The first Cloverfield movie had some of the best marketing I’d ever seen. The trailer, which was launched before the first Transformers film, featured some fun looking party scenes, then it all went south in a hurry with a terrifying sequence which ended in the Stature Of Liberty’s head being bowled down a street.
And all we got was a date. No title. No nothing.
While the actual Cloverfield film was fine, it thrived under the found footage heading that made other scary films like the Blair Witch Project and Quarantine so popular. There is a mystery there and it keeps the audience off balance. Especially with a city falling to pieces around you.
Which is why I’m confused that we’re getting a Cloverfield movie that is a direct sequel, but not a found footage film. Why mess with this formula?
Do you know what you get when you throw out the found footage aspect of the original Cloverfield?
A second rate Godzilla film. And that’s no good.
Now, while I’m pessimistic at the news, we also have to examine the entire franchise for what it is, and that leaves the possibility for some twists and turns open.
I’m talking about the terrific 10 Cloverfield Lane. That underrated thriller with Mary Elizabeth Winstead and John Goodman.
Are the filmmakers leaving themselves some wiggle room for some experimenting here?
Let’s hope so.
The truth is that when sequels stray too far from their original successful formulas, they lose. Don’t remind me about that Blair Witch Sequel I can’t even remember.
But this Cloverfield sequel should be a found footage movie. Let’s hope that just this once Hollywood doesn’t change course and remembers what works and what doesn’t.