Will We See an Actual Sequel to ‘Cloverfield’ This Year?

Massive news to come out of Cinemacon last week was that J.J Abrams’s upcoming Nazi zombie flick Overlord is not actually related to the Cloververse, but is in fact a standalone movie. This news has been welcomed by many fans who felt that The Cloverfield Paradox was a poor addition to the franchise and nothing more than an underwhelming horror that had ‘Cloverfield’ tacked onto its name for publicity.

Second to this revelation was the news that a “true, dedicated sequel” to the original Cloverfield is in the works. This news has understandably excited the Cloververse fanbase, many of whom have been waiting ten years to find out more about the unstoppable Cloverfield Monster and the reason behind its unprovoked attack on New York. If this is true, then colour us excited as well; Cloverfield reinvigorated the “giant monster attacks” genre and ten years is a long time to wait for a follow-up.

Cloverfield (2008)

That being said, this is Abrams and Bad Robot Productions that we’re talking about; they don’t make things clear. Some sites are flirting with the idea that Cloverfield 2 might already have been filmed and that we’ll get to see it in cinemas this year. However, we at Vampire Squid err on the side of caution; Abrams has been quoted differently across the web regarding this news and we can’t be sure that when he said “Cloverfield” he was even referring specifically to the 2008 hit. He might, after all, have just meant the general franchise. If this all sounds a wee bit convoluted then that’s because it is: the Cloververse has never really made sense.

An interesting point to end on is how a sequel to the original film might work. Would it take place immediately after the first movie or even during it and would it be more found footage? Director Matt Reeves has famously said that what we saw in the first movie could just be one view of the night’s events:

“There’s a moment [in Cloverfield] on the Brooklyn Bridge, and there was a guy filming something on the side of the bridge, and Hud sees him filming and he turns over and he sees the ship that’s been capsized and sees the headless Statue of Liberty, and then he turns back and this guy’s briefly filming him. In my mind that was two movies intersecting for a brief moment, and I thought there was something interesting in the idea that this incident happened and there are so many different points of view, and there are several different movies at least happening that evening and we just saw one piece of another.”

You might recall that the REC film series did this relatively well and in a way that made sense to the casual movie goer. There’s no reason that Abrams can’t do the same, other than his apparent desire to make things as confusing as possible!


This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.