‘10 Cloverfield Lane’ 2016
Options
1CK1S
Members Posts: 27,471 ✭✭✭✭✭
In 2014, news broke that filmmaker Dan Trachtenberg—who helmed the short film Portal: No Escape—would be directing a post-apocalyptic thriller called Valencia (also referred to as The Cellar) for Bad Robot and Paramount Insurge, produced by J.J. Abrams. While it’s true that the film is a post-apocalyptic thriller and was produced by Abrams, it appears that the Star Wars: The Force Awakens director has pulled another fast one on us—the movie’s actual title is 10 Cloverfield Lane.
Yes indeed, it appears as though that long-talked-about sequel to the secretive Abrams-produced 2008 film Cloverfield is not only happening, it’s already in the can. Abrams is taking the exact same marketing approach to this film as he did with Cloverfield, as a Collider reader who caught an east coast screening of Paramount’s 13 Hours hipped us to the news that the teaser trailer for 10 Cloverfield Lane is attached to Michael Bay’s Benghazi film. Surprise!
We subsequently reached out to Paramount Pictures for comment, who provided Collider with this exclusive statement from J.J. Abrams himself:
“The idea came up a long time ago during production. We wanted to make it a blood relative of Cloverfield. The idea was developed over time. We wanted to hold back the title for as long as possible.”
The film stars John Goodman, Mary Elizabeth Winstead, and John Gallagher, Jr. and when we previously spoke with Winstead while she was promoting her indie Faults, she told us the story revolves around a woman who wakes up in a cellar where she’s being kept by a stranger, played by Goodman. The actress elaborated a bit on the plot by saying the following:
“He tells me that basically the world is over outside because there’s been a nuclear fall-out. It does have similarity to Faults, in some ways, because you don’t know who’s telling the truth or who to believe. There’s a lot of, who’s manipulating who, and all of that. Tonally, it’s very different, but it has some of those same themes.”
Now that we know the title of the film, this “post-apocalyptic” setting appears to make much more sense, but how exactly it ties to Cloverfield remains unknown. Abrams tells us it’s a “blood relative”, which seems to suggest that the movie isn’t a direct sequel to Cloverfield but instead takes place within the same universe. Our reader says the trailer is not found footage so it’s taking a different visual style than the Matt Reeves-directed original, but is it set within the New York City area? And how long after the events of Cloverfield does it pick up? That’s all unclear, but seeing as how the first trailer is set to arrive imminently, I’m sure we’ll have plenty more questions once that’s officially released.
Luckily, we don’t have to wait long at all to see the film. 10 Cloverfield Lane is set to hit theaters on March 11th.
What do you think, folks? 8 years later, are you still eager for another Cloverfield story? Sound off in the comments below.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HPYpJA1NnL8 Comments
-
-
Hope it grabs my attention like the first
-
First movie was horrible, never explained anything
meh i wouldnt call it horrible... but i agree 200% with the bolded.. apparently that doesnt bother some people. but im with you, if a movie doesn't explain anything im not with it.. i remember watching when it came out, wasnt a BAD film, but they did not offer any type of explanation -
-
Trailer ain't half bad
-
I don't think I've ever seen the first one. Maybe I'll watch it. This trailer looks cool.
-
Cloverfield is one of my favorite movies of all time. ? ? me up the first time I seen this.
I won't lie, I marked out reading this. -
Lou_Cypher wrote: »I don't think I've ever seen the first one. Maybe I'll watch it. This trailer looks cool.
Don't........Monster comes destroy ? movie goes off...... That's it no really that's it
The movie was alright. They could've went another route instead of the "semi-hero finding and save the ex-girlfriend" plot. -
-
I guess they did away with the handheld cam style shooting. It looks iight.
-
Lou_Cypher wrote: »I don't think I've ever seen the first one. Maybe I'll watch it. This trailer looks cool.
Don't........Monster comes destroy ? movie goes off...... That's it no really that's it
The movie was alright. They could've went another route instead of the "semi-hero finding and save the ex-girlfriend" plot.
i wasnt even mad at the wanna be hero part. but i gotta cs @cain, i just remember them not explaining ? .. like nyc was attacked by this monster/monsters, with zero explanation. -
The user and all related content has been deleted.
-
The user and all related content has been deleted.
-
I'm gonna watch this ?
-
Cloverfield was hot garbage.Glad I downloaded that trash
-
Kinda enjoyed the first one
-
I think I liked the build up to the first one more then the actual movie itself, still enjoyed it though. This looks worth checking out.
-
The 1st one was good in my opinion.
Only gripe I had, was that dumb muthafucca actually going back to get his ex. Hefa brings another ? to YOUR party, and you wanna risk your life, and your friends lived to save her...FOH.
Some brothas wouldn't even save their bm from gettin her lights cut off. So they definitely ain't entering a halfway collapsed building to save her. Lol
And his friends was dumb enough to follow his azzz. -
-
The user and all related content has been deleted.
-
'10 Cloverfield Lane' Reviews
Before we get started, let’s get one thing straight. If you’re the type of spoiler-averse moviegoer who has a tendency to write angry letters to the editor or hammer out irate, CAPS LOCK comments below reviews, do us both a favor and just stop reading now. Seriously. I’m not really planning on spilling super-important plot points here, or telegraphing any surprise third-act twists (if, in fact, there are surprise third-act twists). But let’s just agree that if you’re potential enjoyment of 10 Cloverfield Lane rests on knowing as little as possible going in, then click on over to some of the other fine stories on ew.com. Okay? Okay.
Disclaimers like the one above are getting to be a bit of a habit with J.J. Abrams productions, like Lost, Star Trek Into Darkness, Star Wars: The Force Awakens, and now this one. The man has constructed his cult around mystery. And he seems to get off on making us all complicit in his secrets. Not that I have a problem with that. Writing a spoiler-free review is simple enough (if a little limiting). Plus, I’m a believer that there’s nothing more satisfying than walking into a movie theater knowing next-to-nothing about the film you’re about to see and getting the rug pulled out from under you – assuming, of course, that it’s a decent enough rug, warranting all the tap-dancing and obfuscation. Abrams’ latest film, the quasi-/semi-/kinda-/not really-sequel to 2008’s Cloverfield is a decent enough rug. But it’s not a great one. It’s like a solid Twilight Zone episode or second-tier M. Night Shyamalan movie like Signs. It’s lean, and taut, and tense, and moves with Swiss-clock precision. Still, it’s not as scary as you want it to be. Honestly, the best thing about it may be its buzz-building top-secret tease of a marketing campaign.
The movie opens with a young woman named Michelle (Mary Elizabeth Winstead) who’s frantically packing and rushing out the door of her apartment. Whatever the reason, she needs to leave and she needs to leave fast. She drives into the night, gets into a terrible car accident, and wakes up in what looks like a concrete cellar. She’s got an I.V. drip injected into her arm, but this is definitely not a hospital. And, oh yeah, she’s also chained to the wall. She’s someone’s prisoner. Before you can say Room II (or Saw VII), in walks John Goodman, with a tray of food in his hands and a gun on his hip. He tells her that he’s not her jailer, but her savior. He pulled her out of the wreckage. He also explains that she can’t leave because there’s been some sort of terrorist chemical attack, or nuclear Armageddon unleashed by the Russians, or, who knows, maybe it’s a Martian invasion.
Seriously, stop reading here if you don’t want to know more…
What happens next doesn’t have very much to do with Abrams and Matt Reeves’ stealthy found-footage monster mash from eight years ago. Abrams himself has cryptically referred to 10 Cloverfield Lane as merely a “blood relative” of 2008’s Cloverfield, and thankfully, that doesn’t include a similar first-person shaky cam M.O. But apart from a similar what-is-happening air of anxiety, you have to squint to connect it to the Cloverfield universe apart from the fact that it’s arrived at the multiplex with next to no advance warning. (Then again, there may be connecting threads that I’m not willing to divulge…Abrams isn’t the only one who can be a tease). For a lot of people, though, the Abrams signature, the shared tone, and the publicity machine’s veiled come-on may be enough to get them to fork over their ten bucks and roll the dice. But will they get their money’s worth?
Directed by first-time feature filmmaker Dan Trachtenberg, the film puts Goodman’s twitchy Howard, Winstead’s skeptical Michelle, and a third bunker dweller (John Gallagher, Jr.’s Emmet, a young handyman neighbor of Howard’s) into a claustrophobic subterranean space waiting for a sign that all is clear back on the surface. But slowly, Michelle and Emmet find holes in Howard’s story. For the record, everything I’ve just described takes place in the first-third of the movie. But I think it would be churlish to say any more, not because the studio would prefer it that way, but because the small handful of thrills in 10 Cloverfield Lane are of the jump-scare variety. They work best when you don’t see them coming. The movie doesn’t have anything deeper on its mind than shouting “Boo!” But sometimes a well-timed “Boo!” can be enough. After all, it’s why they still make jack in the boxes.
For a rookie director, Trachtenberg appears to be a real craftsman, even if what he’s crafting doesn’t add up to as much as you hope it will. Like Shyamalan’s Signs, it’s 90 minutes of anticipation – ominous trap-setting that leads to a big pay-off that is well staged but also a little anticlimactic and hokey. In the end, I wished there was a better payoff to warrant all the mystery.
B
-
I never had a interest in seeing Cloverfield.
-
This has nothing to do with the original clover field.... Basically jjabrams came across a story called "the cellar" that was about a woman who got into a car accident and wakes up in a bunker with a survivalist who tells her that the world has ended, and she has to stay with him in his bunker...
She calls ? and fuckery ensues...
Jjabrams reads this and is like, yea this is totally something that could happen after people see the monster on the news wrecking ? ...
So he makes a "sequel".... dude had nothing to do with the story -
Pumped for this and I've never even seen Cloverfield. John Goodman is underrated as hell and one of my favorite actors.
-
I heard this good movie is good
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=guGBUaxtwxE
![[Deleted User]](https://w1.vanillicon.com/v2/15efd8efe08bb34aae25f1808aaf5018.svg)
https://youtu.be/biG8R1yGouY
