Tuesday, March 8, 2016

Dan Trachtenberg Q&A Today at 10:30am ET on Reddit


Dan Trachtenberg is participating in a Reddit AMA on Tuesday, March 8th at 10:30 EST.

20 comments:

  1. Is it possible when we get to the theater the movie has nothing to do with a bunker?that its all been misdirection? I doubt it but one thing this game wants us to do is think outside the box(or bunker)

    ReplyDelete
  2. I was thinking the sameee thing! It's a far stretch but if Abrams actually did that, it would be the best marketing scheme ever!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Wee Matt now that we said it even if its not we will probably see it done somewhere down the road.i am curious how would fans react?I personally would think that would be brilliant. Anyone else?
    Thoughts?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ya, I wouldn't be mad whatsoever if the entire movie took a turn from what we see in the trailers and actually had much more to do with the first Cliverfield than we initially thought. Abrams is known to deceive his fans but I doubt he'd go that far. I just want an actual sequal already!

      Delete
    2. Me too.i am looking forward to what ever it is.time to bunker down.i mean hunker down till show time.

      Delete
  4. Will it be clear to us, after we've seen the movie, as to why you used the Cloverfield name, if the monster is not in it?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's what I'm saying. If this film shows little to no connection to the first one I will be very disappointed and feel mislead. I know they already made it apparent it's not a direct sequel but why have 'Cloverfield' in the title at all then. I just feel like fans like myself have waited so long for a sequel to Cloverfield, that when a movie with 'Cloverfield' in the title pops up, we immediately expect a sequel type movie.

      Delete
    2. I don't necessarily need to see the Cloverfield monster again (don't get me wrong, it would be nice to see him, though). But, from what I am gathering, this movie doesn't even acknowledge what happened in Cloverfield. That doesn't make sense to me. I can't wait to see this movie. Like you, I just don't see the need to tie the "Cloverfield" name in if there is no actual tie to the movie.

      Delete
    3. I think it all depends on where in the timeline this movie takes place. It may in fact take place after the events of the first movie and the fallout that Howard is convinced has happened, may be just a reaction to the attacks in New York.

      Delete
  5. "Cloverfield" was a name assigned to an event. The first movie starts saying that.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not to just an event, but to the actual events that took place in NYC that day. All the information about that day is stored under the name "CLOVERFIELD". It's not that far of a stretch to think that if the title has Cloverfield in it, it should have connections to the original.

      Delete
  6. If this movie doesnt tie in to the first film then JJ should be prepared to never work in film again. I almost guarantee he will be getting the m night shyamalan treatment if this movie isnt what the fans want it to be. Producer or not his name is part of this property. Its his baby, Its what made him what he is today. so if he screws this up then I can say the cloverfield franchise will probably die unfortunately.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. JJ said there was a connection and that Bad Robot after receiving the initial script titled "The Cellar", and being asked about a Cloverfield sequel, reworked the script to try to make those connections. I think it all depends on where in the timeline this movie takes in comparison to the first one.

      We'll just have to see the movie.

      Having said that, even if there isn't a monster, and the connection is tenuous at best, if it's a good movie, it's a good movie, and good movies should be what keep people working, not failing whatever expectations an audience has.

      Delete
    2. I agree whole-heartedly. I will lose tons of respect for JJ if he pulls some money-grab shit by putting the 'Cloverfield' name on this film without obvious connections to the previous one. The first movie was so good and different, plus it made a pretty decent profit. I don't get why not make a direct sequel. The design and story of that monster is just too cool to let all what's on the table go to waste. One of the coolest looking monsters in any kaiju-type movie.

      Delete
    3. Theres alot lf chatter that this could possibly be a twilight zone anthology series. I swear if this is true I promise they wont get any of my money. I'll just watch the bootleg online.

      Delete
    4. That's what it sounds like in the Reddit thread with the director answering questions. Shit would be stupid to turn it into an anthology. Look what happened to Halloween 3.

      Delete
    5. They must really DO NOT care for this franchise anymore or they just really have no idea what the fandom is like for the first film. I have a hard time believing that though, I know I wasnt the only one who was super giddy when I seen the first trailer for 10 Cloverfield Lane. Plus they went so far with the ARG's for both films. I just dnt get why they would screw us over like that. Makes no sense....

      So this just may be a big F-you to the fans. If thats the case then JJ can prepare for major backlash.

      Delete
  7. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  8. It's weird to see all this websites with info and survival kits in the real world, I never felt the first Cloverfield movie viral stuff finished at all, like that Teddy/videos/useless website that did nothing, the 1-01-08 or whatever number was, showed a limited number of pics that once the movie was premiered was forgotten, ia like all that was left half done and now this. The movie opens in 2 days and by that time everyone will forget all this quick and will go nowhere after that premiere. Is just a feel no offense to anyone following this.

    ReplyDelete