Cloverfield 2!

[Tiny Poster]

I've read that it's a good film let down by having a fey Cloverfield connection foisted uppon it.

[BritishHobo]

Essentially. I have two completely different opinions on that film. On the one hand it's

Spoiler alert

a brilliant, tense, claustrophobic fucking roller coaster of a film, with a mental adrenaline-filled climax - it lives up to Cloverfield perfectly in that respect. The three leads were fantastic, Goodman especially, up there with the Christian lady from The Mist in terms of sheer fucknuttery. There's some wonderful moments down in the bunker - the charades game, the puzzle montage - the trailer was misleading enough that it's still racked with tension, and the ending left me with a massive grin on my face. Mad fucking fun that leaves you dreaming of what comes next.

[close]

On the other hand,

Spoiler alert

why call it Cloverfield? It stands great by itself. I'm not TOO bothered by it, although it means a genuine sequel is much more unlikely...  but still, it's an irritatingly pointless mislead.

[close]

[Johnny Textface]

Spoiler alert

why call it Cloverfield? It stands great by itself. I'm not TOO bothered by it, although it means a genuine sequel is much more unlikely...  but still, it's an irritatingly pointless mislead.

[close]

Would you have gone to the cinema if it hadn't been called that?  Apparently, the film was in the can and the cynical gits slapped that connection on to get bums on seats.

[Phil_A]

Hmm. Well, I think I'd go with the consensus that it was great up to the last 15 minutes. But Christ, what a weak ending.

Spoiler alert

"OH, it turns out it was aliens, but we won!" END.

[close]

Basically, it all falls apart

Spoiler alert

after Emmett gets shot. That was a brilliantly shocking moment, but it was like all the tension evaporates from that point on, because you know Howard is irredeemably crazy and Michelle has no choice but to get out, which she does ridiculously easily. The whole climax of the film should've been her finally overcoming him and breaking out, but in the event that happens so quickly with so little build-up it feels like a massive let-down. All the shit with the aliens that happens after that just feels like irrelevant, tacked-on nonsense.

[close]

Spoiler alert

I also kept thinking there was going to be some further twist with Emmett, because he just seemed a bit too good to be true. I thought maybe he had killed those girls and was trying to turn her against Howard, because she only had his word that the girl in the photo wasn't Howard's daughter.

[close]

Spoiler alert

The death of Howard off-screen was a bit odd as well. I kept expecting him to've survived the explosion somehow and come after her, but instead it's like "Oh, okay. Guess he's dead then? Probably?"

Also, what kind of survivalist doesn't own at least one gasmask and/or radiation suit? I mean, I know the whole idea is he doesn't want anyone to leave, but surely he would have one stashed away for himself just in case.

[close]

I'd love to know what the original ending was before the reshoots.

[BritishHobo]

As far as I can tell, the reshoots story is inaccurate. The 'original' was just a script called The Cellar, which was rewritten into this film before production began. I imagine the Cloverfield label was still late in the game, but the film as it stands is how it was meant to be when it went into production.

The original ending

Spoiler alert

relies a little bit on earlier differences in the script. Emmett is named Nate and is far less friendly. He isn't already in the shelter, he turns up far later and fights Howard, claiming Howard owes him money. He gets Michelle onside and they take Howard prisoner and get his gun. At the end Nate gets killed and Michelle escapes, then gets chased through the farmhouse by Howard (this is the main climax, her fighting him off). He tells her that he killed his wife in a drink-driving accident and lost custody of his daughter - primarily because Nate testified against him, claiming he beats his daughter, out of revenge for not getting the money he's owed.

[close]

Spoiler alert

Anyway, Michelle fucks Howard up but leaves him alive, then drives off in a car. She drives on for ages (seeing no-one) until she comes to the top of a hill and sees the Chicago skyline smouldering and in ruins. She pulls down her gas mask and takes a breath.

[close]

END

[BritishHobo]

Would you have gone to the cinema if it hadn't been called that?  Apparently, the film was in the can and the cynical gits slapped that connection on to get bums on seats.

I definitely see what you're saying - no title would have gotten more publicity than this - but I think Abrams and the Bad Robot name would still have carried a lot of weight.

[Glebe]

Saw it today... it's actually a great little suspense thriller, and I thoroughly enjoyed it for the most part, but, while

Spoiler alert

the ending is admittedly entertaining

[close]

, they really shouldn't have made it as a Cloverfield movie. I'd much prefer more tense drama in the bunker than it

Spoiler alert

suddenly turning full-on into Cloverfield 2. Just feels tacked-on.

[close]

So a really solid film for the most part, but again, making it a 'blood-relative' to Cloverfield was a misstep, really.

[St_Eddie]

I Typed up a review for another site and figured I'd re-post it here, to share my thoughts, having finally seen the film.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As a huge fan of the original Cloverfield, when this follow-up was announced, I was beyond hyped for it.  A sequel to Cloverfield is something that I (and many other fans) have been hankering after for over half a decade now.  I followed the ARG (Alternate Reality Game - essentially an in-universe form of viral marketing) for this follow-up with keen interest.  In the build up to the film's release, producer, J.J. Abrams and director, Dan Trachtenberg went on record as describing this film as a "blood relative" to the first entry.  This immediately started setting off alarm bells in my head; partly because the last time I heard something like this was when Ridley Scott described Prometheus as having "the DNA of Alien" and look how that turned out!

However, I was mostly concerned by the filmmakers' comments, due to the implication raised that 10 Cloverfield Lane may not in actuality be a sequel to Cloverfield at all.  Still, I kept my hopes up that it would be a film set in the same universe as the first flick but featuring a tangent narrative.  That would be something that I'd not only be perfectly content with; I'd downright applaud such a non-derivative approach to a sequel to one of my favourite horror movies.

Then, shortly before the movie hit theaters, a worrying bit of news leaked on Reddit about this new entry in the Cloverfield series and in that moment, the thing that I'd feared the most was confirmed by the unnamed source; 10 Cloverfield Lane is absolutely not a sequel in any real sense of the word.  At all.  Indeed, 10 Cloverfield Lane is not even set in the same universe as the original movie.  This raises some fairly salient questions; why even put the word "Cloverfield" in the title of this new flick?  One can only assume it's because it allowed Abrams and Paramount to piggyback (or should that be piggyBANK) off the success of the original.

Quite frankly, the apparent thought process that went in to naming 10 Cloverfield Lane (which was adapted from a screenplay originally titled The Cellar) reeks of an extremely cynical stab at opportunistic marketing.  All this talk of this film being a "blood relative" quite frankly, comes across as very disingenuous.

The fact that Abrams and company danced and skirted around the issue, whenever the question arose during media interviews, regarding the film's connection to the original, speaks volumes for a lack of integrity for an artistic vision.  Surely, if 10 Cloverfield Lane was a genuine and purposeful continuation of the series but one simply set in a new universe, then the powers that be would have disposed with such phrases as "blood relative" and straight up told the fans of the first movie, that this is absolutely, categorically not a sequel in any way, shape or form.  Instead, they wanted to leave the possibility in the audiances minds, that this was set in the same universe but merely thematically different to the original.

It's actually somewhat ironic that J.J. Abrams is the producer on 10 Cloverfield Lane because with Star Wars: The Force Awakens he gave us far too much fan service; the Starkiller base that third Death Star is really quite indefensible (and I'm not referring to the fact that the rebels resistance blew it up at the end of the flick).  Yet with 10 Cloverfield Lane, Abrams gives us far too little fan service.  I guess that J.J. Abrams must have a God complex because what he giveth with one hand, he taketh away with the other.


"Kneel before me, mortals.  Lest I strike you down with a bolt of lightning lens flare"

One can only assume that the series has now become an anthology series of sorts.  Kind of like The Twilight Zone but with each installment having the world "Cloverfield" awkwardly shoehorned into its title.  I think that I can speak for the vast majority of Cloverfield fans when I say this is about as far removed from any concept of what we wanted for a follow-up.  Indeed, many-a-fanboy butt has been hurt with this lamentable development.

With all of that said, thanks to the Reddit leak, I went into 10 Cloverfield Lane already knowing exactly what this flick is, or more importantly, what it isn't. This was undoubtedly for the best (certainly for my fellow movie-going patrons), as Satan only knows what kind of a stink I would have kicked up in the cinema, had I not had prior knowledge of the flick's non-sequel status.  Ultimately, having gone through all five stages of grief; denial, anger, bargaining, depression and acceptance; I decided it best to judge the film on its own merits.



So, you may be wondering what 10 Cloverfield Lane like actually like as a film.  Is it truly an utter waste of time, money and resources, not to mention a truly egregious misuse of the Cloverfield title?  Or perhaps, the film unexpectedly turned out to be, pretty much a superior film in every conceivable way to Cloverfield and somehow in the process, succeeded in making the original movie look all the more unworthy of carrying the now multipurpose cloverfield name?

Well, the truth of the matter is that, on it's own terms, 10 Cloverfield Lane is... merely alright.  It's slightly above average.  In many ways, this is the worst possible outcome.  If it had been genuinely awful, then at least I could have have indulged my malicious side by frequently mocking the film over the Internet, like some fat neck-beard, beating on a dead horse, until nothing but a fine crimson paste remains (something that the Star Wars prequels have provided countless hours of entertainment for).

The plot of 10 Cloverfeild Lane centres around a young woman named Michelle (played by a genre favourite of mine; Mary Elizabeth Winstead) whom is involved in a car crash and awakens in an underground bunker, owned an older man named Howard (played wonderfully by the iconic John Goodman).  Howard informs Michelle that there has been a chemical attack on the outside world and that she must remain in his bunker for her own safety.  Much of the film revolves around the questions posed by both Michelle and the audience; is Howard actually telling the truth regarding the chemical attack and why does some twerp keep kicking the back of my seat?  Although, that last question doesn't actually apply to Michelle (though it was one of the main thought processes that I experienced during the screening).

Oh and there's also a third guy in the bunker.  He's named Emmett and quite honestly, he felt rather extraneous to the plot.  So, whatever...


"Emmett it, you're superfluous to requirements!"

The film does carry an acute sense of tension, as the claustrophobic confines of the bunker gradually pervades through into the general atmosphere of the film, with mounting intensity.  There's a palatable sense of unease which permeates throughout.  It's all very effective at setting the correct tone for the piece.  Also, director, Dan Trachtenberg has exceeded himself with just how well shot 10 Cloverfield Lane is, which is all the more impressive considering that this is Trachtenberg's first feature film.  I shall certainly be watching his future directorial career with considerable interest.

Special mention simply must go towards the film's composer, Bear McCreary and his magnificent score.  It's highly reminiscent of the classic film scores of the 70s and is easily the best soundtrack that I've heard since watching the sublime Jonathan Glazer film, Under the Skin (that film's wonderfully unnerving soundtrack being provided by Mica Levi).  In fact, I would be willing to go on record and say that, like Under the Skin, 10 Cloverfield Lane has one of the greatest soundtracks that I've ever had the pleasure of hearing.  Period.

However, it's not all good news, as I have a couple of fairly major bugbears with 10 Cloverfield Lane.  Firstly, there was one long scene towards the middle of the film; a conversation between Michelle and Emmett that focused on them explaining their life stories to one another.  It made for an exceptionally dull moment in the film, one which single-handedly managed to grind the pacing to a complete halt.  Honestly, film classes the world over, would do well to use this scene as a prime example of why you should always 'show and not tell'.

The second issue I have with 10 Cloverfield Lane is also it's biggest flaw; the climax to the film.  I'm not going to spoil events for those of you who've not yet seen the film.  Suffice to say that events during the final 10 minutes of the film take a drastically different turn to the proceeding hour and a half.  I can completely see what the filmmakers were going for but it's such a complete 180° spin, that it felt as though the projectionist had switched reels by mistake.  Now, I happen to have read the original script for this film (The Cellar - before it got morphed into a film falsely masquerading as a sequel to Cloverfield) and the original ending is vastly superior and infinitely more appropriate, in as much as it actually feels like a part of the same story.

Overall, I did enjoy 10 Cloverfield Lane and if for nothing else, I would recommend it for John Goodman's performance as Howard.  It's easily the most creepy that I've seen him act since his final moments in the Coen Brothers' superb Barton Fink.  10 Cloverfield Lane is undoubtedly not a bad film; in actuality it's rather good.  However, it's a film with a couple of unfortunately weighty flaws.  Perhaps this is being somewhat petulant but I decided to knock a point off my final score, due to the whole hoodwinking/swindle aspect of using the Cloverfield name for an unrelated film.  If such things really don't bother you on any level, then you can knock this film up a notch, to a 7/10, otherwise I regret to say that it's a...

6/10

[Custard]

Just to say, there are good copies of this AVAILABLE

[Claude the Racecar Driving Rockstar Super Sleuth]

Stuff and things.

I had no idea anyone actually gave two shits about the first film. Sure enough, the marketing was somewhat dishonest, but if this is what it takes to garner attention for a decent little film such as this, then so be it, I says. At the very least, I think it's less obnoxious than the "There's no CGI... honest" hype that preceded The Force Awakens.

[St_Eddie]

I had no idea anyone actually gave two shits about the first film.

The majority of people are either indifferent towards it or they just plain dislike it but believe me, it has a fanbase (one that I'm a part of).  If there's one thing in common between the fans versus the nonplussed crowd; it's that the fans have delved heavily into the ARG for Cloverfield.  Certainly, no film should require its viewers to search outside of the core experience for information pertaining to the plot and backstory but once you do, it really can hook you in.

Most of what I love about Cloverfield comes from the viral marketing; Tagruato, Slusho!, Jamie & Teddy, the ChimpanzIII satellite and the destruction of the Chuai Station oil rig.  Having all of this information in mind when watching the movie makes it infinetely more fascinating.  The whole movie is one giant puzzle piece and that's why I love it, though I can completely understand why others would simply want to be able to watch a film and enjoy it at face value, without needing to look up information on the Internet.

Sure enough, the marketing was somewhat dishonest, but if this is what it takes to garner attention for a decent little film such as this, then so be it, I says.

Just because you personally didn't care for Cloverfield; that really shouldn't influence your standing on dishonest promotion tactics.  J.J. Abrams and Matt Reeves have been saying that they'd love to do a sequel to Cloverfield for years because it's a "world and story they're incredibly found of" and that they wouldn't do one unless they had a brilliant idea of how to expand on that story.  Now, just imagine if it were a film that you loved and that a follow-up arrives and it turns out to be a non-related film, with the title of something you love slapped on it, just to sell a few more tickets.  In all honesty, would you feel the same way; that it's acceptable because this new film needed a bit of extra promotion?

[Pissant]

In all honesty, would you feel the same way; that it's acceptable because this new film needed a bit of extra promotion?

The flip-side of that argument is a more thorough pedigree but a shittier film, so I would choose the current weak-link solid movie combo and count our blessings.  I say this as a fan of Cloverfield, btw.  If the new trend is to 'smuggle' out tight, well executed character thrillers inside absurdly bolted-on hollywood franchises then it's at least a move in the right direction.  Also, the end of the first movie is just as forgettable.

I can see how, if by some god-like miracle, you had avoided all spoilers and expected a 100% Cloverfield movie you might feel a little ripped (apart). They won't get away with it next time I tell ya.  Take solace in the forthcoming Cloverfield VR, the next instalment I've just made up, two hours of Kathy Bates putting up some washing in 3D then a big spaceship comes along and does a poo.

[clingfilm portent]

Special mention simply must go towards the film's composer, Bear McCreary and his magnificent score.  It's highly reminiscent of the classic film scores of the 70s and is easily the best soundtrack that I've heard since watching the sublime Jonathan Glazer film, Under the Skin (that film's wonderfully unnerving soundtrack being provided by Mica Levi).  In fact, I would be willing to go on record and say that, like Under the Skin, 10 Cloverfield Lane has one of the greatest soundtracks that I've ever had the pleasure of hearing.  Period.

That's mind-boggling to me. 
I thought it was bombastic crap that was completely at odds with the film's tone which, while not exactly subtle could have used something a little more sinister to augment the tension. Instead it blasts the audience at every single fucking opportunity.

[olliebean]

I thought the ending was somewhat excused by Mary Elizabeth Winstead's line, "Oh, come on!"

[St_Eddie]

...the end of the first movie is just as forgettable.

Aw, I like the ending to Cloverfield, even if it is completely ludicrous that a skyscraper-sized monster could somehow sneak up on a relatively ant-sized human being.  However, it must be said that I am rather partial to observing a man being munched in half by a ginormous monster.  It's a very specific fetish of mine.  Cloverfield is my most commonly used wank material.  Thank goodness that it's a Blu-ray.  I dread to think how degraded a VHS copy would have become by this point in time[nb]Probably far worse for wear than the snake lady's tits scene from Blade Runner.[/nb].

That's mind-boggling to me. 
I thought it was bombastic crap that was completely at odds with the film's tone which, while not exactly subtle could have used something a little more sinister to augment the tension. Instead it blasts the audience at every single fucking opportunity.

Horses for course, I guess.  The way that you describe the score makes me think of New-Who, where every time a character sneezes; a 30 piece orchestra kicks in.  Oh, how ever so dramatic, that bubble of snot is.

I thought the ending was somewhat excused by Mary Elizabeth Winstead's line, "Oh, come on!"

I'm rather ambivalent towards that particular line.  On the one hand, it's funny in a certain meta kind of way and on the other hand, it's irritatingly on the nose, in a certain meta kind of way.  Either way, it's undeniably meta, in a certain kind of way.

[Rev]

I had no idea anyone actually gave two shits about the first film.

Same - it was an okay Blair Witch-alike, but that whole genre had been run into the ground by the time it surfaced.  It's competent enough, but the idea that there are actual fans of the thing is baffling.  This is not meant as a barb or anything;  I like it well enough, I just don't see anything special about it.

10 Cloverfield Lane is a much better film, taken individually, but it's an episode of a non-existent TV show dragged out for half an hour longer than is necessary.  I'm not sure why people seem to be struggling with its connection to the first film; despite the origin of this one as its own thing, pay attention to the sound in the last stretch. 

[Pissant]

I think the genius of the first film, and where it really shone above other similar shaky-cam footage clones of the time, was the mashing together of the post 9/11 atmosphere with the godzilla city aesthetic.  The plot was ludicrous, the characters were worse, but I felt it was a great popcorn movie because it played on some very current fears.  You'd leave for work the next day and wonder, hmm, what if...

In that way you could say 10 Cloverfield Lane is a reasonable blood relative.  It's just using the Josef Fritzl / Saw / Isis hostage dynamic for it's thrills.  And anything with Goodman instantly doubles the fun.

[St_Eddie]

10 Cloverfield Lane is a much better film, taken individually, but it's an episode of a non-existent TV show dragged out for half an hour longer than is necessary.  I'm not sure why people seem to be struggling with its connection to the first film; despite the origin of this one as its own thing, pay attention to the sound in the last stretch.

It's a similar sound to the LSA (large scale aggressor) from the first film but it's not connected in any way.  Trust me on this.  The LSA came from the darkest depths of our oceans. 

Spoiler alert

The creatures in 10 Cloverfield Lane are aliens

[close]

.  I was a part of a large online community in the run up to and during the release of 10 Cloverfield Lane.  We consisted of a bunch of fans of the first film.  The events in 10 Cloverfield Lane categorically are not connected to the events or universe of Cloverfield.

However, J.J. Abrams has hinted that both stories could potentially be set in parallel universes; which doesn't really mean a great deal, when you think about it.  I mean, every movie ever could be seen as taking place in a parallel universe, if you look at it that way.  Some of us in the Cloverfield community has hypothesised that the upcoming Abrams produced The God Particle may have it's characters jumping from one universe to the other but that remains to be seen, as it's pure conjecture at this point.

I think the genius of the first film, and where it really shone above other similar shaky-cam footage clones of the time, was the mashing together of the post 9/11 atmosphere with the godzilla city aesthetic.  The plot was ludicrous, the characters were worse, but I felt it was a great popcorn movie because it played on some very current fears.  You'd leave for work the next day and wonder, hmm, what if...

In that way you could say 10 Cloverfield Lane is a reasonable blood relative.  It's just using the Josef Fritzl / Saw / Al Qaeda hostage dynamic for it's thrills.  And anything with Goodman instantly doubles the fun.

Aye, I agree with everything you just said and I can see how 10 Cloverfield Lane could be viewed as a "blood relative" but I still feel as though it should have been called 'The Cellar', to truly make it stand on its own.

[Small Man Big Horse]

As someone who hated the first Cloverfield (had to turn off fairly early as it was committing all the worst sins made by found-footage films) I was pleasantly surprised by 10 Cloverfield Lane. It's total B-movie silliness but I really enjoyed it - especially the last twenty minutes when

Spoiler alert

it goes bugfuck silly, with acid-burned John Goodman getting all stabby and UFOs and alien bloodhounds and whatnot.

[close]

Definitely not a film I'd recommend as a genuinely tense horror/thriller but it's a fun time.

That's pretty much how I felt about it. Not a great film by any means but it's pleasingly tense and only occasionally daft, and Goodman is superb in it. My only major complaint is the whole

Spoiler alert

"she keeps on running away from everything in life, but not at the end, yay" nonsense, which was heavy handed and not really needed, surviving all that shit proved how kick ass she was anyhow.

[close]

The original ending does sound a lot better, too, but hey, what can you do.

[Custard]

Yeah, really enjoyed it too

Though I also think it might have been better if it'd ended at her "oh, you've gotta be kidding me" line

Mary Elizabeth Winstead is really good. Pity she's not in more things. To see her in a similar role, check out the (surprisingly OK) The Thing prequel, from a few years back. She's got a natural likeability that you can't buy

[St_Eddie]

Though I also think it might have been better if it'd ended at her "oh, you've gotta be kidding me" line.

Well, thanks to your mentioning of it; I've "procured" a copy of 10 Cloverfield Lane for myself.  I'm thinking a fan edit is in order.  I'm going to do two versions.  The first is something which I was planning on doing anyway; to edit it so that the ending matches the ending of The Cellar script and the other, just for you, I will end at your suggested line.

I'll post links to both versions on this forum in the next few days.

My only major complaint is the whole

Spoiler alert

"she keeps on running away from everything in life, but not at the end, yay" nonsense, which was heavy handed and not really needed, surviving all that shit proved how kick ass she was anyhow.

[close]

That's something that really bothered me as well and is another aspect that will be getting the chop in my fan edit.

Mary Elizabeth Winstead is really good. Pity she's not in more things. To see her in a similar role, check out the (surprisingly OK) The Thing prequel, from a few years back. She's got a natural likeability that you can't buy.

Aye, I like Winstead a lot too.  Always happy when she shows up in a film.

[Custard]

Hehe, I will look forward to seeing that!

[Rev]

It's a similar sound to the LSA (large scale aggressor) from the first film but it's not connected in any way.  Trust me on this.  The LSA came from the darkest depths of our oceans. 

Spoiler alert

The creatures in 10 Cloverfield Lane are aliens

[close]

.  I was a part of a large online community in the run up to and during the release of 10 Cloverfield Lane.  We consisted of a bunch of fans of the first film.  The events in 10 Cloverfield Lane categorically are not connected to the events or universe of Cloverfield.

The origin of the creature isn't known in Cloverfield, is it?  I've not seen it since its original release, but the characters involved don't seem to be in a position to get a handle on where the big bugger came from.  If this is something mentioned in the ARG then take it with a big pinch of salt, as that was just something cooked up by a PR department that has even less of a genuine connection to the film than 10 Cloverfield Lane does.

It's all bollocks as the reason for the second film carrying the same name is obvious, but there's not a problem with the two films existing in the same universe.  The aliens maybe dropped several big chaps over oceans as a first attack, with their big organic-looking ships that sound similar and look like they'd maybe come from the same neighbourhood.   They did their job of tearing about the place, but a quick follow-up was always intended.  If the films take place at the same time, this works, and is consistent.

Does it need to work?  No, and I'd be much happier with 'Cloverfield' being an anthology series in the sense that 'Halloween' was once intended to be.  If they can use the name for that purpose and get a wide release for another low-key film like this, then we all win.

[St_Eddie]

The origin of the creature isn't known in Cloverfield, is it?

The finer details of its origin aren't.  However, there are several pieces of information which tell us about certain aspects of its nature.  Including the fact that it originated from the depths of our ocean.

I've not seen it since its original release, but the characters involved don't seem to be in a position to get a handle on where the big bugger came from.  If this is something mentioned in the ARG then take it with a big pinch of salt, as that was just something cooked up by a PR department that has even less of a genuine connection to the film than 10 Cloverfield Lane does.

No, you're entirely incorrect.  Unlike a lot of viral marketing, the ARG for Cloverfield is 100% official in relation to the events depicted in the movie and was developed directly by J.J. Abrams and Matt Reeves.  As filmmakers, they decided on what this creature is and where it came from and then gave those who'd care to look, pieces of the larger puzzle.  All of the ARG information (and more) can be found on the Cloverfield Blu-Ray's 'Special Investigation mode'[nb]A feature which, in-universe, is a post-movie military document, that plays concurrently with the found footage, overlaying the locations of the protagonists, the LSA and the military, at various stages of that fateful night (on a map to the left of the screen) and also provides a stream of constant information, which was subsequently gathered by the military, following their hammer-down protocol (in a text box at the bottom of the screen).[/nb].

Elements tied to the ARG can also be seen in the movie itself and I'll do my best to summarise the most salient information from the ARG below...

Protagonist, Marlena's friend, Jamie, had consumed copious amounts of a substance known as seabed nectar.  This had been sent to Jamie by her boyfriend, Teddy (a member of TIDO Wave; a environmentalist group).  TIDO Wave had discovered what Tagruato[nb]A Japanese conglomerate, that has its hands in various monetary pies; including sicentific research and satellites.  Essentially, they're the Cloverfield equivalent of the Alien series' Weyland-Yutani.  Here is their website - http://tagruato.jp/profile.php.[/nb] were involved in and had recently begun collecting evidence to use against the company.  Teddy had been active as a spy aboard Chuai Station, before Tagruato discovered his connection to TIDO Wave and took him hostage, for questioning.  He was most likely still being held captive on Chuai Station when it was destroyed and is now believed to be dead.[nb]All of the relevant videos of Jamie can be seen here - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K7eAkNFxCWg&list=PL15EA29F79ED2CB1B[/nb].

Jamie is seen passed out on the sofa at the party, during the opening segment of the movie; a direct result of overdosing on the seabed nectar that Teddy had sent to her from Chuai Station, to be used as evidence.  Seabed nectar is a strange, naturally occurring substance, which is located several miles below sea level.  This nectar is believed to have mutated the LSA and is also used, in small quantities, as the secret ingredient in Tagruato's commercial drink, 'Slusho!'.  Seabed nectar is highly addictive and when consumed in large quantities; it causes those whom consume it to become increasingly erratic and aggressive; as well as displaying an immense increase in energy and strength (this obviously also applies to the LSA).

Then there's the Tagruato satellite, ChimpanzIII, which can be seen in the background at the very end of the movie (when we flashback to Rob and Beth at Coney Island) , crashing into the sea[nb]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TpiyCGMhsfc[/nb].  It was this downed satellite and the subsequent attempt to retrieve it, which lead to the Tagruato corporation discovering the LSA  in hibernation at the bottom of the ocean.

They also discovered the parasites[nb][/nb], which feed off the nectar infused blood of the LSA (their bites are similar to that of a flea.  They are able to penetrate the LSA's thick skin by causing it to swell and rupture.  Something which is lethal when used on a relatively miniature human being - poor Marlena).  These monumental finds were discovered very close to the location of Tagruato's offshore oil rig, Chuai Station, which they subsequently used as a base of operations, whilst they studied the creature.  Tagruato's interference resulted in awakening the creature[nb]The creature swims up from the ocean floor, directly below Chuai Station...
Here's a zoomed-in close up on the creature, as it ascends to destroy the oil rig... [/nb], which swam up to the surface, destroying Chuai Station [nb]In this footage, you can briefly see a senior staff member of Tagruato (possibly the vice president), escaping from the collapsing oil rig with a briefcase handcuffed to his hand.  This breifcase is thought to have contained some very important, highly-classified information pertaining to the company's motives regarding the LSA - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cCTIgSmohe0[/nb], which leads us into the events seen in the movie.

It's unknown whether Tagruato's motives were malevolent, although it is highly suspected.  The CEO of Tagruato, Ganu Yoshida, went into hiding following the case file designated as 'cloverfield' and was subsequently wanted by the US Government for questioning.  One thing that is known is that an oil tanker owned by Tagruato was present at the harbour of New York on the night of the incident.  It was destroyed by unknown means shortly before the attack on Manhattan occurred and was later discovered to not be carrying any oil.  It's speculated that it was carrying vast quantities of seabed nectar (the substance that the LSA feeds upon) and that it was purposefully destroyed by Tagruato, in order to lead the LSA on land, to initiate the attack.   The destroyed oil tanker, bearing the logo of the Tagruato Corporation, can be seen in the movie itself[nb]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_OOmDH7lWiY[/nb].

I'm only just scratching the surface of the ARG with this information and as I've previously stated in this thread, it's preciously why there is a fanbase for this movie.  There's so much more going on in Cloverfield than is apparent to the layman.

As a side note, I would also like to bring up one of my favourite pieces of information in regards to the LSA.  J.J. Abrams has gone on record as stating that the creature was actually a relative newborn; lost and confused.  It is in no way inherently malicious.  It is wondering around New York, screaming for its Mother, scared out of its mind, as it's attacked by these strange, relatively ant-sized creatures.  The LSA is terrified and acting as a spooked animal might in a similar situation.  The only difference from your standard animal being that this creature is as tall as a New York skyscraper.  I love having that in mind when watching the movie.

Also, one last interesting tidbit; the LSA attacked the Statue of Liberty because it initially thought it to be a biological creature and therefore a possible threat.  It ripped the head off the statue with it's claw and tried to bite down on it.  Realising that it was not an organic lifeform, the LSA threw the head away, towards the streets of Manhattan.

The aliens maybe dropped several big chaps over oceans as a first attack, with their big organic-looking ships that sound similar and look like they'd maybe come from the same neighbourhood.

I trust that I've been able to demonstrate to you that this is categorically not the case.

[Puce Moment]

I rather liked the juxtaposition of the intense, psychological story in the bunker, with the full-on SF elements in the third act. However, I never really got that edgy feeling for most of the film in a way that I expected to. There was a stakes issue maybe, but I never felt dread (although the screw falling off the air vent was a good moment). By the end of the film I was growing weary of the whole 'normal person suddenly becomes a super-hero' and I just felt they went too far with her skills. The whiskey bottle was a low moment.

It has now basically set up a world that could be explored through a TV series if that had not already been done with mixed results by Falling Skies.

[Rev]

(Much stuff)

You're being very generous and wide-eyed about the ARG's connection to the film, in a manner that reminds me of people who believed that Harold Ramis and Dan Aykroyd actually wrote the Ghostbusters video game.

I'll leave this here - you obviously enjoy the film and all it's associated business, and I don't want to piss on your chips.

[Ringside]

Has anyone else heard about a third film, that will tie in Cloverfield w/ 10 Cloverfield Lane? Sorry if it's been mentioned, I just went through the thread but didn't see anything. I was told about this idea, but don't know if it's reliable.

[Ant Farm Keyboard]

I didn't mind the ending at all, as it mostly shows how much the character has progressed from the beginning.
The early minutes are basically a tribute to Psycho (the woman who tries to flee, the score), the uncertainty about how much John Goodman is right and how much he's telling crap makes for great suspense, and then there's the escape.

Spoiler alert

For me, the rewarding thing in the third act or epilogue is that it shows that her time in the shelter trained her as a warrior in full control of her life. She faces a new threat which is far more dangerous than Goodman ever was, and she nails it. And it's liberating to see her in action, rather than just executing a meticulously prepared plan.

[close]

Of course, there's an element of exploitation as the promotion focused on the ties with the original Cloverfield, which are ultimately quite disappointing, but you know what? It's always been part of the game for B-movies to trick people into watching a loosely connected sequel or spin-off. Check for instance Cat People and Curse of the Cat People. So, I don't mind it.

[St_Eddie]

You're being very generous and wide-eyed about the ARG's connection to the film...

I'm not though.  As I've already stated, the ARG was directly developed by the filmmakers themselves and key elements of the ARG are actually seen throughout the movie itself.  This isn't a case of me wanting to believe it's connected; sticking my fingers in my ears and going "la la la la", should anyone suggest otherwise.  J.J. Abrams has directly referenced elements of the ARG, when people have brought up the question of the LSA's origin in interviews.  I'm not sure as to why you're so resistant to hearing the truth of the matter.

Abrams and Reeves didn't just say "a monster attacks New York and we we have absolutely no idea as to why.  Let's film this movie and have a shot of a Tagruato tanker on fire at the harbour of New York and a shot of Jamie passed out on the sofa at Rob's leaving party, for absolutely no reason whatsoever".  It's a bit daft to give the filmmakers so little credit for putting in a bit of time and effort, in coming up with their own backstory for why a gigantic creature suddenly emerges from the ocean.  Also, as evidenced by the fact that elements of the ARG appear in the movie itself; the viral marketing and the principle photography were produced in tandem with each other and all of that expanded lore is something which director, Matt Reeves not only came up with in conjunction with J.J. Abrams but was also purposefully incorporating into his big screen vision, during filmmaking.  The ARG isn't something which was hastily knocked together during the post-production phase of Cloverfield.

I'm absolutely aware that an awful lot of viral marketing holds what is generally considered to be a non-canonical status but I'm also cognisant of the fact that some viral material is developed directly by the key creative members of a film.  For example, The Blair Witch Project and it's three spin-off "documentaries" draw on the official backstory developed by Eduardo Sánchez and Daniel Myrick and should absolutely be viewed as being in alignment with the film itself, whereas other Blair Witch based media, such as the novels and video-games are generally to considered as a hypothetical 'what-if' type of scenario.  Whereas, you seem to think that all viral marketing is bollocks.  You are thinking in terms of absolutes; everything is either black or white.  I'm thinking in terms of grey areas, based upon the facts laid out in front of me.  Which sounds more credible to you?

I will say this much; when it comes to the thorny issue of "canon" (which let's be honest, is a tedious and irritating debate to have - not too mention a fairly rotten misuse of the word "canon"), I'm very much of the mindset that 'whatever works for you is the correct answer for yourself, personally'.  So, if you choose not to acknowledge the ARG for Cloverfield, then that is an absolutely valid way to view such things.  However, that's not the point that I am making here.  I am trying to convey to you that the filmmakers themselves intended for the viral marketing to be a genuine expansion upon the movie's story.

I'll leave this here - you obviously enjoy the film and all it's associated business, and I don't want to piss on your chips.

Well, now that we've both said our pieces, I concur that it's probably best to close the book on this particular discussion, lest we go in around in circles of tedium and repetition.  By the way, I'm not saying that to be prickly (nor am I saying it in a prickish manner, despite being a prick).  I just don't think there's much else to say on the matter.

Has anyone else heard about a third film, that will tie in Cloverfield w/ 10 Cloverfield Lane? Sorry if it's been mentioned, I just went through the thread but didn't see anything.

I Mentioned this earlier in this tread.  Here's the relevant snippet...

...J.J. Abrams has hinted that both stories could potentially be set in parallel universes; which doesn't really mean a great deal, when you think about it.  I mean, every movie ever could be seen as taking place in a parallel universe, if you look at it that way.  Some of us in the Cloverfield community has hypothesised that the upcoming Abrams produced The God Particle may have it's characters jumping from one universe to the other but that remains to be seen, as it's pure conjecture at this point.

[St_Eddie]

Hehe, I will look forward to seeing that!

Hey, just to let you know that I have rendered the file but it's all gone tits up!  It's ultra choppy and I don't know why.  I've tried several methods of fixing the problem but I'm at a loss.  I can always upload the choppy file if you'd like? Sorry, I know that's hardly ideal.