MovieChat Forums > 10 Cloverfield Lane (2016) Discussion > Why did JJ allow "COVERFIELD" in TITLE a...

Why did JJ allow "COVERFIELD" in TITLE as it had NADA to do w/original ?


The trailer even semi-alludes to the "creature" from original possibly the cause of the devastation outside and of John Goodman hiding out in the bunker. Not only that but the audience has to sit through near an HOUR before we get to any scenes outside the bunker. The film was simply....boring. Unfortunate too as the acting was great. Goodman as always amazing.

reply

Because the Cloverfield name has become like an umbrella term for Bad Robot's monster movies. It's more like a spiritual successor instead of an actual sequel.

Damn you Lindelof!

reply

I'm guessing that the monster(s) in the original Cloverfield were just the beginning of a whole heap of weird extra-terrestrial visitors.

reply

"God Particle" It is the third entry in the Cloverfield anthological film series.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_Particle_(film)



Can you fly this plane?
Surely u cant be serious
I am serious,and dont call me Shirley

reply

Well logic would tell you its because it DOES have something to do with the film Cloverfield.




"dont you hear that horrible screaming all around you? That screaming men call silence."

reply

I think or at least hope there may be more to "Cloverfield" franchising than "monster."

I could see each film featuring old timey monsters (kaiju, aliens, etc.) but following an entirely independent cinematic conceit (found footage, psychological thriller, etc.) to portray a human character arc (finally admitting mutual love, learning to overcome a tendency to run away, etc.)

The monster element could be universal, but incidental in other words

reply

The two films exist in the same universe, but are not prequels or sequels. They are stories told about the same event, which is the alien invasion of earth, but that's the only link between them.

Just google some interviews with JJ Abrams about it, he calls the 2 films 'blood relations' in a few and 'sisters' in others.

http://www.rollingstone.com/movies/news/10-cloverfield-lane-how-j-j-abrams-made-a-secret-sequel-20160309



"dont you hear that horrible screaming all around you? That screaming men call silence."

reply

Back in 2008-2011 or so, JJ Abrams was always asked about Cloverfield 2 and he used to say that they were waiting to do something very different for the 2nd movie. He said one idea was to show the same event from different people's point of view.

10 Cloverfield Lane is probably exactly what he said back then, even though they arent during the same monster attack from Cloverfield.

I think the Cloverfield monster was just a large monster the aliens used to wipe out large cities just like how they used a small, predator type in 10 Cloverfield lane, in order to hunt and kill survivors.

John Goodman's character explained that an alien attack would do that in phases.

reply

Logic doesn't say that. If anything, logic would say that you're begging the question.

reply

Logic doesn't say that.


1. Both films produced by the same person
2. Both films have the word 'cloverfield' in the title
3. Both films feature alien monsters.

You think its illogical to think there is a link between the films?

really?




"dont you hear that horrible screaming all around you? That screaming men call silence."

reply

Interestingly enough, based on your list you can say that "Star Trek" and "Star Wars" are in the same universe. Just swap out "Cloverfield" with the word "Star." That's a pretty tenuous rationale you got there, sweetheart.

So without further information, it's logical.

After observations it's more logical to conclude that the filmmaker made an error in titling the film with the brand name, "Cloverfield."

Looking at it another way: If this film didn't include "Cloverfield" in the title and didn't include minor references to the first movie (e.g. "Slusho" neon sign), can you create a list of themes, characters, or designs that would lead an ordinary viewer to irrefutably make an overwhelming connection between the two films?

reply

Sweetheart? You wanker. Why can't people on IMDB keep discussions civil? Well I don't start the name calling, but I am fine to go with it as you have taken us there, sweetturd.

based on your list you can say that "Star Trek" and "Star Wars" are in the same universe


no doofus, Cloverfield is a name a bit more specific and unique than 'star'. My list was specific to the link between these 2 films and not something to expand to all films ever.

JJ DOES link the 2 films. They are tales set in the same 'universe' where they earth is invaded by the same alien monsters. Not sure why you would argue with this, as its very well documented that the films ARE linked. The links are obvious to anyone who has seen both films. The giant space monsters attacking the planet in both films should be quite a big clue.

https://www.theguardian.com/film/filmblog/2016/mar/15/why-10-cloverfield-lanes-success-proves-the-enduring-power-of-surprise

Many assumed it would be a direct sequel to Cloverfield, but it’s been referred to as more of a “blood relative”. Abrams has cleverly manufactured a franchise of secretive sci-fi thrillers that exist under one mysterious word and provide an antithesis to the tired cycle of uninspired sequels that are trotted out every month.


One thing that the film’s low-budget success will definitely lead to is yet more Cloverfields. Abrams and director Dan Trachtenberg have discussed the potential for sequels, and the ending certainly hints at more to come. But after “breaking the template” this time around, can it be done again? And after all, would a surprise Cloverfield semi-sequel really be a surprise next time?




"dont you hear that horrible screaming all around you? That screaming men call silence."

reply

So when I challenge, "can you create a list of themes, characters, or designs that would lead an ordinary viewer to irrefutably make an overwhelming connection between the two films?" your answer is…

"I can't. But here's some well-known documentation showing that the person who's cashing in on a brand name is covering his tracks."

-MarwoodWalks, age 42


?

Um. Ok.

As far as the "giant space monsters" go, that hardly connects two films. Are you suggesting that this is related to Independence Day, Alien, and Monsters vs Aliens? How about Star Trek 2009 which had basically the same Cloverfield monster design and was directed by JJ and had the letter "e" in the title?

You sure have a curious grasp on logic.

reply

Do you deny the 2 films are linked?

You sure have a curious grasp on logic.


The film makers made them with direct links, they wrote the 10 cloverfield lane as a film with direct links to Cloverfield, they talk about the links openly and also about a third film in the series that will probably be made. so my logic that they are linked is pretty sound don't you think?

If it confuses you that the films didn't have some really dumbass obvious links other than the event of the alien invasion then that's your issue, not the films. The film makers made a film set during the same alien invasion as in the previous film, and tried to make it obvious to morons by putting the word "CLOVERFIELD" in the title. This isn't my opinion, its what the people who made the film say about it.

Do you want to explain my logic issues now? I am only telling you what the people who made the film are telling us...isn't that logical?



"dont you hear that horrible screaming all around you? That screaming men call silence."

reply

As there is not a single piece of evidence — sans the title and the dubious statements of the creators — that the films are linked then yes, by logic, I have to presume they are NOT linked and that the creators have made an error in judgment (possibly for financial gain).

Your fallacy is that you presume the premise to be true and can only substantiate it by those who share that opinion. There is no other observable evidence to support the premise.

It's completely, ridiculously, and hilariously illogical, sweetie.

reply

The argument has nothing to do with logic in academic sense. You come off as arrogant and foolish when referencing his/her points.

reply

Yawn. Ad hominem. Move along, pumpkin.

reply

Glad to see you read "logic for dummies". Seeing as you are clearly a special kind of stupid I will move on.

reply

This thread started as "logic for dummies." Don't be surprised that it ends that way as well.

And I'm not sure anyone will notice if you move on or not. Did you even contribute to the discussion? Who are you?

reply

You don't even understand logical fallacy yet continue to fail in its application. In case you hadn't noticed this is an open forum. All you have contributed is your lack of understanding of logic in the academic sense.

reply

Why have you replied again? My last post won the argument numbnuts...didnt you notice?



"dont you hear that horrible screaming all around you? That screaming men call silence."

reply

Backing a fallacy isn't technically a win.

But... congrats?

reply

It is when its only you who thinks its a fallacious argument, and in reality, no fallacy is evident.



"dont you hear that horrible screaming all around you? That screaming men call silence."

reply

Begging the question. Appeal to authority. Shall we add proof by assertion and call it a day?

All you have to do is point out how the films are related on their own merit as works of art and I'll disappear with a humble apology.

Until then, the conversation continues, sweetie.

reply

Look Kid, I am not just going over old ground to try and prove points already proven to anyone with half a brain. I have already pointed out the links, and the fact that the film makers say they are linked (which is a fact you can't disagree with).

Until then, the conversation continues, sweetie.


This is not a conversation, when you started throwing insults you ended the conversation. This is the forum equivalent of a much better boxer knocking down a lesser opponent, and yet the opponent wont stay down. Well you keep on replying with nothing, and i will keep on knocking you down.




"dont you hear that horrible screaming all around you? That screaming men call silence."

reply

I'm sad that you've given up. That was way too easy. Hopefully someone will defend your position for you. Do you have an adult or guardian who can help?

reply

Yet again you reply with no substance. You are out of arguments and haven't successfully refuted a word I have said.

Do you have an adult or guardian who can help?


LOL...that's pathetic.



"dont you hear that horrible screaming all around you? That screaming men call silence."

reply

I'm actually the one asking for substance. My claim is that there is no way to substantiate your argument. You have proven this over and over again through opting out.

If I missed something, I'm sure your ilk can help finish this thought (because you can't):

"Cloverfield and 10 Cloverfield Lane are clearly linked through these observations in both films:
a. ______________
b. ______________
c. ______________"

So run along, poochie. I'm looking for a conversation with an adult now.

reply

See my answer below.

So run along, poochie. I'm looking for a conversation with an adult now.


Yeah you sound so mature.

Another knockdown...BOOM!


"dont you hear that horrible screaming all around you? That screaming men call silence."

reply

See my answer below.

The impotent one? Or did you post something useful yet?

reply

The one you had no comeback on, and then got beat down again...


"dont you hear that horrible screaming all around you? That screaming men call silence."

reply

I'm not recalling anything by that description. Hm. It must have been featured in both films.

reply

I agree with EVERYTHING you wrote here MarwoodWalks, 100%!

reply

Cheers!





"dont you hear that horrible screaming all around you? That screaming men call silence."

reply

Finally! A reasonable person!

Can you logically link the films — other than through begging the question or a "because I said so" fallacy, of course?

reply

So two stories about the same world event told in different settings and with different povs are unrelated? Have you ever heard of an anthology? BTW, referring to people you disagree with using cutesy pet names makes you sound smug, not smart. Nobody's arguing this is a sequel, just that the films are loosely related.

That IS a tasty burger!

reply

Come on sport, you're better than this.

same world event

How so? Other than alien monsters from the sky, which is a centuries-old trope, what elements unify the two? The method of approach is different (one from the water, the other from the sky). The types of monsters are different (in terms of design and intelligence). They don't occur in the same region. The events don't reference each other (heck, even live news reports during Cloverfield don't mention similar devastation in other areas of the country). Other than a commonality shared by every alien invasion film ever made, what irrefutably sets them in the same universe?

In other words, if this film was called "Something's Goofy in Texas" not a single person would ask, "Why was the word 'Cloverfield' not in the title?"

Nobody's arguing this is a sequel, just that the films are loosely related.

Well, they're arguing poorly that they're loosely related. The arguments are based on stinky, smelly, icky piles of raw, unprocessed fallacies, not observations.

reply

OK, seeing as how the top level obvious stuff that links the films doesn't do it for you, Hows this for observation of minutiae in the film: (the satellite one I knew, the Howard job one I found in a google search...there is some really cool stuff online about the links of the films that I wouldn't have found if not for your moronic denial of the facts, including blogs from Howard about the impending invasion...so thanks!)

At the end of Cloverfield, we see a satellite coming to earth into the sea. Right? You remember that?

At the beginning of 10 Cloverfield Lane we are looking out over the sea from Michelles window, the camera pans to her packing, there is a flash and a muffled explosion offscreen. This is a (or the) satellite coming to Earth just as in Cloverfield.

John Goodmans character Howard is a satellite tracking tech, he knows about the satellites and the impending invasion, and he is employee of the month for Bold Futura, a subsidiary of Tagruato corp...the same company that Rob Hawkins from Cloverfield was off to start working for.

http://tagruato.jp/employee_of_the_month_2016_february.php

click on the link, scroll to the bottom and there is Howard.

So is having Howard working for a subsidiary of the same Japanese oil company Tagruato whose deep sea drilling awakened the cloverfield monster a link? Is having him be a satellite tech, when we see a satellite crashing at the end of cloverfield a link? Is his doomsday prepping for the invasion before it happens because of his work on the satellites for it a link?

We may well get more answers in the third film set around these events, we may find out what the link is between the ancient alien sea monster and the subsequent invasion after it awakens, but what we do know for sure is that the films are linked. Lets not forget THAT THE FILM MAKERS SAY THEY ARE LINKED!!!



"dont you hear that horrible screaming all around you? That screaming men call silence."

reply

At the end of Cloverfield, we see a satellite coming to earth into the sea. Right? You remember that?

Yes, we see something. Most alien invasion films have an invasion.

This is a (or the) satellite coming to Earth just as in Cloverfield.

Yes, this could be something. Most alien invasion films have an invasion.

he knows

He wildly suspects many things and repeatedly states that he doesn't know anything.

scroll to the bottom

If possible, try to limit to observations within the films, as that is the claim being challenged: By watching the two films, an observer would not logically conclude that they are related.

Lets not forget THAT THE FILM MAKERS SAY THEY ARE LINKED!!!

This appeal to authority (while comforting since it comes from a grownup) doesn't substantiate the argument, but presumes an infallible author. Please stop it with the fallacies.

Try again, sugardimples?

reply

It becoming painfully obvious you don't understand what a fallacy is. It isn't wrong to point out that the 2 films are made as films with links when answering a question about one film having 'nada' to do with the other. Its cute that you have a word you (just you) think is clever, but not so good that you don't understand what it means.

as that is the claim being challenged: By watching the two films, an observer would not logically conclude that they are related.


um no, you can't just make stuff up. The question is 'Why did JJ allow "COVERFIELD" in TITLE as it had NADA to do w/origin'. The fact that viral marketing and online teaser stuff clearly links the films is very valid in answering the actual question asked. You cant change the question just because you have lost the argument moron.

I just battered you again, showing clear links between the films, your reply has nothing to refute them.



"dont you hear that horrible screaming all around you? That screaming men call silence."

reply

Ok, I see the problem. I'm going to try to use fewer syllables now.

The two films have nothing to do with each other.

This is true until you bring in material that isn't in the films.

At that point, it's not about the films, is it?

Do you understand those words, slappy?

reply

Not sure I can dumb this down any further for you...

I gave you some stuff IN THE FILM that links them, you have not done a thing to dispute any of my points yet.

This is true until you bring in material that isn't in the films.


Oh so now you concede they are linked...could have just done that from the start and saved yourself the embarrassment of how you have looked on this thread...you haven't come across well...



"dont you hear that horrible screaming all around you? That screaming men call silence."

reply

You provided two tenuous connections:

1. Things fall from the sky in both alien invasion films.
2. There's a blink-it-and-miss cameo of the company that is mentioned in both films.

These elements are distinct in your mind?

I mean, it totally makes sense if they are given your disdain for critical thought.

reply

Oh so you now concede I HAVE provided links from within the films. Take this with your concession that outside info about the films clearly links them, and you have 2 films that are linked.

Well it took a while, but you finally stayed down and admitted defeat, shame you couldn't do it graciously, but I guess what matters is that you finally see sense.



"dont you hear that horrible screaming all around you? That screaming men call silence."

reply

Yes, I concede that while your effort was dismal and ultimately impotent, the task was technically completed.

You may have your gold star, sweetpea.

Now run along.

reply

A question was asked, and I 'technically completed' the task of answering it correctly.

What should I do beyond that? What expectations do you have for answers on an internet forum above answering questions correctly?

You may have your gold star, sweetpea.


You don't hand out the gold stars numbnuts, and I already got one for my first response on this thread, which was correct. All you have achieved through your posts is make everyone who read your words dislike you. Kudos.



"dont you hear that horrible screaming all around you? That screaming men call silence."

reply

It is very clear there is no point arguing this. Not because the OP is right, but because he cannot concede that anything that didn't originate from his own smug little consciousness has any validity. Being so in love with your self-perceived cleverness and ignoring any reasoning that doesn't conform to your own view doesn't mean you have superior logic, it just makes you look an ass with his fingers in his ears going, "nah, nah, nah. I can't hear you!"

That IS a tasty burger!

reply

Yes, I agree, arguing with Mugo is pointless, he is a special kind of stupid. Any other civil discussion I can just agree to disagree, but he decided to be nasty about it...so I will continue to peck at his tiny mind.



"dont you hear that horrible screaming all around you? That screaming men call silence."

reply

This is the worst mugojoe fan club meeting ever.

reply

Come on bro. Make an independent thought and defend it. Your nose won't be happy for long in that other guy's sugar barrel.

Claim: The two films have no tangible connection that a casual observer would make had their titles been obfuscated.

Your challenge to the claim: __________________

Go!

reply

Claim: The two films have no tangible connection that a casual observer would make had their titles been obfuscated.


Changing the goalposts again?

Here would this make your position easier to defend:

Claim: If someone has both films on in the background while making a Lego Deathstar, would they notice the link between the films as long as they didn't know the titles of the films and missed the last 30 mins of each to have dinner?

Lets remind you of the thread: Why did JJ allow "COVERFIELD" in TITLE as it had NADA to do w/origin




"dont you hear that horrible screaming all around you? That screaming men call silence."

reply

I don't have my nose up his arse, but you've clearly got your head up yours. Changing the claim midway through an argument doesn't make you right. You made a major modification to the OP's original statement in your defense of it. Imagine I say the corneto trilogy movies have nothing in common, someone else refutes that with several parallels, then you defend my original statement by pointing out the plots and characters are all different, and follow that up by demanding somebody disprove your new argument. That's stupid, because the original statement was a superlative, and your new argument is not. You do understand nada means nothing, and is an absolute?

That IS a tasty burger!

reply

The goal of Cloverfield wasn't to make a direct sequel. It's not the same story from a different perspective. It's a close relative to the original movie. They want Cloverfield to like American horror story, twilight zone, broken lizard. Different story, same genre type deal. However they do LOOSELY connect them with small Easter eggs, in the event that in the future they want to officially tie them together with a third movie.

reply

Oh wait! You're the guy who says they're both clearly connected because they're both alien invasion films.

Yikes. My condolences on your situation. My prayers are with you.

reply

I would just like to point out that the original script the movie is based on had nothing to do with the original Cloverfield
Movie.

What I think happened here is the script was decent but not quite good enough to get picked up. But JJ liked the potential of the script and thought "How can I sell this to Hollywood?"

I was disappointed in the end because Cloverfeild is one of my all time favorites. I was expecting more in that relationship.

This movie on its own is quite good. I found it intense and exciting. I would honestly change the bed and leave out the whole alien nonsense if it were me. And I love alien movies.

If I look back on it and remind myself that it really does have nothing to do with Cloverfield, I feel much better about the movie and can enjoy it that way. I might even just give it my own new title so it doesn't piss me off.

reply

Sorry that should have been change the end. I can't see how to edit my post.

reply

Zing!

How many knockouts in a row is that now?

reply

Ha! This mugojoe guy... what a funny dude. He keeps asking "why are those films related?", but he cannot explain why they are not! Seriously.

What's so hard about it? Its an anthology. Same name, same producers, same theme. And the producers have already stated the filmes ARE related.

Come on, dude, just say: "the two movies are not related because i dont want them to be".

reply

If they have to meet all 3 criteria then they are not related.

reply

They are. Ours. A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away...

reply

Someone needs a lesson on the definition of logic.

I'll try. Let's start with circular logic.

Is there there a link between the two because of the same proper noun in the title?
Yes, because they both have the same proper noun in the title.

Ha Ha! Love IMDB.

reply

he is a hack

The stupid have one thing in common.They alter the facts to fit their views not the other way

reply

3 pages of people arguing how these movies are "obviously" connected, but I don't see it. Cloverfield was a massive deep sea Godzilla like creature (or seemed like it) attacking Manhattan, while 10 Cloverfield Lane was a War of the Worlds style alien invasion. There was no mention of either event in either movie, the creatures were in no way related, etc. Other than the fact the creators said they were connected, there is not connection.

They were both good movies though. I agree most with the people saying they are using the "Cloverfield" title to connect these two movies and future movies for an anthology series. But otherwise no in-universe connection...yet.

reply

Why did JJ allow "COVERFIELD" in TITLE as it had NADA to do w/original ?

Obviously just to annoy you.

reply

I figured it might have something to do with marketing, and the ending, but mostly for marketing. The ending actually just feels tacked on. I liked the stuff beforehand, especially because of the acting. I just think people wanted a monster movie but instead felt duped into an old-fashioned thriller.


Trying to create a funny, engaging YouTube channel. If you guys check it out, hope you enjoy what you see. Thanks in advance.

Review of the film here-https://youtu.be/5koeI7uv20I

reply

Haha yah I remember seeing people on here saying "it's your fault for thinking this movie had the Cloverfield monster in it, the trailer made it obvious that it didn't" and I'm like no it didn't, it really didn't. The trailers seem like they purposely tried fooling you into thinking the original monster was the villain and not new aliens.

reply

I think it will be clear later, in the third, fourth films, that these aliens come from the same planet/solar system.

It's the beginning of an organized invasion. The makers have said they are planning a Cloverfield universe.

So, the gigantic deep sea monster waking up and attacking Manhattan might be a precursor to other phases of the invasion. For all we know, maybe these gigantic deep see monsters are important parts of the alien ecosystem and were planted into the ocean(s) for future use. For all we know they might be the alien's milk cows.

If the aliens are planning to exterminate the humans and occupy Earth, they'll need parts of their own ecosystem, not to forget, the Cloverfield monster attacking Manhattan proves that it does have some military value as a weapon, similar to how the ancient Asians used elephants in attacks.

Also, maybe the very awakening of the Manhattan monster was triggered by the approach of the alien spaceships that carried on the chemical attack in Louisiana.

Think of it. The attack killed Earth's cows as well. Being the aliens carnivores, they might think "we'll kill too much of the Earth's ecosystem and our planet is too distant and bringing food is a logistic nightmare, so first we will populate the oceans with our large animals which we can use as food after we decimate Earths intelligent and non-intelligent animals" - humans, cows, pigs, and if the chemicals will run into the oceans maybe they'll poison fish and whales; maybe their own deep sea monsters are immune to the poison.

I mean, this is just a guess by me regarding how future movies can tie-up the Cloverfield universe. There are of course infinite other possibilities and I don't know which one the filmmakers will pick.

But what is a FACT is that these movies ARE connected since they talk about alien creatures coming to Earth in the same overall time period, and as pointed out by others here, there are hints and clues already pointing to connections, plus there is THE FREAKING STATEMENT BY THE FILMMAKERS THAT THE MOVIES ARE CONNECTED AND THEY ARE PLANNING AN ANTHOLOGY OF CLOVERFIELD-UNIVERSE MOVIES.

This arrogant user's argument that the aliens are very different in the two movies is BS. Just think of how different we are from a whale or a firefly. Think of Spaceship Troopers where there were aliens of all sizes and shapes, some smaller, some gigantic.

The two satellites being knocked out in both movies... aliens are coming. They come in different sizes and shapes. They are invading the Earth and trying to exterminate humans, in the same time period of the 21st century.

Interstellar distances being huge and the universe vast, it would have to be a statistically prohibitive coincidence if suddenly aliens showed up in Manhattan and Louisiana at the same time, and they were NOT coming from the same planet and the same invasion force, regardless of their size and appearance.

reply

Get the power back, you are a genius. I too remember thinking the same thing, and tons of flatout “high IQ” retards were babbling “durrrr obviously it’s an anthology movie and that was so glaringly obvious from day one!” Man, I wish I had the telekinetic powers of some of these users.

reply