I seriously wonder if news on Paramount's Cloverfield (reviews) will ever stop coming in? After destroying the box office two weekends ago, sequel talk hit the web, but today's news is different. Inside you'll find a portion of an interview with Director Matt Reeves who reveals that the monster was actually a newborn baby! Read on for the skinny.
Matt Reeves tells Den of Geek, "So the secret that we had was that the monster was a baby. Having just been born it was going through separation anxiety and had no idea where its mother was and was freaking out and was in a completely foreign place, didn’t understand a thing and that that would be sending it into a kind of infantile rage. Which was very frightening, but the thing that was also frightening to me was the idea that not only was it going through an infantile rage but, because it was suffering from this separation anxiety, it was spooked.
It was really afraid. And as the military started shooting at it, I started thinking, like if you were attacked by a swarm of bees for the first time, it wouldn’t necessarily kill you but you’d be terrified, you’d be like, "What are these things doing?!" And for me there’s nothing scarier than thinking of something that big that’s spooked. Like if you’re at the circus and suddenly the elephants are spooked, you don’t want to be anywhere near that, you’ll be crushed..."
The creature had a few too many parasites to be a "newborn" baby...
I love how they just throw out these crazy ideas like they make sense. A newborn that big? With parasites? And where is it's parent(s)?
Instead of saying these weird little facts (the baby bit), just have the monster and let the audience create heir own mythos.
THE parents are probaly fukin huge. man probably as big as 2 sears towers. man. and for ULTAZILLA2000 WHAT WOULD U DO IF THEY DIDNT TELL WHERE GODZILLA CAME FROM HUH. man that was creative. in number 2 rob and beth meet up with more people and try to escape the mom and son. hopefully cloverfield 2 doest go cheesy on us and give us a luv story between mother and son. and when hud is about to be eaten u see the monsters eyes and they looked weepy and confused. man if a baby did all this then wait til the mom comes.
I say that for the next one they kill the new born baby when they fine out it is done Attacking NY. You see other people filming and they run over to the TV saying that the monster is leaving, and everybody is like it is over it's done, but it's not over, it's still alive and pissed, so it goes back to the water and retreats to fine it's mother so it winds up in another City. Then the miltary followed it after destorying NY and thinking they destory the monster. We also see rob and them again in quick shots. The monster then destorys the other city the milatry do what they do best but this time they are sure they killed it. The monster sends out a loud impulse noise as it atracts the mother who is super super super huge. And is really fucking pissed the milatary just killed its baby, then it unleashes the most scariest fucked up shit you'll ever see put to film.
THE END
That's just weird. They couldn't even do a sequel with the parents because all it would be is the Mother or Father stomping its foot on the ground and wiping out humanity. The end. It would be practically impossible to kill them. A nuclear bomb would maybe take out, what, a finger? A finger nail? Either way I'll still go see a sequel.
I agree, thats my number one thing...I kept thinking if this is a baby then damn what do the parents look like. As someone else mentioned, i mean the second they step foot on land they would be leveling cities. Shit id pay to see that.
People this really isn't the first time they've said it was a 'baby' going through seperation anxiety. Honestly I think they're using the term 'baby' very loosely here. Why? Last time I read an intereview where they said the same sort of thing (They may have said child or something then but whatever) they followed up saying it wass like a thousand or something years old. So sure freakin old for our standards, but could be very infantile mentally for it's kind (mixed with the fact that it's been asleep for who knows how long)
I'm tired of reading Chrisby's bitching, so here's a gif
that shows the Cloverfield monster:
http://nymag.com/daily/entertainment/2008/01/17/i mages/clove
rfieldsmallslowhu0.gif. If u do not want to have the movie
spoiled then do not click on the link. The gif is a bit
dark, but that is indeed the monster.
The monster's mother can live on earth without ever being detected because no human knows how big things gets on the ocean floor it could potentially be as big as the state of califorina but have never been seen once because never probably has never needed to surface
Im liking this, it gives it a realistic motive, im glad they didnt explain this stuff we've been finding out in the film, but mainstream viewers wont read this stuff so its kind of a mystery for most.
I think that in the sequel, the people formerly of NYC should hire Beowulf to come kill the "child" monster. Then, after he's done, he is summoned to the bottom of the ocean to fight its sexy mother.
if you haven't heard the news at the end of the credit for a few seconds u hear audio from rob's cam and if you reverse it it's rob saying "it's alive"
I'm very excited at the prospect of Cloverfield 2....however they will need to come up with a different title because the ladder sounds a bit corny...maybe Cloverfield: Still Alive or something to that effect....oh and the mother tidbit is starting to get on my nerves... If the baby came from the sea then of course the mother is coming from the exact same place...however what would be cool is if they kill the baby early on in the sequel then do a deep sea dive and discover the mother sleeping but she is then awakened and carries on a rampage in NYC or another city in the world.....that I'd love to see:)
This is a simple thought did anyone think that the monster in Central park that used the camera boy as a chew toy, was the baby? and the one tearing up Manhatten was the mother looking for it. The size differential alone should be enough for even the casual viewer to acknowledge that the creature shown in central park could have walked over buildings it was about 40-50 ft where as the one attacking New York was about 150 ft
i don't live in new york so i'm not too sure on the distance of things, but heres what i think some of you fans from new york should do. find out where the street is that the head of the statue lands on, while their all on the streets watching all this hud sees a monster move past the buildings. I dont think it matters how far the head thrown, in any case its out quite a ways in the water by a couple kilometers, i dont think this monster is fast enough to be in both places pretty much at once........................
You have to be logged in to comment! If you don't have an account register now for free! Your account allows you to post comments and reviews, upload videos and images, access or our forums, write personal blogs, and maintain your profile.
Matt Reeves tells Den of Geek, "So the secret that we had was that the monster was a baby. Having just been born it was going through separation anxiety and had no idea where its mother was and was freaking out and was in a completely foreign place, didn’t understand a thing and that that would be sending it into a kind of infantile rage. Which was very frightening, but the thing that was also frightening to me was the idea that not only was it going through an infantile rage but, because it was suffering from this separation anxiety, it was spooked. 
Print Story
Send to a Friend
