It's sequel or prequel of "Cloverfield" ?
-
jennifer-l-boyer — 9 years ago(November 19, 2016 07:46 PM)
I saw it as a sequel simply because the invasion seemed quite advanced in this film (it seemed to be all along the coast), whereas in the first film I got the vibe that NYC was the first city to be hit.
-
churchr-1 — 9 years ago(November 21, 2016 12:44 PM)
I'd add just one thing, I suspect that he was a survivalist first and then a kidnapper. I think the bunker is too elaborate just to kidnap a girl, but it was very handy when he decided to. Maybe building a doomsday bunker then looking around at how secure and isolated it was helped him decide to go ahead and kidnap a woman. Like the old saying "when you have a hammer everything looks like a nail." When you have an underground dungeon every young woman looks like a princess to chain to the wall.
-
ExcellentBulletproofVest — 9 years ago(November 26, 2016 07:32 AM)
Neither, it's just got the same producer.
It can't be a prequel or be taking place in parallel because Michelle has a modern iPhone. Everyone in Cloverfield uses 2007-8 phones and all the cars are from that period.
It can't be a sequel because nobody ever mentioned the massive monster that destroyed New York. If something like that happened they would have mentioned it.What started out as a joke has turned out to be a disaster
