I have this question!
-
ItsMcDude — 9 years ago(January 17, 2017 08:07 PM)
I think he went crazy talking about aliens and bunker building. He tried to get them to live in there with him just like Michelle and Emmett. It caused his wife to want to walk out on him and take his daughter from him. He probably killed them before they could escape, cursing them for abandoning him when he was trying to save them.
It would explain his abandonment issues and all of his talk about how you can't convince people that safety is in their best interest. He's now projecting the pain of that moment onto Michelle and Emmett. -
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
