Paramount Home Media Distribution has announced the Blu-ray release of producer J.J. Abrams and up-and-coming director Dan Trachtenberg’s 10 Cloverfield Lane, which stars Mary Elizabeth Winstead, John Goodman and John Gallagher, Jr. The spiritual sequel/spin-off to Cloverfield (2008) arrives on Blu-ray combo pack on June 14th.
After a catastrophic car crash, a young woman (Mary Elizabeth Winstead, Scott Pilgrim vs. The World) wakes up in a survivalist’s (John Goodman, Argo) underground bunker. He claims to have saved her from an apocalyptic attack that has left the outside world uninhabitable. His theories are supported by a mysterious stranger who is in the bunker with them (John Gallagher, Jr., The Newsroom), but as his increasingly suspicious actions lead her to question his motives, she’ll have to escape in order to discover the truth.
10 Cloverfield Lane is presented in 1080p with Dolby Atmos surround. For a limited time only, fans will receive a bonus Digital HD copy of the original Cloverfield with their purchase of the 10 Cloverfield Lane Blu-ray Combo Pack. Special features include:
Commentary by director Dan Trachtenberg and producer J.J. Abrams
Over 30 minutes of Behind-The-Scenes Footage: Take an extensive look behind-the-scenes with Abrams and the cast as they revisit the legacy of 2008’s Cloverfield, and discuss how 10 Cloverfield Lane went from script to production. Continue with a tour of the ominous bunker, see how the costume designer was challenged to create a homemade Hazmat suit, follow the production team and sound designers as they work on the movie’s epic finale, and hear the unique scores composed for each character.
2016 is off to a surprisingly awesome start, continuing the quality bounty we reaped at the end of last year. Two months ago, I didn’t know 10 Cloverfield Lane existed, and I would have thought the idea of a sequel (though it’s more of a spin-off) would be eye-rollingly stupid. Having just experienced it, the best analogy I can give you as to what 10 Cloverfield Lane is without ruining it, is to say it’s the closest to a big-screen classic Twilight Zone episode I’ve ever seen. It’s fantastic. Not only is it light-years better than Cloverfield (which I liked), it makes me happy that Cloverfield is apparently now a franchise. I can’t wait for the next installment. Continue reading Movie Review: 10 Cloverfield Lane (2016) *Tense, Brilliant, Must-See Thriller*→
Little is known about 10 Cloverfield Lane in terms of how it might connect to Cloverfield, the 2008 found-footage hit from producer Abrams and director Matt Reeves and writer Drew Goddard. Paramount and Abrams released a statement after the trailer hit on Thursday night, with Abrams saying, “The idea came up a long time ago during production. We wanted to make it a blood relative of Cloverfield. The idea was developed over time. We wanted to hold back the title for as long as possible.” Fueling the flames of speculation that pegged this as a Cloverfield sequel was the surprise launch of the trailer, which tracked with the very memorable and equally surprising preview for the first film back in 2007. Plus, that Statue of Liberty-decapitating piece debuted in front of another Bay film, the original Transformers.
But what does “blood relative” actually mean? Many have assumed that 10 Cloverfield Lane will be a direct sequel to the earlier film, set in the same world where a giant monster (or monsters?) is running amuck. Certainly, the new trailer would allow for that possibility, with its depiction of three people (Mary Elizabeth Winstead,John Goodman and John Gallagher, Jr.) who are seemingly living in a bomb shelter of some kind, fearful of what exists up above ground. Could they be survivors of the Cloverfield monster’s rampage?
Sure, they could be. But it seems more likely that the new film is a spiritual successor to the spooky/freaky/weird vibe of the Reeves film. Some have speculated that Abrams could be creating an anthology series that will operate under the “Cloverfield” name, but with the films in the series not being specifically connected to one another beyond that and their genre bent. (It should be noted that neither Reeves nor Goddard appear to have been involved with 10 Cloverfield Lane. If this was a true sequel to their film, one would expect a producer credit at the very least for Reeves.)
There seems to be some confusion on the part of everyone involved in making this movie as to how a Die Hard film works. John McClane gets dragged into a situation IN AMERICA that results in him causing massive amounts of chaos and death and progressively getting torn to shreds as the film evolves. In the midst of all of this, he’s usually dealing with a crisis in his family, there are things said that are funny and there is an actual plot (linear though it may be). Die Hard 5 (which is easier to type than its real title) is only recognizable as a Die Hard film because it’s in the title and people are addressing Bruce Willis as John McClane.
A lot of people didn’t like Die Hard 4 (which also has an unnecessarily long title), but I thought it was a ton of fun and a good transition to an older John. That movie focused mainly on John re-establishing ties with his daughter Lucy (Winstead). In theory, the plot here is he’s going to re-establish ties with his son Jack (Courtney). Jack’s gone off the grid, but they think he might be in Moscow, so off John goes and within ten minutes of leaving the airport, he’s managed to find his son, blow his son’s CIA op, and engage in a demolition derby that wrecks a sizable portion of the city. This is the most plausible part of the plot. Salvaging Jack’s op leads them to a culmination in Chernobyl. Yes, Chernobyl, where even though the bad guys manage to figure out that radiation suits are a good idea, Jack and John march in dressed in automatic weaponry. I can only imagine that the plot of Die Hard 6: Die Hardest (seriously) which is scheduled for 2015 will involve them both dying from horrifying radiation-induced cancer. There’s a decent chance that would have been more entertaining than this.
There is no character development, no connective tissue between action scenes and really the only things I can say positively about the film is that it’s short and rated R, which is what a Die Hard film should be rated. John McClane is not Jason Bourne. I hope whatever they come up with for what they are claiming will be the last film, will give the character a better send-off then this loud, pointless dud. 2.25/10