CLOVERFIELD PARADOX Sold To Netflix, Now Available to Stream

Talk about the latest movies and video releases here!
Message
Author
User avatar
AndyDursin
Posts: 34185
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 8:45 pm
Location: RI

CLOVERFIELD PARADOX Sold To Netflix, Now Available to Stream

#1 Post by AndyDursin »

Paramount has officially slated October 27th for the next CLOVERFIELD film which allegedly is subtitled GOD PARTICLE, and revealed this description last month, though there's some question about the movie's true identity:
Is this third Cloverfield movie opening in October actually God Particle, about a team of astronauts who make a “shocking discovery” and end up fighting for survival in what is described as an altered reality, or is it a proper sequel that was secretly shot right under our noses?! It’s probably the former, but you never know with Bad Robot and Mr. Abrams. God Particle, or whatever the title is, stars Ziyi Zhang, Elizabeth Debicki, Daniel Brühl and Chris O’Dowd.
Of course that plot description is possibly just a cover for something far different, but we'll see.

Plan is to open a new CLOVERFIELD movie every year...

Eric Paddon
Posts: 8592
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2005 5:49 pm

Re: CLOVERFIELD (III) - October 27th

#2 Post by Eric Paddon »

AndyDursin wrote:a team of astronauts who make a “shocking discovery” and end up fighting for survival.
Hmm, didn't Rod Serling already do that? :D

http://uploadsociety.com/video_v179211

User avatar
AndyDursin
Posts: 34185
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 8:45 pm
Location: RI

Re: CLOVERFIELD (III) - October 27th

#3 Post by AndyDursin »


User avatar
AndyDursin
Posts: 34185
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 8:45 pm
Location: RI

Re: CLOVERFIELD (III) - April

#4 Post by AndyDursin »

Change of plans -- Paramount is apparently selling this to NETFLIX, nixing a theatrical release.

You wonder what Paramount is doing here, unless the film is a stinker and they're cutting their losses by selling it off.

Either way, things in the movie business are certainly changing. Paramount did the same thing with another new film of theirs, ANNIHILATION with Natalie Portman, internationally -- will debut on Netflix outside the US a couple of weeks after its theatrical release.
No confirmation yet, but I hear the streaming service is bearing down on a deal to acquire from Paramount nearly all rights to God Particle, the Julius Onah-directed film that is considered a sequel to the low-budget genre hit Cloverfield. It is produced by JJ Abrams’ Bad Robot. Consider it a strong rumor at this point that is building steam.

Paramount had the film dated for April 20, but I’ve heard that Netflix might debut it on the streaming service more quickly than that. It would be the second recent deal between Paramount and Netflix, after the latter acquired international on another genre film, the Natalie Portman-starrer Annihilation. Here, Netflix would take the world with the exception of China. Elizabeth Debicki, Daniel Bruhl, Gugu Mbatha Raw, Chris O’Dowd, Ziyi Zhang and David Oyelowo lead the ensemble cast.

The pic revolves around a scientific experiment aboard a space station involving a particle accelerator that has unexpected results involving alien life. The astronauts find themselves isolated, and following their horrible discovery, the space station crew must fight for survival. I recall that God Particle‘s similarity to the Daniel Espinosa-directed Life was the reason Paramount didn’t move forward with that Skydance project. Sony Pictures released it instead. This one’s The Thing in deep space.

No word from the studio or Netflix, so stay tuned.
http://deadline.com/2018/01/netflix-clo ... 202267849/

User avatar
Monterey Jack
Posts: 9712
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 12:14 am
Location: Walpole, MA

Re: CLOVERFIELD Sequel Heading to Netflix

#5 Post by Monterey Jack »

Well that sucks, especially as very few movies or shows that premiere on Netflix even receive DVD or Blu-Ray releases. :(

User avatar
AndyDursin
Posts: 34185
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 8:45 pm
Location: RI

Re: CLOVERFIELD Sequel Heading to Netflix

#6 Post by AndyDursin »

This wasn't developed and produced by Netflix though so it's different. I'd imagine this is about an exclusivity window and using Netflix as the main distribution platform instead of a theatrical release.

House of Cards was a Netflix show but it was produced by Sony and had home video releases so I'd imagine Paramount will release this after a certain amount of time.

User avatar
Monterey Jack
Posts: 9712
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 12:14 am
Location: Walpole, MA

Re: CLOVERFIELD Sequel Heading to Netflix

#7 Post by Monterey Jack »

AndyDursin wrote: Sat Jan 27, 2018 11:56 pm This wasn't developed and produced by Netflix though so it's different. I'd imagine this is about an exclusivity window and using Netflix as the main distribution platform instead of a theatrical release.

House of Cards was a Netflix show but it was produced by Sony and had home video releases so I'd imagine Paramount will release this after a certain amount of time.
I hope so...it sucks that there are several Netflix exclusives that will likely never have a physical release (like a pair of damn good Mike Flanagan horror movies, Hush and Gerald's Game). And look how long it took for one of the service's buzziest shows, Stranger Things, to receive a Blu release (and even that was a Target exclusive). This is what also gives me pause about the next Scorsese movie, The Irishman, going direct-to-Netflix. It'll drive my collector's OCD crazy to not have a copy of a new Scorsese movie to put on the shelf with the others (and being able to stream it any time I want is not the same).

User avatar
AndyDursin
Posts: 34185
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 8:45 pm
Location: RI

Re: CLOVERFIELD Sequel Heading to Netflix

#8 Post by AndyDursin »

Yeah it's all about who produced the property. Disney's Marvel shows have gotten a physical release, because they own them. It's the material Netflix produces on their own that they nix a physical release on, and really, you can't blame them because they want you to buy their service. (Amazon, on the other hand, does follow the traditional platform of theatrical/home video windows for the movies they produce usually).

This is really late in the game to be selling off a movie, but Paramount did it with ANNIHILATION for international markets a few months ago so the precedent has been set (New Line/Warner and Netflix also partnered up on the SHAFT movie that will also be on Netflix only outside the US). ANNIHILATION received terrible test screening numbers and the director refused to change the ending (among other things), so I think they opted to cut their losses. The only places it will get a theatrical release are the US and China.

What we're seeing is that things are really changing in the movie biz for non-tentpole franchises. Those "mid range" films we keep talking about, for adults or a niche audience, are more likely than ever to skip a theatrical release now -- and apparently anything that may not have a $500 mil-$1 bil ceiling too. If the projected in-take for this CLOVERFIELD movie was going to be $50 million, Paramount may have just decided to take the quick cash from Netflix and not gamble on what it may or may not have done theatrically -- especially if it's "less than good".
This is what also gives me pause about the next Scorsese movie, The Irishman, going direct-to-Netflix. It'll drive my collector's OCD crazy to not have a copy of a new Scorsese movie to put on the shelf with the others (and being able to stream it any time I want is not the same).
You may be out of luck there. Sounds like Scorsese wants it to play in theaters but Netflix is giving no assurances, maybe a 2 week window, according to this:

http://variety.com/2017/film/news/marti ... 202612050/

If it follows other Netflix-produced shows/movies, you may be waiting a long time for a physical home video release too.

Personally I care less about movies receiving a theatrical release than ever. 2 trips to the theater last year resulted in some pothead's cell phone going off during IT (for 90 some odd minutes!) and a speaker filled with static during BLADE RUNNER 2049. I like the big screen but they don't have 4K/HDR so between that, the "audience/technical malfunctions" and how difficult (and expensive) it is to procure babysitting for a night out with Joanne, I'm fine with streaming when the quality has gotten so consistently good (though I would prefer a physical release whereever possible).

User avatar
Monterey Jack
Posts: 9712
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 12:14 am
Location: Walpole, MA

Re: CLOVERFIELD Sequel Heading to Netflix

#9 Post by Monterey Jack »

AndyDursin wrote: Sun Jan 28, 2018 10:43 amPersonally I care less about movies receiving a theatrical release than ever. 2 trips to the theater last year resulted in some pothead's cell phone going off during IT (for 90 some odd minutes!) and a speaker filled with static during BLADE RUNNER 2049. I like the big screen but they don't have 4K/HDR so between that, the "audience/technical malfunctions" and how difficult (and expensive) it is to procure babysitting for a night out with Joanne, I'm fine with streaming when the quality has gotten so consistently good (though I would prefer a physical release whereever possible).
I wouldn't mind so much if certain smaller movies bypassed theaters (it might even mean a return of the "mid-budget movie for adults" we've been sorely missing in the all-blockbuster, all-the-time era), but I do mind that these films might be confined to steaming services forever and never receive a proper physical release. Hell, I'm still steamed I'll never be able to own a copy of the third season of Fargo on Blu-Ray. I'm very much a collector, and if a movie or TV show is good enough for me to watch it a second time, I want it to be on an actual disc I can own and put on the shelf. It also frankly drives me crazy when I'm watching a movie or show on Netflix, and as soon as the end credits start, they get squeezed into a tiny box in the corner while there's a countdown to the next episode or a suggestion for a similar movie to watch...absolutely wrecks the mood the director established. :x That's why I bought the first season of Stranger Things when it was released to Blu (awful, gimmicky VHS packaging and all)...whenever I revisit it, I don't want to see a "skip intro" button hovering over the opening credits of each episode.

Plus, if there's technical difficulties with your internet service or Netflix itself, you don't get to watch a movie or TV episode, whereas as long as you have power, you can watch a movie on Blu or DVD. :) I feel the same way about buying actual BOOKS instead of having one of those Nook things.

User avatar
AndyDursin
Posts: 34185
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 8:45 pm
Location: RI

Re: CLOVERFIELD Sequel Heading to Netflix

#10 Post by AndyDursin »

Plus, if there's technical difficulties with your internet service or Netflix itself, you don't get to watch a movie or TV episode, whereas as long as you have power, you can watch a movie on Blu or DVD. :)
I get that. Vudu does offer the option of downloading any of your purchases so there's that at least. You may not be able to hold it in your hand but you do own it, and it's not entirely reliant on the internet to work. As much as I love Blu-Ray I've invested a lot in Vudu and feel good about it. Most of what I've purchased are movies that look like they're never coming to Blu-Ray, and they don't take up room on the shelf anymore, which trust me, means a lot these days.

Movies Anywhere has also been a huge boost to streaming. That it no longer matters where you buy your movies mostly is a huge plus. That was always a hang-up for a lot of people.

Sadly, the heyday of physical media is over. It'll be around but it's going to become more niche than it is as we go forward. We're not quite in the laserdisc era again but it'll be headed that way I feel.

The ease of convenience with streaming and the fact that the quality is nearly as good -- and more than good enough for the average viewer who isn't a home theater geek -- is matched by the fact the studios don't have to pay to manufacture a disc. And, at least you can get FARGO streaming in HD, which beats a DVD only release.
feel the same way about buying actual BOOKS instead of having one of those Nook things.
If I'm using a reference book -- and I have a lot of them -- the Kindle is worthless for that. My old Halliwell's Film Gude is over a thousand pages, I like flipping through it and don't have the time to text search titles. Like anything else, Kindles and Nooks are convenient and easy if you're reading a novel, but for books where you have to refer back to earlier portions or use it as a reference, I'd much rather have the actual thing 8)

User avatar
AndyDursin
Posts: 34185
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 8:45 pm
Location: RI

Re: CLOVERFIELD Sequel Heading to Netflix

#11 Post by AndyDursin »

Apparently available now!

As for why Paramount sold it, this explains it:
This Cloverfield sequel cost around an estimated $45M, and we hear that the Netflix deal makes the film immediately profitable.

User avatar
AndyDursin
Posts: 34185
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 8:45 pm
Location: RI

Re: CLOVERFIELD PARADOX Sold To Netflix, Now Available to Stream

#12 Post by AndyDursin »

Reviews are blah. Couple of different people in comment sections have said the film was cut and completed as THE GOD PARTICLE, then some CLOVERFIELD "elements" were added in plus a few lines of added dialogue in post-production.

Sounds as if Paramount was smart to take the money and run.

User avatar
Monterey Jack
Posts: 9712
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 12:14 am
Location: Walpole, MA

Re: CLOVERFIELD PARADOX Sold To Netflix, Now Available to Stream

#13 Post by Monterey Jack »

7/10

All over the map, and painfully obvious it's an unrelated sci-fi project with the Cloverfield "brand name" slapped on it (it's akin to re-issuing Darkman and throwing in a post-credits scene where he runs into Nick Fury on the sidewalk :lol: ), but it's also stylish, well-acted and rife with intriguing if underdeveloped ideas. It likely would have tanked in theaters (at least 10 Cloverfield Lane worked as a solid suspense thriller up until the last-minute "Hey, there ARE aliens!" reveal), but as a lazy Netflix watch, it's fun.

User avatar
AndyDursin
Posts: 34185
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 8:45 pm
Location: RI

Re: CLOVERFIELD PARADOX Sold To Netflix, Now Available to Stream

#14 Post by AndyDursin »

Ok time waster. Would have gotten slaughtered if it came out theatrically. Very clearly it had nothing to do with Cloverfield until post production.

And according to this, the WWII set OVERLORD from Billy Ray is really CLOVERFIELD 4...and its already completed!

http://www.slashfilm.com/cloverfield-4/

User avatar
Monterey Jack
Posts: 9712
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 12:14 am
Location: Walpole, MA

Re: CLOVERFIELD PARADOX Sold To Netflix, Now Available to Stream

#15 Post by Monterey Jack »

We've really hit the wall in terms of studios desperate for any kind of "brand name" franchising when any random sci-fi script can have a few additional scenes shot to tie it in ever-so-tenuously to the Cloverfield "franchise". :? I mean, it'd be one thing if these movies actually did gradually tie into each other in some kind of Lost-style jigsaw puzzle manner, but I somehow doubt we'll be seeing, say, Mary Elizabeth Winstead's character from 10 Cloverfield Lane show up in another one of these (despite that film being left wide open for a follow-up). And seeing as how this film went straight-to-Netflix, it's not like there's a huge audience out there for this series of films. The first Cloverfield and Lane were both sold, mid-range hits, but hardly smashes, and with no recurring characters, it's a nebulous hook to reel audiences back in for more.

Post Reply