A Quiet Place 2

peddlelies · 25-12-2019 5:59pm #1

Enjoyed the first one, will be interesting to see where they take this. Cillian Murphy is to star.

han2000 · 25-12-2019 6:03pm

Loved this movie. Had no idea there was a second one in the works. Should be interesting.

McDermotX · 01-01-2020 4:43pm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XEMwSdne6UE

Slydice · 01-01-2020 5:58pm

Origin and Development!

tallaghtfornia · 01-01-2020 10:16pm

looking forward to that now

Kingp35 · 02-01-2020 11:09am

Poor enough trailer, looks like a completely different film to the first one. Hopefully it can maintain the tension of the first but it looks more action based.

Slydice · 02-01-2020 11:48am

Kingp35 wrote: »

Poor enough trailer, looks like a completely different film to the first one. Hopefully it can maintain the tension of the first but it looks more action based.

I can't see them keeping the tension of the first one as much. I felt kept in the dark about the creatures for most of the first one and that racheted up the tension for me.

He might be able to go the Alien -> Aliens route by just making more of them a lot scarier. Like maybe we only saw some basic backwater version of em out in the countryside.

FortuneChip · 02-01-2020 12:04pm

Happy enough with where this might be going. Otherwise we would have been dealing with a fairly similar remake, with the initial suspense gone.

Showing Day One is a great idea too though, seeing how society dealt with the initial panic, fear & confusion. Especially when the typical response to attack is noisy guns.

Wonder how/if they'll show the Eureka "IT'S SOUND" realisation and how, assumedly, larger populations tried to cope with that, or if the survivors had dwindled long before then.

If this was computer game progression, I'd suspect some evolution on the monsters, that can seek out people through other means than just sound.

pixelburp · 02-01-2020 3:19pm

I'm cautious about this, because reading between the lines the trailer seems to hint towards the whole "the biggest monsters in the post apocalypse are other people" thread, which is a trope so trodden and worn out, I'm not immediately interested in watching yet another spin on it.

Bacchus · 02-01-2020 4:34pm

pixelburp wrote: »

I'm cautious about this, because reading between the lines the trailer seems to hint towards the whole "the biggest monsters in the post apocalypse are other people" thread, which is a trope so trodden and worn out, I'm not immediately interested in watching yet another spin on it.

Agreed, the third act of 28 Days Later sprang to mind, where its the other humans that are the monsters... that this would be an entire movie of that. Which isn't a bad thing necessarily, but I'd much prefer to keep it about the quiet tension of the monsters. I guess I just want more of the same so it's hard to imagine that taking it in a different direction will pay off. Maybe it will. I'll be there opening weekend anyway

Dades · 04-01-2020 1:01am

I literally just watched the first one (excellent!), but we don't need another one where everyone is just creeping about the place. It was a product of its budget, which is cool, but a sequel needs to ramp it up.

I think this trailer looks good, and have no problem with the idea that most of the people left are likely wrong 'uns. I've read enough apocalyptic sci-fi to know that when law and order cease to exist, you either help fill the cooking pot, or you're in the cooking pot.

Mr Crispy · 31-01-2020 3:55pm

Super Bowl TV spot;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mi5RoP1-8-I

Slydice · 31-01-2020 9:01pm

I sense.. jump scares

Slydice · 31-01-2020 9:24pm

They put this up too..

Not a trailer but this has the hype building up for me

Slydice · 25-02-2020 12:29am

Oh that shotgun at the end! More of that! Also Sequel to Edge of Tomorrow! Immediately!

siblers · 25-02-2020 8:59pm

John Krasinski sounds nothing like John Krasinski.

Mr E · 12-03-2020 4:58pm

Just posted to Omniplex page on Facebook:

*Customer Notice*

The A Quiet Place Part II release date has been moved to later this year, and the A Quiet Place (2018) re-release double bill has been cancelled.

Refunds will be issued for all pre-booked tickets over the coming days. If you booked your tickets in-cinema please get in touch with us!

johnny_ultimate · 12-03-2020 5:13pm

Yep, confirmed by Krasinski and Universal:

https://www.indiewire.com/2020/03/a-quiet-place-2-release-date-delayed-coronavirus-1202217148/

Slydice · 12-03-2020 11:26pm

He has tweeted it:
https://twitter.com/johnkrasinski/status/1238115296017371137

JP Liz V1 · 13-03-2020 12:02am

Cillian Murphy and Djimon Hounsou are in playing new characters

John Krasinski back as Lee in flashbacks

Mr Crispy · 02-04-2020 9:42pm

September 4th has been announced as the new release date (in the US at least). Subject to change of course.

Agent Coulson · 09-11-2020 10:22pm

It is pushed now to April 2021 and they they are now creating A Quiet Place Universe

Paramount Sets Jeff Nichols To Write/Direct New Pic In ‘A Quiet Place’ Universe Based On John Krasinski Idea

Paramount Pictures is broadening its A Quiet Place franchise. The studio has set Jeff Nichols to write and direct the third film, which is based on an original idea by John Kraskinski. Studio has set a 2022 release date. Krasinski co-wrote and directed the original, and wrote and directed the sequel, which was pushed from its March 20 release date by the COVID lockdown, with Paramount slating for an April 23, 2021 release.

They are keeping the details of the plot under wraps, but I would not be surprised if this was not a straight sequel, but rather broadened the world that the original introduced, plopping viewers in a post-apocalyptic world where survivors are struggling to stay alive by being quiet, as monsters with ultra sensitive hearing hunt them. The movie progressed so quickly you barely had time to ask how the world got that way, and whether the creatures might be defeated. So there’s plenty of room creatively to stretch this out......

https://deadline.com/2020/11/a-quite-place-new-film-jeff-nichols-write-direct-john-krasinski-idea-paramount-pictures-2022-release-1234611623/

Mr Crispy · 05-03-2021 9:57pm

This had been moved all the way out to September, but it's now pencilled in for a May 28th release, in the US anyway.

Mr Crispy · 05-05-2021 2:38pm

A final trailer is due to drop tomorrow. It's still down as a May 28th release for the US.

Agent Coulson · 06-05-2021 3:28pm

May 28th.

Mr Crispy · 06-05-2021 3:29pm

And the final trailer.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BpdDN9d9Jio

gmisk · 19-05-2021 6:25pm

Reviews look good so far!
90 percent on rotten tomatoes.
73 percent metacritic.
Who knows when cinemas will open in ROI though!

I am on Belfast 11th June will plan to see it then

TaSeThat · 24-05-2021 9:48pm

I still can't get past the 2 x main plot issues with the first movie -

They go to the waterfall to talk....why not live there instead of the quiet woods. The aliens are summoned by noise.....why not plant bombs and make noise.

bewareofthedog · 24-05-2021 9:54pm

TaSeThat wrote: »

I still can't get past the 2 x main plot issues with the first movie -
They go to the waterfall to talk....why not live there instead of the quiet woods. The aliens are summoned by noise.....why not plant bombs and make noise.

IIRC it was only directly behind the waterfall stream they could talk freely, which isn't a living space at all - I don't see that as a plot issue. If they lived around the waterfall the same problems would exist - in fact it would be worse than being able to talk freely in their basement.

Your second point, the army could potentially do that but a family like in the movie wouldn't have the resources. The family could potentially make a few bombs and blow some of them up but the vibe I got is that there are countless amounts of them so it would be pointless

TaSeThat · 24-05-2021 10:09pm

bewareofthedog wrote: »

IIRC it was only directly behind the waterfall stream they could talk freely, which isn't a living space at all - I don't see that as a plot issue. If they lived around the waterfall the same problems would exist - in fact it would be worse than being able to talk freely in their basement.

Your second point, the army could potentially do that but a family like in the movie wouldn't have the resources. The family could potentially make a few bombs and blow some of them up but the vibe I got is that there are countless amounts of them so it would be pointless

I hear what your saying on the first point but it is a livable condition....you get used to your surroundings after a while so it was a major plot issue for me. Specifically as most of the movie was geared around her being pregnant and trying to minimise the noise it would result in.

The second point...does not have to be bombs, all sorts of booby traps. I get your point on the alien count, it was never clear how many there were. The whole idea that not once was there any effort put into using their "noise attraction" against them was annoying as hell during viewing. Even as a nuisance for them.

El Duda · 07-06-2021 8:41am

TaSeThat wrote: »

it was never clear how many there were.

Yes it was. it was all written on the board in the office.

"Three creatures in the area"

Anyways...

This is a great sequel. Easily as good as the first one. So so good in the cinema.

speedboatchase · 07-06-2021 11:18am

Loved this. Saw Cruella the week before but THIS is what returning to the cinema is all about.

Incredibly tense throughout, especially a 20-min sequence in the middle that is Krasinski showing off :cool:

Whatsisname · 07-06-2021 12:59pm

Saw this over the weekend. Really enjoyed it.

I'd probably say the first one is a better movie, but the second one is better made (if that makes sense). I loved how Krasinski had multiple storylines ongoing at the same time where the tension in each builds up simultaneously as you go back and forth between them.

That opening scene was fantastic. He's done a video on youtube talking through it. I'm a sucker for a continuous shot and was surprised I never copped onto the fact he took inspiration from the car scene in Children of Men. Also lol at the fact the close up of Emily Blunt was a happy accident. :pac:

that ****ing bear trap

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M57NmccfZxA

c.p.w.g.w · 07-06-2021 1:00pm

Where are people seeing this?

gmisk · 07-06-2021 1:03pm

c.p.w.g.w wrote: »

Where are people seeing this?

I am seeing in a few hours odeon in the point

speedboatchase · 07-06-2021 1:44pm

c.p.w.g.w wrote: »

Where are people seeing this?

It opened in the UK last week.

gmisk · 07-06-2021 5:51pm

Just home from Odeon in the point.
I would say maybe 20 in the big screen all well spaced out etc.

Solid film not quite as good as the first.
The

day 1 part is terrific and really well done, Murphy is also very good it helps that with him you are never sure if he is going to be a good or bad! The thing with the alien getting to the island on boat was kind of obvious as was a lot of plot tbh. It wasn't said but I am guessing the people on boats were cannibals?

Some terrific set pieces and scares but story felt a bit predictable. Very much worth seeing on a big screen, with as few people munching popcorn as possible

7/10

07-06-2021 7:13pm

Pretty pointless film, standard cash grab sequel. Just a bit louder and more hiding.

3/10

santana75 · 07-06-2021 10:09pm

An absolute belter. I don't know if it's down to the lack of anything decent these past 18 months but I just thought this was great. Doesn't mess around, gets stuck In straight away and keeps that pace all the way to the finish. Even though Emily blunt is very good, as are the two kids, its Cillian Murphy who steals the film. I'm hoping there's a third one.

Kingp35 · 09-06-2021 8:59am

Saw this in the cinema last night and I enjoyed it a lot. It's really well made with incredible sound design and great tension throughout.

There are some problems with the plot though. It's reasonable obvious what's going to happen and I can't get my head around an obvious plot hole/issue -

Why did the people on the Island just play 'Beyond The Sea' on a continuous loop if they wanted others to come to the Island. Why not actually have someone speaking and telling others where they are and how to get there. Also why not broadcast to others that the creatures can't swim? That would be slightly more helpful than playing a song on a repeat as some kind of cryptic clue.

If you can ignore the above then it's a good film!

09-06-2021 11:30am

Kingp35 wrote: »

Saw this in the cinema last night and I enjoyed it a lot. It's really well made with incredible sound design and great tension throughout.

There are some problems with the plot though. It's reasonable obvious what's going to happen and I can't get my head around an obvious plot hole/issue -
Why did the people on the Island just play 'Beyond The Sea' on a continuous loop if they wanted others to come to the Island. Why not actually have someone speaking and telling others where they are and how to get there. Also why not broadcast to others that the creatures can't swim? That would be slightly more helpful than playing a song on a repeat as some kind of cryptic clue.
If you can ignore the above then it's a good film!

That stuff really irritated me. Like the first one, why didn't they just go and live by the waterfall.

flasher0030 · 09-06-2021 12:42pm

winstonia83 wrote: »

That stuff really irritated me. Like the first one, why didn't they just go and live by the waterfall.

Why not just sit back and enjoy a movie about man versus unknown creatures.
It's a monster movie for god's sake. It's not like a trails away from a facts of a so-called true story. How does it irritate you that something what you deem unrealistic happens in the film. That's a little sad. Surely you comprehend that the creatures are make believe.

In any case, the waterfall idea makes no sense. How would they just move their house beside the waterfall. They cannot just decide that "hey let's build a house over here, and whilst doing so, don't make any loud noises" - no hammering, no sawing etc. They cannot just stand around a waterfall all day - weather, no electricity etc.

TaSeThat · 09-06-2021 1:57pm

It was certainly a bug bear for me. When a movie is called A Quiet Place, when its premise is about being quiet, when a large plot is making sound proofing for a birth and all the follow on from that, when it introduces a place where they can make noise...well yeah it's a bit of a plot issue when they don't move to the location where they can make noise.

Not being able to build a habitable area in/around the waterfall...are you seriously suggesting that it can't be done?

I'd give a movie a chance but there were too many key plot issues for this movie to fully enjoy it. It was entertaining but for me anyway, no where near as good as it is given credit for...but that's personal opinion.

El Duda · 09-06-2021 3:56pm

TaSeThat wrote: »

Not being able to build a habitable area in/around the waterfall...are you seriously suggesting that it can't be done?

This cracks me up. Even when it has already been explained to you that the "why don;t they live by a waterfall' argument is stupid, instead of admitting it was silly you double down on it.

How do you build a place to live near a waterfall at the drop of a hat? Without making noise?

You'd have to dig foundations, gather materials, hammer nails, mix cement, install electrics etc...

It wouldn't work.

pixelburp · 09-06-2021 4:09pm

Plus how would you get the materials to build the waterfall house, without first leaving the safety of those noisy environs? Unless some previous person generously left all the wood and materials first needed. While an electric generator in the vicinity of constantly running water also seems ... unwise.

TaSeThat · 09-06-2021 4:29pm

Have I seriously to explain how it would be possible to build/construct/find a habitable space in or around a waterfall.

An abundance of fallen usable materials available in the forest. Go explore other derelict buildings for useful materials or harvest from where they current live.
Any noise work can be done.....have a guess where.

Early man built a shelter without any of the tools/materials available today so I'd hazard a guess that someone can construct some kind of livable quarters. There may have even been caves that could be lived in around the waterfall.

For some reason they could adapt their living to the quiet of the wood, but could not adapt their living to a noisy waterfall which also provides running water, irrigation, food, etc.

Am I seriously the only person that sees the flaw with this in the film...if so fair enough it's probably just me.

Banjaxed82 · 10-06-2021 2:18am

TaSeThat wrote: »

Have I seriously to explain how it would be possible to build/construct/find a habitable space in or around a waterfall.

An abundance of fallen usable materials available in the forest. Go explore other derelict buildings for useful materials or harvest from where they current live.
Any noise work can be done.....have a guess where.

Early man built a shelter without any of the tools/materials available today so I'd hazard a guess that someone can construct some kind of livable quarters. There may have even been caves that could be lived in around the waterfall.

For some reason they could adapt their living to the quiet of the wood, but could not adapt their living to a noisy waterfall which also provides running water, irrigation, food, etc.

Am I seriously the only person that sees the flaw with this in the film...if so fair enough it's probably just me.

Construct? Try whipping out the black & decker in this world.

flasher0030 · 10-06-2021 10:00am

TaSeThat wrote: »

Have I seriously to explain how it would be possible to build/construct/find a habitable space in or around a waterfall.

An abundance of fallen usable materials available in the forest. Go explore other derelict buildings for useful materials or harvest from where they current live.
Any noise work can be done.....have a guess where.

Early man built a shelter without any of the tools/materials available today so I'd hazard a guess that someone can construct some kind of livable quarters. There may have even been caves that could be lived in around the waterfall.

For some reason they could adapt their living to the quiet of the wood, but could not adapt their living to a noisy waterfall which also provides running water, irrigation, food, etc.

Am I seriously the only person that sees the flaw with this in the film...if so fair enough it's probably just me.

I understand the premise of what you're getting at. But when you dig into it, it just doesn't make sense. Maybe they could make a temporary shelter there, but not somewhere they can live on a full time basis. For one obvious reason, there is no electricity, therefore no heating and no cooking food. Remember there are kids as well, so cannot just rough it up for months on end.

You say there may be caves. But that is just an assumption that you are creating. Equally, there may not be caves. We didn't see any caves in the movie, therefore as an audience, we take that as face value.

Just on the piece in bold above, how did they adapt their living to the quiet of the wood. The answer is they had no choice. The house was already there. So that's where they had to live. They couldn't just move the house close to the waterfall. The sound of the waterfall allowed the humans to communicate with each other without drawing the attention of the creatures. But it doesn't mean that the waterfall noise would just drown out everything. If there was banging hammers, drills, saws etc. to construct a dwelling for them, surely you can understand the folly of this argument.

And early man did manage to put together a hammer device made from stone - or maybe I watched too much Fred Flintsone!!!

Thelonious Monk · 10-06-2021 11:34am

I enjoyed it, great to see in the cinema having been away for so long. EB is great and Cillian too.

I thought it ended a bit abruptly, and you don't know what happened with Emily and the baby and the other kid. Maybe that's for AQP3?

TaSeThat · 10-06-2021 12:25pm

flasher0030 wrote: »

I understand the premise of what you're getting at. But when you dig into it, it just doesn't make sense. Maybe they could make a temporary shelter there, but not somewhere they can live on a full time basis. For one obvious reason, there is no electricity, therefore no heating and no cooking food. Remember there are kids as well, so cannot just rough it up for months on end.

You say there may be caves. But that is just an assumption that you are creating. Equally, there may not be caves. We didn't see any caves in the movie, therefore as an audience, we take that as face value.

Just on the piece in bold above, how did they adapt their living to the quiet of the wood. The answer is they had no choice. The house was already there. So that's where they had to live. They couldn't just move the house close to the waterfall. The sound of the waterfall allowed the humans to communicate with each other without drawing the attention of the creatures. But it doesn't mean that the waterfall noise would just drown out everything. If there was banging hammers, drills, saws etc. to construct a dwelling for them, surely you can understand the folly of this argument.

And early man did manage to put together a hammer device made from stone - or maybe I watched too much Fred Flintsone!!!

Appreciate the response but still can't see why it's a non runner.

Yes, there may or may not be caves but that is not the only viable option for a dwelling. They don't have to move any house, build a new one. Point taken on noise and at what level it would "summon" the aliens so it may not drown out all noise (banging, sawing, etc), but that would certainly not stop constructing a dwelling as there are always alternatives for doing something - at the top of my head rope, glue, air pressure tools provided using power (see following paragraph) .
The waterfall and river would also provide power (hydro, tidal) and transport options (raft) so any material that could not be carried by hand can be done using raft if located near a river.

I'll bow out of this conversation now as it is dragging on a bit. I appreciate the counter argument but, maybe I'm pig headed, I still can't see the logic in doing what they were doing considering:

A huge plot is for them sound proofing with the imminent arrival of the baby, there are woods anyway beside the waterfall and they travel to the waterfall to talk...just does not make sense to me. Move the mountain to Mohammed and all that

To preempt some of the questions that may come from some of the other patronising posters:

Q: Where would they get the tools or knowledge to construct a house or indeed power using the waterfall?
A: From excursions or supply trips to towns. Plenty of towns built on rivers so may be one directly near the waterfall one. If not just what they can carry over numerous trips by hand. If towns located on river, use a raft for transport - quieter, quicker and easier than foot. Libraries, leaflets or books for the knowledge part.

Q: How could they build a raft?
A: Using the wood from the forest that the waterfall is beside/near.

Q: What if they are on the river and have to fart?
A: Just put their arse under the water surface and let rip

Q: What about the bubbles that rise to the surface and pop from said fart...what about that noise, huh?
A: You are right, that will probably get them killed.

flasher0030 · 10-06-2021 1:13pm

TaSeThat wrote: »

Appreciate the response but still can't see why it's a non runner.

Yes, there may or may not be caves but that is not the only viable option for a dwelling. They don't have to move any house, build a new one. Point taken on noise and at what level it would "summon" the aliens so it may not drown out all noise (banging, sawing, etc), but that would certainly not stop constructing a dwelling as there are always alternatives for doing something - at the top of my head rope, glue, air pressure tools provided using power (see following paragraph) .
The waterfall and river would also provide power (hydro, tidal) and transport options (raft) so any material that could not be carried by hand can be done using raft if located near a river.

I'll bow out of this conversation now as it is dragging on a bit. I appreciate the counter argument but, maybe I'm pig headed, I still can't see the logic in doing what they were doing considering:
A huge plot is for them sound proofing with the imminent arrival of the baby, there are woods anyway beside the waterfall and they travel to the waterfall to talk...just does not make sense to me. Move the mountain to Mohammed and all that

To preempt some of the questions that may come from some of the other patronising posters:

Q: Where would they get the tools or knowledge to construct a house or indeed power using the waterfall?
A: From excursions or supply trips to towns. Plenty of towns built on rivers so may be one directly near the waterfall one. If not just what they can carry over numerous trips by hand. If towns located on river, use a raft for transport - quieter, quicker and easier than foot. Libraries, leaflets or books for the knowledge part.

Q: How could they build a raft?
A: Using the wood from the forest that the waterfall is beside/near.

Q: What if they are on the river and have to fart?
A: Just put their arse under the water surface and let rip

Q: What about the bubbles that rise to the surface and pop from said fart...what about that noise, huh?
A: You are right, that will probably get them killed.

Ok We'll leave it at that.

Glue and rope??? For a house??

A Quiet Place 2

Comments