It happened with The Blair With Project, and now it’s probably going to be happening with Cloverfield too, so long as the director can get his act together. Almost a year after it was greenlit, Cloverfield director Matt Reeves still hasn’t made is mind up about what to do with Cloverfield 2.

Don’t get him wrong, he has ideas about Cloverfield 2, he just doesn’t know where to set it. Or who’ll star in it. Or when it’ll take place. Or what’ll happen in it. Or if he’ll direct it or not. But, seriously, once Matt Reeves has those details down, Cloverfield 2 is going to be excellent. Or rubbish. Or somewhere between those two.

We don’t know about you, but we’re really excited about the prospect of Cloverfield 2 – especially if it’s about the same monster attack, but compiled from sources that weren’t seen in the orginal movie. That way we’ll get to see the effects of a giant squid rampaging through New York from the perspective of people who aren’t insufferably smug cocknozzles, and that would be quite nice.

But, although that’s what was discussed when Cloverfield 2 was first mooted, it might not be what’ll happen in the movie. And that’s because nobody seems to have the first clue about what Cloverfield 2 will even be about. Not even Cloverfield director Matt Reeves.

And this isn’t some hokey Christopher Nolan manouvre to stall the inevitable and hold out for more money for the sequel – Matt Reeves genuinely doesn’t seem to have a clue what he’s going to do with Cloverfield 2. MTV reports:

Reeves says that talks have been frequent if sporadic over the last nine months. “At times it’s gone dormant and then its come back up again,” Reeves says of the brainstorming over a sequel. “There are a couple ideas that have potential but we haven’t quite cracked it yet… When we were in Japan we thought, wouldn’t it be cool to do it here,” he said.

So Cloverfield 2 might be set in Japan, might be set at the same time as the original movie and might be directed by someone other than Matt Reeves, but might not be. You know what? We’re worried that Cloverfield 2 is never going to happen because everyone involved is too busy sitting around with their thumb up their arse. So, to hurry things along here, we’ve drawn up a list of potential Cloverfield 2 plots, which Matt Reeves can use completely free of charge:

1 - Cloverfield 2 is set in a military base at the time of the attacks, and consists of nothing but a cigar-chomping US general’s face getting redder and redder for two hours.

2 - Set Cloverfield 2 at the same time as the original, but on the set of a porn film at the top of a skyscraper. That way you have perspective across the city, a means to film the attack, and boobies.

3 - Hire Matthew Broderick to play a reporter in Cloverfield 2. That way you can just film a couple of minutes of footage and edit it Godzilla and hope nobody notices.

4 - Cloverfield 2 is set at the same time as the original attack, but thousands of miles away at a dinner party in Surrey where everyone is completely oblivious to it because they’re all having awkward, slightly drunk conversations with each other.

5 – Set Cloverfield 2 after the monster has been killed, so we can see the parents of Rob and Hud agree that they’re pleased their sons died because they were both douchey hipster wankers.

6 – Cloverfield 2 is actually a prequel where we learn that monster attacked New York because earlier that morning it had a fight with its girlfriend because she used all the hot water in the shower again.

7 - Anything. Cloverfield 2 can be about anything. Just, please, stop shaking the sodding camera around so much. We really don’t want to go home from the cinema wiping someone else’s vomit from the back of our heads again.

You! Follow hecklerspray on Twitter!

Even now, nobody has any idea about why Terrence Howard was sacked from Iron Man 2 – not even Terrence Howard himself. In fact, Howard claims that he’s still in the dark about it all. All he knows is that he’s angry enough to wail about it to anyone close to him who happens to be holding a microphone.

Still though, Terrence Howard will get the last laugh here. After all, Iron Man 2 might be one of the biggest movies in history, but can Don Cheadle look himself in the eye and say that he’s making a rubbishy Karate Kid knock-off about street fighting that starts Channing Tatum? No. No he cannot. So in that respect, Terrence Howard wins. He loses the bits about being rich and famous and powerful, but he wins the Karate Kid bit.

It seemed like such a brilliant idea, didn’t it, when Marvel decided that it’d hire big-name credible actors for the roles in their movies. Robert Downey Jr, perhaps the finest actor of his generation as Iron Man. Oscar-winner Gwyneth Paltrow as Pepper Potts. Edward Norton as The Incredible Hulk. Terrence Howard as Jim Rhodes. What a brilliant way to make low-grade superhero schlock seem intelligent and highbrow, we all thought.

Marvel forgot one very important thing in all of this, though – the reason why nobody had thought to do it first is because everyone knew that when you hire an important actor for a movie you’re essentially hiring an enormous raging ego trapped inside the body of Veruca Salt from Charlie And The Chocolate Factory.

That’s why earlier this year we were treated to the sight of Edward Norton threatening to hold his breath until Marvel made The Incredible Hulk into a three-hour exploration of the frailty of the human condition – and it might be why Terrence Howard is no longer in Iron Man 2.

There were plenty of hints in Iron Man that Iron Man 2 would be Terrence Howard’s film – all the nods to War Machine certainly pointed that way – but last week it was revealed that Don Cheadle was replacing Terrence Howard as Jim Rhodes in the sequel.

At the time there were vague murmurings about Terrence Howard wanting too much money, but according to Howard himself, he hasn’t got a bloody clue about anything. And he’s mighty displeased about it, as he told NPR:

“It was the surprise of a lifetime. There was no explanation. I read something in the trades that implicated it was about money or something but apparently the contracts that we write and sign aren’t worth the paper that they’re printed on. And promises aren’t kept. Good faith negotiations aren’t always held up. You know, even friendships, people that you support…”

So who knows why Terrence Howard got the shove from Iron Man 2. Maybe it was money, or maybe it’s because Terrence Howard seems to be such a self-important nobsack that nobody could bear to spend another second working with him.

Either way, let’s just pray that Marvel doesn’t run into the same difficulties with Don Cheadle, because then it’d have to switch black actors a third time for Iron Man 3 and, as well as giving the slightly dubious impression that the moviegoing public can’t really tell the difference between one black actor and another, it’d only be a matter of time before the studio decides to cast Chris Tucker as Jim Rhodes, and that would just be hideous.

With all of this in mind, someone who should be watching his back is prospective Thor director Kenneth Branagh. He’d better not get any flighty ideas about the movie or he’ll be out and Marvel will jump on the phone to the bloke who directed Beverly Hills Chihuahua.

That’s fine – a firebrand like Angelina Jolie must be used to the criticism from strangers by now – but it has to hurt when Angelina Jolie’s own unborn children start to launch violent internal attacks on her own abdominal wall just to shut her up.

Because that’s what’s happened – during a discussion about Iraqi education policy in Washington on Tuesday, Angelina Jolie was forced to talk about her own unborn twins in public for the very first time because they wouldn’t stop booting her in the gut with all their might. Heartwarming stuff, huh?

There’s just something about Angelina Jolie that makes people violent, isn’t there? God knows paying to see her act in a series of disappointing movies has got us all riled up in the past, plus we get the impression that Jennifer Aniston would like nothing more than to slam her head in a car door for one reason or another, but mainly we’re talking about Angelina’s kids.

Just last week we reported about the constant vicious fights between Angelina Jolie’s children over who looks more adopted – or something – and now it looks like Angelina Jolie’s unborn twins have started to get a little bit berserk as well. Get this – they’re actually beating up Angelina Jolie from the inside.

Although Angelina Jolie has been happy to show off her baby bump in the past, she’s never actually made a verbal confirmation of her pregnancy. Being the unassuming, non-intrusive types that we are, we just assumed that Angelina was suffering from an outbreak of parasitic intestinal worms that were causing her stomach to bloat, but that theory was shot out of the water on Tuesday when Angelina Jolie spoke about her pregnancy for the very first time. People reports:

Maybe it was all the talk about children, but while Angelina Jolie was discussing Iraq education policy Tuesday in Washington D.C., she “felt kicking suddenly,” she tells PEOPLE. And though it was “in the middle of the event,” the expectant mother of four didn’t miss a beat as she talked about her two visits to Iraq and her new initiative, Educational Partnership for Children of Conflict… Jolie says she’s savoring this period – unexpected kicks and all – adding, “It is a very special time in our lives.”

Oh, so she just happened to suddenly feel the babies kicking in the middle of a big humanitarian speech. How very convenient. Cynics could argue that the only way for Angelina Jolie to draw attention to her educational partnership initiative was to explicitly mention her kids for the very first time during it, but we’re not cynics so we’ll assume it was genuine.

No, come to think of it we are cynics, and Angelina Jolie did probably make it all up. But that’s all unimportant, because it worked. A whole new audience now knows about Angelina Jolie’s initiative to help Iraqi children because she alluded to her pregnancy, and that’s great.

Admittedly it’s a lonely audience that personally invests in the lives of celebrities because of a freakish imbalance which makes them clamour for the approval of people who they’ve never met, and they’ll forget about the Educational Partnership for Children of Conflict the second that Eva Longoria gets a new haircut, but it still counts.

Anyway, our point is this: awww, babies are so cute!

Read more:

Angelina Talks About Pregnancy for the First Time – People

So it was always inevitable that an X-Files sequel would be on the cards. And it just so happens that one's coming out in a few months. But nobody has the foggiest clue about what it'll actually be about.

But that's where X-Files sequel director Chris Carter and screenwriter Frank Spotnitz come in. They've decided to spill the beans about the X-Files sequel without actually mentioning anything that's going to happen in it at all. Still interested? Yes? Well that's fairly depressing.

Once you've been in a show like X-Files, you're more or less promised geek adoration for life. While that can be a good thing – it means that you've got a guaranteed audience for your dire forays into sub-erotic trip-hop – it can also stop you from ever doing anything popular ever again.

Look at the two main stars of X-Files, for instance. Gillian Anderson went off to have a baby, develop an odd British accent and star in a film about pushing shotguns up people's bottoms, while David Duchovny now just spends his time annoying bad funk-rock bands. And they've tried to distance themselves from X-Files, either by making spoof sci-fi movies like Duchovny or just saying that they hated X-Files like Anderson.

But despite all that, a sequel to 1998's X-Files movie – you, know, the one about all the spooky bees – is coming out in July. But plot details for this X-Files sequel have been scant so far. Sure, there was the leaked X-Files sequel trailer, but that just convinced us that it was going to be a film about some spooky snow featuring a guest appearance from Billy Connolly as Father Christmas. And that can't be what it's about, can it? Can it?

Never fear, for the two creative brains behind the X-Files sequel Chris Carter and Frank Spotnitz have decided to reveal all. Well, we say 'all'…

"While this is not a mythology movie, it's true to everything that's come before," Spotnitz said at the William S. Paley Television Festival. "It's true to Mulder and Scully, who they are and where they would be this point in their lives and all of the experiences that they've had."

So that's that all cleared up. Thanks for your time, Frank. No really. 

Alright, so we can appreciate that Chris Carter and Frank Spotnitz want to keep plot details for the X-Files secret close to their chest, because once they finally reveal that it's just going to be two hours of the same old hokey shit that everyone got sick of at some point 13 years ago, then the movie's just not going to have the same pull, is it?

But still, it wouldn't hurt to tell us what the X-Files sequel is going to be called, would it? Unless it's actually going to be called X-Files 2: Look Out, Santa's Got A Spooky Banjo! then the title won't give too much away. So it's over to Chris Carter to make the big reveal:

"I can't tell you. I know what I want it to be, but Fox has some ideas of their own."

Wow, the X-Files sequel really is top secret, isn't it? Everyone's probably just hard at work coming up with a movie title that will get the biggest audience possible to pay to see it. And if that's the case, we've got just the right title for them that they can use free of charge.

Indiana Jones 4.

Read more:

`X-Files' Creator Spills Film Details – Reuters