Here's the deal: I'm not opposed to a sequel - as a matter of fact I think this has the makings of a great franchise for at least another couple of movies. Kind of our very own Godzilla.
What I do believe is a bad idea is what the film's director, Matt Reeves, may be kicking around as the concept for Cloverfield 2:
"While we were on set making the film we talked about the possibilities and directions of how a sequel can go. The fun of this movie was that it might not have been the only movie being made that night, there might be another movie! In today's day and age of people filming their lives on their iphones and handy cams, uploading it to YouTube... That was kind of exciting thinking about that."
Matt, if you get to be the guy who makes the sequel I would highly recommend that you go in a completely different direction.
The hand-held digicam point of view concept is cool the first time you use it, but I'm telling you: If the sequel is based on the exact same events but from yet another point of view it will tank.
The only thing that gives me hope in the statement above is that Reeves states that it is only one of many possible directions they discussed for a sequel.
Remember how awesome the original Alien by director Ridley Scott was? It was groundbreaking, fantastic and did amazingly well at the box office. And then James Cameron came on board for the sequel and instead of continuing down the same road he took the story in a completely different direction, and that turned out to be a brilliant decision.
I suggest that Reeves, Abrams and Paramount take a lesson from that page in movie history while they consider a Cloverfield sequel.