Return to Unfiction unforum
 a.r.g.b.b 
FAQ FAQ   Search Search 
 
Welcome!
New users, PLEASE read these forum guidelines. New posters, SEARCH before posting and read these rules before posting your killer new campaign. New players may also wish to peruse the ARG Player Tutorial.

All users must abide by the Terms of Service.
Website Restoration Project
This archiving project is a collaboration between Unfiction and Sean Stacey (SpaceBass), Brian Enigma (BrianEnigma), and Laura E. Hall (lehall) with
the Center for Immersive Arts.
Announcements
This is a static snapshot of the
Unfiction forums, as of
July 23, 2017.
This site is intended as an archive to chronicle the history of Alternate Reality Games.
  

The time now is Mon Nov 25, 2024 10:07 pm
All times are UTC - 4 (DST in action)		 View posts in this forum since last visit
View unanswered posts in this forum
Calendar
 Forum index » Archive » Archive: Cloverfield (1-18-08) » Cloverfield: General / Updates
[SPEC] Random thought RE: "Monster"
View previous topicView next topic
Page 2 of 3 [37 Posts]   Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3 Next
Author Message
Leyton Stone
I Have No Life

Joined: 08 Dec 2007
Posts: 2302
Location: London (NOT Ontario!)

 		[SPEC] Re: Random thought RE: "Monster"
I did use search function.
m0r1arty wrote:
Back on topic: I think within the timeframe the SoL's head starts coming down the street after the big explosion seen South of the party. So it [the monster] has probably went back out to the sea grabbed the head and then came back into the city.

Just guesswork really, it could have been holding onto the head for a while I suppose.

-m0r


Another good point... Eh I could just picture the Monster almost at the dock then suddenly thinking.

"Wait, I know something that'll REALLY Get their attention. I'll destroy their Liberty figuratively!"

*Swims back to get the head of SoL and LAUNCHES it into NYC*

"Hah! Take that HUMANS!"

Meh

Edit - Tagged - MikeyJ

PostPosted: Sun Dec 09, 2007 3:41 pm
 View user's profile AIM Address MSN Messenger
 Back to top 
Caerwiden
Unfettered


Joined: 08 Oct 2007
Posts: 651

 		Re: Random thought RE: "Monster"
I did use search function.
pegassissy wrote:
Caerwiden wrote:
Don't be so sensitive.

Quite down now caerwiden. No need for your reply.

good thought Leyton Stone, but unlikely.


Don't tell me to "quite"(sic) down, I asked a question and got attacked for it, I'm gonna respond to that.

Leyton Stone wrote:
Caerwiden wrote:
Leyton Stone wrote:
Caerwiden wrote:
Leyton Stone wrote:
Surely it would have smashed the entire thing?


You're an expert on monster psychology are you?


Was there any need for rudeness?

If I need to justify myself, I'm a Film and Television studies student @ University and one of my main focuses is Science Fictions and the horror genre... And well; look @ all recent and classic monster movies IE: Godzilla, King Kong etc.

They sway through the city/cities bashing everything around then not caring whether it's partial or complete annihilation... Except the first thing, the introductory destructive point... It's always complete damage.

As I said it was just a thought and what you have quoted was evidently a question put to the other UF Members. Your blatantly rude response was uncalled for Smile


Strange, I thought it was a valid question. You're saying "surely it would do this", but the only way you could know that is if you know what the monster is like and how it thinks.

Don't be so sensitive.


No... You were nitpicking.

But to answer your first question; being a Film/TV Studies student particularly in the aforementioned subjects and giving the evidence to which I have regarding prior movies featuring monsters - Yes that would make me somewhat an "expert on monster psychology"

Rolling Eyes


You posted a theory and then made an assumption, then you get all pissy when someone calls you on it. It's only a rude question if YOU think it's a rude question. It wasn't intended as rude, but whatever, this is ridiculous.

PostPosted: Sun Dec 09, 2007 3:41 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Caerwiden
Unfettered


Joined: 08 Oct 2007
Posts: 651

 		Re: Random thought RE: "Monster"
I did use search function.
m0r1arty wrote:
Caerwiden wrote:
OliMango wrote:
Caerwiden wrote:
OliMango wrote:
Caerwiden wrote:
Leyton Stone wrote:
Surely it would have smashed the entire thing?


You're an expert on monster psychology are you?


You're an expert on being a flamer are you?


Pot, meet kettle.


Hello kettle.


You do know what that phrase means don't you?


I just wanted that quoted in case you edited it later.


Why would I want to edit it?

PostPosted: Sun Dec 09, 2007 3:43 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
OliMango
Entrenched


Joined: 07 Oct 2007
Posts: 1189
Location: Vegas

 		Re: Random thought RE: "Monster"
I did use search function.
Caerwiden wrote:
pegassissy wrote:
Caerwiden wrote:
Don't be so sensitive.

Quite down now caerwiden. No need for your reply.

good thought Leyton Stone, but unlikely.


Don't tell me to "quite"(sic) down, I asked a question and got attacked for it, I'm gonna respond to that.

Leyton Stone wrote:
Caerwiden wrote:
Leyton Stone wrote:
Caerwiden wrote:
Leyton Stone wrote:
Surely it would have smashed the entire thing?


You're an expert on monster psychology are you?


Was there any need for rudeness?

If I need to justify myself, I'm a Film and Television studies student @ University and one of my main focuses is Science Fictions and the horror genre... And well; look @ all recent and classic monster movies IE: Godzilla, King Kong etc.

They sway through the city/cities bashing everything around then not caring whether it's partial or complete annihilation... Except the first thing, the introductory destructive point... It's always complete damage.

As I said it was just a thought and what you have quoted was evidently a question put to the other UF Members. Your blatantly rude response was uncalled for Smile


Strange, I thought it was a valid question. You're saying "surely it would do this", but the only way you could know that is if you know what the monster is like and how it thinks.

Don't be so sensitive.


No... You were nitpicking.

But to answer your first question; being a Film/TV Studies student particularly in the aforementioned subjects and giving the evidence to which I have regarding prior movies featuring monsters - Yes that would make me somewhat an "expert on monster psychology"

Rolling Eyes


You posted a theory and then made an assumption, then you get all pissy when someone calls you on it. It's only a rude question if YOU think it's a rude question. It wasn't intended as rude, but whatever, this is ridiculous.


How about you let it go.

I think that he just kind of was swimming towards NYC, saw the statue, and just hit it on his way. Maybe he was PMSing.

PostPosted: Sun Dec 09, 2007 3:43 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Caerwiden
Unfettered


Joined: 08 Oct 2007
Posts: 651

 		Re: Random thought RE: "Monster"
I did use search function.
OliMango wrote:
Caerwiden wrote:
pegassissy wrote:
Caerwiden wrote:
Don't be so sensitive.

Quite down now caerwiden. No need for your reply.

good thought Leyton Stone, but unlikely.


Don't tell me to "quite"(sic) down, I asked a question and got attacked for it, I'm gonna respond to that.

Leyton Stone wrote:
Caerwiden wrote:
Leyton Stone wrote:
Caerwiden wrote:
Leyton Stone wrote:
Surely it would have smashed the entire thing?


You're an expert on monster psychology are you?


Was there any need for rudeness?

If I need to justify myself, I'm a Film and Television studies student @ University and one of my main focuses is Science Fictions and the horror genre... And well; look @ all recent and classic monster movies IE: Godzilla, King Kong etc.

They sway through the city/cities bashing everything around then not caring whether it's partial or complete annihilation... Except the first thing, the introductory destructive point... It's always complete damage.

As I said it was just a thought and what you have quoted was evidently a question put to the other UF Members. Your blatantly rude response was uncalled for Smile


Strange, I thought it was a valid question. You're saying "surely it would do this", but the only way you could know that is if you know what the monster is like and how it thinks.

Don't be so sensitive.


No... You were nitpicking.

But to answer your first question; being a Film/TV Studies student particularly in the aforementioned subjects and giving the evidence to which I have regarding prior movies featuring monsters - Yes that would make me somewhat an "expert on monster psychology"

Rolling Eyes


You posted a theory and then made an assumption, then you get all pissy when someone calls you on it. It's only a rude question if YOU think it's a rude question. It wasn't intended as rude, but whatever, this is ridiculous.


How about you let it go.

I think that he just kind of was swimming towards NYC, saw the statue, and just hit it on his way. Maybe he was PMSing.


Yay! Quote pyramid!

How about you let it go? You can drop it just as easily as I can.

PostPosted: Sun Dec 09, 2007 3:45 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
m0r1arty
Unfettered


Joined: 08 Aug 2007
Posts: 337

 		Re: Random thought RE: "Monster"
I did use search function.
Caerwiden wrote:
Why would I want to edit it?


Why wouldn't you?

Now lets drop the big quotes, bad attitudes and get back on track. There's IMDB for flame wars.

-m0r

PostPosted: Sun Dec 09, 2007 3:49 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
pegassissy
Unfettered

Joined: 14 Aug 2007
Posts: 552

 		Please refrean from using sarcasm and antagonistic remarks on unFiction.

Quote:
You're an expert on monster psychology are you?


Quote:
Strange, I thought it was a valid question. You're saying "surely it would do this", but the only way you could know that is if you know what the monster is like and how it thinks.

Don't be so sensitive.


When i said quite down i was referring to the second of the two quotes, you didnt have to reply to his explanation.
_________________
And then the nurse comes round and everyone will lift their heads
But I'm thinking of what Sarah said, "Love is watching someone die"
So who's going to watch you die?...

PostPosted: Sun Dec 09, 2007 3:49 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Caerwiden
Unfettered


Joined: 08 Oct 2007
Posts: 651

 		Re: Random thought RE: "Monster"
I did use search function.
m0r1arty wrote:
Caerwiden wrote:
Why would I want to edit it?


Why wouldn't you?


Because I have no reason to, it's a question, not an eight page, profanity filled flame.

PostPosted: Sun Dec 09, 2007 3:51 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Caerwiden
Unfettered


Joined: 08 Oct 2007
Posts: 651
pegassissy wrote:
Please refrean from using sarcasm and antagonistic remarks on unFiction.

Quote:
You're an expert on monster psychology are you?


Quote:
Strange, I thought it was a valid question. You're saying "surely it would do this", but the only way you could know that is if you know what the monster is like and how it thinks.

Don't be so sensitive.


When i said quite down i was referring to the second of the two quotes, you didnt have to reply to his explanation.


It's 'quiet' not 'quite', just so you know, though I probably shouldn't say that, it'll probably be misconstrued as an attack.

Ah well, whatever.

I was replying to him calling me rude, not his explanation.

PostPosted: Sun Dec 09, 2007 3:54 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Leyton Stone
I Have No Life

Joined: 08 Dec 2007
Posts: 2302
Location: London (NOT Ontario!)

 		I Think I've figured it out... The monster climbed OVER Liberty.

If you look @ the photo again there's a huge clawmark up the back of the statue.

PostPosted: Sun Dec 09, 2007 7:06 pm
 View user's profile AIM Address MSN Messenger
 Back to top 
Caerwiden
Unfettered


Joined: 08 Oct 2007
Posts: 651
Leyton Stone wrote:
I Think I've figured it out... The monster climbed OVER Liberty.

If you look @ the photo again there's a huge clawmark up the back of the statue.


I could go with that, but that poster is just advertising really, we don't know what happens to the statue beyond its head being ripped off and thrown into the city.

I wouldn't take the poster as gospel for what's going to happen in the film.

PostPosted: Sun Dec 09, 2007 7:27 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Leyton Stone
I Have No Life

Joined: 08 Dec 2007
Posts: 2302
Location: London (NOT Ontario!)
Caerwiden wrote:
Leyton Stone wrote:
I Think I've figured it out... The monster climbed OVER Liberty.

If you look @ the photo again there's a huge clawmark up the back of the statue.


I could go with that, but that poster is just advertising really, we don't know what happens to the statue beyond its head being ripped off and thrown into the city.

I wouldn't take the poster as gospel for what's going to happen in the film.


I actually agree w/ you on this and as a film student I should know that movie promo posters are just that, posters which promote/summerise the film.

"There's a monster. SoL's Head is ripped off. Nyc is destroyed"

I think I'm playing the ERA/ARG too hard. Embarassed

PostPosted: Sun Dec 09, 2007 7:53 pm
 View user's profile AIM Address MSN Messenger
 Back to top 
Caerwiden
Unfettered


Joined: 08 Oct 2007
Posts: 651
Leyton Stone wrote:


I think I'm playing the ERA/ARG too hard. Embarassed


You are SO not alone in that. Very Happy

PostPosted: Sun Dec 09, 2007 7:57 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
xboyonfirex
Entrenched


Joined: 05 Dec 2007
Posts: 1069

 		Re: Random thought RE: "Monster"
I did use search function.
m0r1arty wrote:
Caerwiden wrote:
OliMango wrote:
Caerwiden wrote:
OliMango wrote:
Caerwiden wrote:
Leyton Stone wrote:
Surely it would have smashed the entire thing?


You're an expert on monster psychology are you?


You're an expert on being a flamer are you?


Pot, meet kettle.


Hello kettle.


You do know what that phrase means don't you?


I just wanted that quoted in case you edited it later.

You were doing so well too...

Back on topic: I think within the timeframe the SoL's head starts coming down the street after the big explosion seen South of the party. So it [the monster] has probably went back out to the sea grabbed the head and then came back into the city.

Just guesswork really, it could have been holding onto the head for a while I suppose.

-m0r


Wow, you guys REALLY over analize things here... but I guess that's the point. The way I see it- the picture's flawed anyways. Sunset? Sunrise? that was the first big flaw... The only thing I think we were meant to take from the poster was that something big went into New York and destroyed some buildings. Why it show's the SOL in the poster, so people could make the connection betweent he poster and the teaser.

Just a poster, barely a clue.

PostPosted: Sun Dec 09, 2007 8:01 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Slusho Addict
Entrenched


Joined: 24 Nov 2007
Posts: 920

 		First off, we see the decapitated body of the statue in the trailer in a helicopter flypast, so the poster does seems to match the state of the statue.

Like many other movies, the poster is a collage of different scenes in the movie, but in this case, they're all taken from the same viewpoint.

I don't think the monster climbed up it, because when we see the monster, it looks like the SOL would be far too small for it to climb. We could be dealing with a rapidly growing monster, of course...

I think it's wrong to assume that the initial explosion is caused by the monster already on land, but we've only got the teaser to go on.

PostPosted: Sun Dec 09, 2007 8:05 pm
Last edited by Slusho Addict on Sun Dec 09, 2007 8:10 pm; edited 1 time in total
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Display posts from previous:   Sort by:   
Page 2 of 3 [37 Posts]   Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3 Next
View previous topicView next topic
 Forum index » Archive » Archive: Cloverfield (1-18-08) » Cloverfield: General / Updates
Jump to:  


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
You cannot post calendar events in this forum



Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group