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 Sun Nov 24, 2024 6:20 am
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][Spoilers] More Than 1 "Mother Monsters"?
View previous topicView next topic
Page 3 of 12 [179 Posts]   Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, ..., 10, 11, 12  Next
Author Message
Evannnn
Kilroy

Joined: 19 Jan 2008
Posts: 2

 		i dont think the monster EVER walked up right, there is no scene verfying it did.(even in the scene where rob and the rest are rescuing lily in the apt and they see the monster coming towards them, its on all fours) and even it did, when the monster got bombed by the plane... it reached up at a building, its arm went more than half way up it. thats like 30 stories, and it was on ALL fours.

theres no way its the same monster, or it is and the size reference is all screwed up.

compare how big the monster head is in reference to the buidling in the clip below, and the one that attacks Hud

the size difference is HUGE

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x439xp_tulip_shortfilms

and it didnt "swat" the helicopter,its the monster head that clearly comes up out of the smoke.

PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2008 5:48 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
MotaHed
Decorated


Joined: 16 Jul 2007
Posts: 227
Location: Portland OR

 		no no no
sorry kids
there's one monster. it really is made pretty obvious, and there are no clues or hints that there are two. The scale in the park and in the city are completely consistent, as is the bite mark on the whale. kthxbai

PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2008 7:01 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
tMan930
Unfettered


Joined: 25 Nov 2007
Posts: 458
Location: Up In There

 		Re: no no no
sorry kids
richardemoore wrote:
there's one monster. it really is made pretty obvious, and there are no clues or hints that there are two. The scale in the park and in the city are completely consistent, as is the bite mark on the whale. kthxbai


So obvious that people are debating about it, a lot. Fortunately, you are one of the few gifted with common sense, and an insight to the movie that others just missed (and maybe a magic movie ruler, that also extends to pictures on the internet?). Your opinion is not the last word, and it certainly isn't fact. It seems very pretentious and overall jerkoff-ish to present it as such.
There is obviously more to come as far the experience related to this movie goes, so until all is revealed, no one can say anything with certainty.



Anyway, if you can excuse the apparent size difference between the monster in the park and the one who clawed the building and took down the helicopter as a matter of stupid people who don't understand scale, how does one explain the monster being everywhere at once? He heads from central Manhattan to the Brooklyn Bridge quite quickly (because he was thirsty?), and then just happens to be everywhere else, all the time? The movie makes it hard for me to believe (not that giant ocean-monsters are particularly believable) that there is only one monster.

PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2008 7:34 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
DBZEROGRAVITY
Greenhorn

Joined: 19 Jan 2008
Posts: 3

 		one big monster

1. i don't think jj or anybody else making the movie mentioned anything other than ONE monster with a bunch of parasites on it, did they?
2. when people are on all 4's they seem kinda small, but when they stand up they are relatively tall...the monster had four limbs so you do the math
3. if you didn't understand the last statement: it stood on its back legs in some scenes and all 4 in others
4. i don't see the size difference that some of you are talking about. when hud's "departure" scene occurred the monster above him was huge just like in the other scenes. if it looked small, that's because it's a shot from underneath the thing not above it or down the street from it
5. if the monster looked different (coloring, etc.) during the scenes, could it not be because of nighttime and daytime lighting?

PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2008 7:48 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Everything's Magic
Unfettered


Joined: 28 Aug 2007
Posts: 491
Location: Michigan

 		Guys, there is only one monster:

- Okay, when you first see the monster's face in the street, before the subway, it is at the same level as it is when we see it when it eats Hud, and when they run to the helicopters.

- When they carpet bomb it, the head is still at the same level, we just now see how long the creature is, making it look much bigger.

- It doesn't just bite the helicopter, the speed of its head clearly suggests a jump, or a it stands up.

And to poo on someone earlier who said you never see it standing up, you clearly see it stand up when Hud peeks out of the electronics store, and when it's on the news it stands up at one portion.

But I think it jumped at the helicopter, which if it did, there is NO size difference at all.

PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2008 7:53 pm
 View user's profile AIM Address MSN Messenger
 Back to top 
The Stray
Veteran

Joined: 16 Jul 2007
Posts: 141

 		I Don't Knoooooow
It's more than likely that there really is only one monster. But I can say that there was a definite size difference. The first time I watched the movie I wasn't sure, but the second time I knew when and where to look and that monster was definitely no the same size every time you saw it. And that's even if you count the perspective. The monster was ALWAYS huge to be sure, but it seemed to waver between gargantuan and OH MY GOD, OH MY GOD...

Personally, for reference I was looking at the news casts (gargantuan), compared to when it was coming straight at them from the apartment (OH MY GOD, OH MY GOD), compared to when the military was fighting it (gargantuan again). I can understand at the end that the perspective from the ground up was screwed at that angle so that's why it seemed way smaller. Also, when it leans on that building at the end, there's a big difference in how big it looked a moment before and then when it clawed that building. And it felt weird both time I saw it. Oh, also when it was walking between buildings way at the beginning (OH MY GOD again) however, that girl pointed out that it was eating people so evidently it was still close enough to the ground to consider people snacks.

Again. It probably is just one monster, and while it would be cooler if it was just a bunch of them it's not likely.

PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2008 9:04 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
grey101
Veteran


Joined: 20 Aug 2007
Posts: 100
Location: virgina beach,VA
tMan930 wrote:
mistermunky69 wrote:
tMan930 wrote:
It's painfully obvious that there's more than one creature in the movie. The monster who the stealth jet bombs, who reaches an arm up and pulls it down the side of that building, and then grabs a helicopter that's clearly more than 40 stories in the air? That thing was a whole lot bigger than the one that ate Hud.


Agreed. The one that ate Hud looks almost entirely different than any other shot of the monster through the whole movie. Particularly, the shot of the monster just before they run into the subway. I'm calling shenanigans.


Exactly. There was an almost triangular shape to the face of the monster from the subway, whereas the Hud-Eater was smaller and much more human-like.

Weird.

1. the bridge one it kinda looked like a tentacle. my step-dad that an octopus was attacking at first

2.note how they said the monster was winning,then it was limping near the end and fell. 20 secs later it lashes out at the heli? no had to bee two monsters

3.and yea the monster at the end looked way different. we didn't see those sacs when the news was recording the monster.

PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2008 9:50 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Calypso
Boot


Joined: 02 Aug 2007
Posts: 38

 		There are a few things I saw that could point to there being more than one monster.

1.The obvious size difference when Hud was eaten and the scenes of MGP we saw throughout the movie.

2.When the Brooklyn Bridge is destroyed it was destroyed by a tenticle and I may have missed it but that was the only time I saw any tenticle in the movie.

3.Lastly the message at the end of the movie clearly states that something is still alive but on 1-18-08.com there is a picture of something dead that may have been a creature of the same species as MGP.

It is likely that the final monster we saw could have been some kind of new arrival to Manhatten, after all the crab-like creatures came attached to MGP so it is likely that there are more of these Species out there that were alerted when the station was blown up.

PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2008 10:34 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Xius
Veteran

Joined: 10 Jul 2007
Posts: 76
grey101 wrote:
tMan930 wrote:
mistermunky69 wrote:
tMan930 wrote:
It's painfully obvious that there's more than one creature in the movie. The monster who the stealth jet bombs, who reaches an arm up and pulls it down the side of that building, and then grabs a helicopter that's clearly more than 40 stories in the air? That thing was a whole lot bigger than the one that ate Hud.


Agreed. The one that ate Hud looks almost entirely different than any other shot of the monster through the whole movie. Particularly, the shot of the monster just before they run into the subway. I'm calling shenanigans.


Exactly. There was an almost triangular shape to the face of the monster from the subway, whereas the Hud-Eater was smaller and much more human-like.

Weird.

1. the bridge one it kinda looked like a tentacle. my step-dad that an octopus was attacking at first

2.note how they said the monster was winning,then it was limping near the end and fell. 20 secs later it lashes out at the heli? no had to bee two monsters

3.and yea the monster at the end looked way different. we didn't see those sacs when the news was recording the monster.


I think the "tenticle" was it's tail.

And yeah, i didnt see the sacs on the other one either.

PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2008 10:44 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Calypso
Boot


Joined: 02 Aug 2007
Posts: 38

 		I think the "tenticle" was it's tail.

And yeah, i didnt see the sacs on the other one either.[/quote]

I don't recal there being a tail and plus that thing did not just swing at the bridge it wraped around it. Can anyone clarify the presence of a tail because if there wasent it could mean there could be a whole pack of these things out there. Why else would they level the entire area for just one monster.

PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2008 10:55 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Xius
Veteran

Joined: 10 Jul 2007
Posts: 76

 		Im pretty sure there was a tail.

PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2008 10:58 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
The Stray
Veteran

Joined: 16 Jul 2007
Posts: 141

 		Tall Tail
Yeah, it had a tail. Definitely. You could see it when they were running for the chopper near the end.

Also, it swatted the bridge, there was no attempt to wrap around it.

I have no idea why it would swat at a bridge with it's tail though when it could just as easily reached for it instead. Plus, wouldn't it need that to swim? Didn't look like it was built for swimming too much...

PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2008 11:07 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Calypso
Boot


Joined: 02 Aug 2007
Posts: 38

 		I'll have to take a better look next time. I suppose it may have looked like it was wraping around do to the bridge since it was shaking so much. What I dont understand is how it attacked the bridge from the angle it was at and what the new picture on 1-18-08 was of.

PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2008 11:12 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
chico8102
Boot


Joined: 07 Jul 2007
Posts: 52
Location: P`Town

 		I can see it now cloverfield 2 attack of the clones coming to a theater near you 1-18-09

PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2008 11:44 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
tMan930
Unfettered


Joined: 25 Nov 2007
Posts: 458
Location: Up In There
grey101 wrote:
tMan930 wrote:
mistermunky69 wrote:
tMan930 wrote:
It's painfully obvious that there's more than one creature in the movie. The monster who the stealth jet bombs, who reaches an arm up and pulls it down the side of that building, and then grabs a helicopter that's clearly more than 40 stories in the air? That thing was a whole lot bigger than the one that ate Hud.


Agreed. The one that ate Hud looks almost entirely different than any other shot of the monster through the whole movie. Particularly, the shot of the monster just before they run into the subway. I'm calling shenanigans.


Exactly. There was an almost triangular shape to the face of the monster from the subway, whereas the Hud-Eater was smaller and much more human-like.

Weird.

1. the bridge one it kinda looked like a tentacle. my step-dad that an octopus was attacking at first

2.note how they said the monster was winning,then it was limping near the end and fell. 20 secs later it lashes out at the heli? no had to bee two monsters

3.and yea the monster at the end looked way different. we didn't see those sacs when the news was recording the monster.


For the record, I believe it was a tail that destroyed the bridge. Also, as for the falling monster, I believe that he just lashed out because he was pissed. If somebody punches you in the gut, you're going to bend over for a second, get your breath, and then start a fight.

I don't know about the head-sacs (or whatever, they look membrane-like when they flare out in the park), but the size and face shape inconsistencies, along with the issue of getting around the city (capability and motivation) are what bother me, and make me think there's more to it.

PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2008 11:53 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Display posts from previous:   Sort by:   
Page 3 of 12 [179 Posts]   Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, ..., 10, 11, 12  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