unforum

[Red Walrus]

From Dr. Awkward:
"Red Walrus ...
Do the extremophile's you've mentioned lie dormant under extreme cold temps, and become active upon "thawing" so to speak??

If this is the case, perhaps the "discovery" of the ancient extinct form of life would perhaps do the same."

Yes below 0 degrees C they go into another state. Sounds like a good theory to me.

[NYC5]

Not to sound cruel, but it reminds me of when we would freeze a bee, it would go into a state of rest without movement. As the thawing process began, the bee would begin to move and soon spring back into action. A cryogenic type of theory...nice.

[Finch]

I like the idea of the monster being angry at least just before he gets to the city. Angry enough to rip the head off the statue of liberty and hurl it into the city. My guess at this point would be the disturbed home scenario, but I'd like to throw in a theory of this thing being some sort of "evil" creature that was trapped beneath the ocean. It wouldn't need much of a motive to attack then.

[Dr. Awkward]

It may suck in terms of a HUGE MONSTER movie, but maybe it isn't angry at all and doesn't mean to "attack"...

It's been sleeping for thousands of years...perhaps it's just a bit ornery after being awoken by a bunch of ruckus that's louder than two skeletons fuckin' on a tin roof, using a beer can for a rubber (paints a pretty picture, donit?).

After being excavated out of a deep sea dungeon where it's all cramped up tighter than a gnat's ass stretched over an oil drum, it's happier than Michael Jackson in Boys' Town to get some fresh air.

It's just acclimating to the temperature after being down @ the bottom of the ocean forever and a lifetime, colder than the balls on a brass monkey.

This thing could just be hungry enough to eat the ass out of a skunk so it scoops up the first thing it sees, but it tastes like a penny dipped in porcupine shit so it flings it outta the ball field, towards 401 Broadway, and looks for somethin' else..

As it walks through the narrow NYC streets it looks as awkward as a cub bear jackin' off with boxing gloves and clumsily knocks things over like a baby lookin' for his binky in a buncha ant hills.

It sees these lil' snacks no bigger than a pint of piss scramblin' all over the place faster than a cat can lick its ass, gets as excited as a blind queer in a hot dog factory and starts poppin' em in his mouth like a kid in a candy store.

You get the idea...

[Finch]

[Helo]

I think the closest Slusho comes to the monster is that the parent company of Slusho just happens to be drilling around it's home, cracks open the front door, pisses it off and makes it cause havoc in NYC. I don't think the Slusho drink has anything to do with it.

[Melampus]

Agreed, Helo... Frackin' A.

One question about the Extremophile stuff: aren't they really, really small? I like the idea of extremophiles being the DSN, but I don't get how the monster could be an extremophile.... are there mammals or lizards or fish that are extremophiles, or are they all micorscopic (or just 'primitive', taxonomically speaking)?

Now, here's something totally different to consider, and it didn't even occur to me until now: the thing walks. I mean, going off the poster alone - it walks, right?

If it does walk, then we've got problems with a plausible 'natural' sea-creature, i.e., one that has lived in the deep, deep oceans (far enough from any land that we wouldn't know about it, other than an occasional 'bloop' reading on sonar), and something that's lived out there in the deep for a long, long time. If that's true, there's no way it would have functional legs - legs that could support it on land. Might as well give it wings - it just doesn't make sense, evolutionarily speaking.

So, either it doesn't walk; or, it's not a natural but as-yet-undiscovered sea-creature, ala Bloop.

If it does walk, then it was either some very ancient creature that got frozen in hibernation somehow (that would also explain its desire to get to land quickly, but how could it make the swim?!); or, it's artificial, designed, etc.

Come to think of it - how does the thing get out of the water at all? Whales don't do so well on land. In fact, most fish don't do so well on land; they're like a fish out of wa...

I dunno - maybe this is just what happens when any monster-movie is analyzed too much.

[Henrik]

Yep - it raises alot of questions...

The known extremophiles are not that big in size, which would indicate a sort of mutation or change.. based on the roar and havoc, it got to be one hell of a large MoFo.. mutations don´t just happen overnight - it takes generations and the right enviromental conditions..

Also, how was the monster able to reproduce.. if it´s an ancient creature (and have been "frozen" at the bottom of the sea), it would mean that it´s one-of-a-kind today (and its species would probably be extinct), but it didn´t come to be out of nowhere.. and to reproduce, its got to have a male/female counterpart (unless the creature is able to reproduce by itself)..

And yes, if the ocean is its natural habitat, it does not make sense that it should be able to walk around.. if it´s an ancient land/sea creature, then why is it buried so far away from the coast...

I´m beginning to be more fond of the monter being some sort of tool for Tagruato and that there´s some sort of hidden agenda behind the attack.. I don´t know

(... and sorry for the spelling ...)

[keeno_82uk]

maybe using the monster to target their opposition in the business field? i doubt it though. it would make a really bad film.

[Melampus]

Actually, I don't think the film will suffer, one way or the other, from any far-fetched ideas in the backstory. If it's really going to be in the hand-held style of the trailer - for most, if not all, of the movie - then, there won't be any backstory given in the movie. This has been talked about a lot in the past, on various threads, so I won't rehash it all; but, basically: the less backstory we get, the better the movie will be, IF it's aiming for a very realistic depiction of people caught in a monster attack, and esp. one that takes place in a limited amount of time (e.g., overnight).

In real life, when disasters happen, nobody has time to worry about why/how? They just run for their lives. Not until later, when it's clearly over, do people really get down to asking and answering the how's and why's - and, even then, it's usually a long time before all the facts can be sorted out and some kind of official account can be agreed upon. If the movie tries to stay realistic throughout, then we won't get any backstory in the movie - it will work, too; it will be intensely realistic. They may feel obliged to offer the audience something, so maybe there will be some kind of voice-over epilogue, or a montage of news reports the following day; but, even with that, I don't think we'll get much.

The backstory will come from this - from online stuff - from the ARG. So, any far-fetched ideas in the backstory can only make this online experience suffer; the movie should still kick-ass.

Here's hoping anyway...

[Red Walrus]

[rose]

Anteros wrote:

[Be@rbrick]

All of these theories and questions about the monster can be explained by this:

[keeno_82uk]

replace ooze with Slusho and Beebop and Rocksteady with the cloverfield monster and theres your film. voila...... yea right

[shoosh]