Re: CLOVERFIELD (spoilers)

"Steven L." wrote:
> 
> Thanatos wrote:
> > In article <fr6dndLl3o6oFwPanZ2dnUVZ_u2mnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
> >  "Ken from Chicago" <kwicker1b_nospam@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >
> >> "Thanatos" <atropos@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> >> news:atropos-55A41F.17410128012008@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>> In article <08GdnfKiiaRMJADanZ2dnUVZ_o-mnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
> >>> "Ken from Chicago" <kwicker1b_nospam@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> "Thanatos" <atropos@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> >>>> news:atropos-803A9D.06113128012008@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>>>> In article <R_udncFFn-lz5QDanZ2dnUVZ_vGinZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
> >>>>> "Rick" <videojockey1a@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >>>>>> JJ has said that CLover was a creature from the depths of
> >>>>>> the Ocean which is why it's hide was near invulnerable.
> >>>>> Not sure why something from the bottom of the ocean would
> >>>>> have skin that can repel bunker-buster bombs and munitions
> >>>>> that can penetrate tank armor.
> >>>> Do you know how much PRESSURE exists on the bottom of the ocean?
> >>> Yes. Do you know how sea creatures survive it? Doesn't sound like
you do
> >>> if you think it's because they have thick skin.
> >> By NOT having air cavities inside. Apparently the Creature did and
thus had
> >> the armored shell to withstand ocean pressures--and thus armored
shells.
> >
> > So let me get this straight... a creature that lives at the bottom of
> > the ocean-- where there is no air-- nevertheless has air-filled
hollows
> > in its body *and* those hollows are inexplicably pressurized at levels
> > comparable to that found at the surface, which consequently requires
it
> > to evolve skin stronger than tank armor.
> >
> > That's such a stupid concept I don't even know where to begin.
> 
> In "monster" movies, the writers always have to find some gimmick to
> explain why the Air Force can't just bomb the creature(s) to oblivion.
> 

Same thing for something like 'Starship Troopers'. "They don't have any
TANKS?" "Why not use those planes ALL THE TIME?" "Interstellar travel,
but the troopers only have machine guns?"

> In "The Beast from 20,000 Fathoms," the creature was carrying a deadly
> infectious disease.  Bombing it would have spread its blood particles
> with the germs all over the city.
> 
> In "The Giant Behemoth," the creature was intensely radioactive.
> Bombing it would have spread the radiation all over the city.
> 

Both plausible explanations.

> Abrams *could* have done a similar gimmick with the Cloverfield
> monster's giant parasites:  We can't risk blowing up the monster,
> because then all of its parasites will crawl away to attack humans and
> we'll have more problems with them.  Gotta find a way to dispose of the
> monster and its parasites at the same time.
> 
> Maybe he just didn't think of it.
> 

He should have just said: "It's a monster big enough to knock the head
of the Statue of Liberty into Manhattan. Don't take it so seriously."

--