Re: CLOVERFIELD (spoilers)

"Steven L." <sdlitvin@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
news:13puaf0ooguc286@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 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.
>
> 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.
>
> 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.
>
>
> -- 
> Steven L.
> Email:  sdlitvin@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Remove the NOSPAM before replying to me.

It doesn't seem that a lot of thought was put into Cloverfield. But they
got 
their money which is what they really cared about instead of making a good

flick.