|
well why not posted:He had a bunker full of girls' clothes and furniture, at least two 'missing' 'daughters', a holding cell, handcuffs and a giant barrel of acid. There's only one murder. The girl in the polaroid photo is Howard's actual biological daughter, who implicitly left with her mother for another town because Howard was getting paranoid about boys. (Hence the extreme reaction to flirting: "I know what a traitor looks like!") He moved her belongings downstairs after she left. There is an incestuous subtext in the film, but it's of the Forbidden Planet variety. The father is trying to maintain a symbiotic relationship with his daughter, and the aliens appear as 'monsters from the id'. He doesn't want to gently caress anyone, exactly. He wants a daughter-figure that he can keep safe and virginal indefinitely, like a living doll.
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 23:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 16:14 |
|
|
Yeah that's what I'm saying. He killed, at minimum, one girl. At most two. Like an authentic crazed abductor, he's all smiles and charm, until someone disobeys him. The bunker is just the way he controls women. Other men use money or influence.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 23:58
|
|
|
The trick to making the film actually interesting is to understand Howard, and even love the character in a political sense (which is of course distinct from sympathizing with him). It's too easy look at the allegorical rise of the right-wing nationalism in the film and conclude that Howard just needs to be killed in order to purify society. 'Patriarchy = bad' is obvious and uncontroversial. The part to focus on is that Michelle sees the monsters too - that Howard's flaw was not that he was too extreme, but that he wasn't radical enough. Contrary to the tagline, Howard is all too human - and so are the literal aliens, really. The actual monster is that terrifying woman who angrily demanded help and then died alone outside - the one who Michelle ultimately takes over from.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 00:59
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:There's only one murder. I can see this, I think that's a much fairer reading than "he has The Pedo Voice." I'm actually glad it's not just me who saw the Polaroid as a different girl, I could have sworn that the two pictures looked like different people (and Howard looked decently younger) but it's hard to check that kind of thing on a movie still in theaters. Emmet's "that's not Megan" was said while holding the class picture, and then the other one was revealed.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 01:18
|
|
|
A True Jar Jar Fan posted:I can see this, I think that's a much fairer reading than "he has The Pedo Voice." It's the same girl and the polaroid was to 'show' you that she was in the bunker.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 01:25
|
|
|
well why not posted:He had a bunker full of girls' clothes and furniture, at least two 'missing' 'daughters', a holding cell, handcuffs and a giant barrel of acid. Please everyone keeps barrels of dangerous materials in their basement.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 01:28
|
|
|
A True Jar Jar Fan posted:I can see this, I think that's a much fairer reading than "he has The Pedo Voice." They looked different to me too.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 02:00
|
|
|
It'd be funny if there were two different photos shown, depending on the cinema.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 02:17
|
|
|
Len posted:They looked different to me too. They were. I think it's a case of goon face-blindness. The polaroid was taken by a third person - presumably Howard's ex-wife - and shows Howard sitting casually with the girl. It's production-designed to look much older than the other photo. There's no secret mega-twist that Megan never existed. That's like that honetpot nonsense again. Howard's telling the truth about the estranged wife and daughter.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 03:22
|
|
|
The class photo & the Polaroid are both Brittany, the missing girl, not Megan. Michelle & Emmett are both freaked out that she's wearing the same Paris t-shirt Michelle has on, which wouldn't be a big deal at all to either of them if it were his actual daughter since he already said that shirt belonged to her. I don't think we ever see Megan. I'm sure she exists, and Howard's story about her being taken away from him by her mother is true.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 16:55
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:They were. I think it's a case of goon face-blindness. That is wrong. That is not his daughter Megan in the couch picture unless the big school picture is also his daughter and Emmett is lying. Megan existed (probably), but we don't see her.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 17:26
|
|
|
Hobo Clown posted:she's wearing the same Paris t-shirt Michelle has on, which wouldn't be a big deal at all to either of them if it were his actual daughter since he already said that shirt belonged to her. The scene exists to visualize Howard's motive and MO. The shirt is underlined to emphasize that Michelle is being made into the daughter, and that she will be killed if she doesn't. It's not a twist about the shirt's ownership ("it was Brittany's shirt all along!"). The twist is that Michelle's realization that she has been, all along, subtly manipulated into becoming Howard's daughter.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 18:00
|
|
|
SMG has it right. I agree.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 18:26
|
|
|
What if Michelle.......... was Megan all along?? When Howard says "now we can be ourselves," he's letting her know that it's OK to drop her disguise now that they've worked together to kill the Evil Man, Emmet, who definitely killed Britney. But it's too late, because the aliens brainwashed her when she heard the rumbling and now she doesn't remember anything now. So she kills her dad, her real dad. Is not a honey pot... it's a homing beacon! A True Jar Jar Fan fucked around with this message at 18:44 on Mar 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 18:41
|
|
|
It seems like there's still some internet detective poo poo going on decyphering clues that were left around as it relates to Megan. http://funandprettythings.com/ there's a password when you click on the computer to get a message. Also apparently some twitter account was found that only tweeted once and linked to this video a few years ago and it's somehow related. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXFpHIs7mIo I'm a fan of weird clues left around to gently caress with people, so this is kinda neat. Also one would think that there would be a cast credit to who was Megan and who was Brittany in the photos. IMDB doesn't say.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 18:45
|
|
|
hey that's the end theme from portal 2 bein played on some kinda printer. maybe megan was a gamer. wow
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 19:28
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:The scene exists to visualize Howard's motive and MO. The shirt is underlined to emphasize that Michelle is being made into the daughter, and that she will be killed if she doesn't. Yes, Howard is manipulating Michelle into becoming his daughter in his creepy underground roleplay. I'm saying he did the same to Brittany before her, which is shown by the Polaroid of Brittany wearing Megan's clothes. Howard is telling the truth about that being Megan's shirt. They're now realizing that Michelle isn't the first girl he's given it to to wear. Anyone have screenshots of the scene in question?
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 19:45
|
|
|
Plus, let's not forget that in the picture were discussing, Brittany isn't smiling. Howard is, because he thinks he's got Megan 2.0, but he doesn't. She'll be a traitor.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 20:25
|
|
|
Would you guys say that it's safe to say that he probably didn't kidnap her with the intent to kill her, and that he more than likely killed her when his temper got out of control because things didn't go his way? Not that it matters, but I assume that was the case.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2016 01:48
|
|
|
NESguerilla posted:Would you guys say that it's safe to say that he probably didn't kidnap her with the intent to kill her, and that he more than likely killed her when his temper got out of control because things didn't go his way? Not that it matters, but I assume that was the case. I think this is right, but I'm not 100% sure why he has the vat of acid around if he didn't at least acknowledge the possibility that it would be necessary. He's got a secret compartment to store it and everything.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2016 03:00
|
|
|
Funkmaster General posted:I think this is right, but I'm not 100% sure why he has the vat of acid around if he didn't at least acknowledge the possibility that it would be necessary. He's got a secret compartment to store it and everything. My thought was to use it as a poo poo disposal. Flush it down the drain to dissolve poops.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2016 03:25
|
|
|
Just got back from a matinee showing, loved it, have a theory about ties to the original. I skimmed the thread and didn't see this idea mentioned (though it may have been and I missed it). Now I know it's been mentioned that it doesn't take place in the same universe, but I know that writers and producers of the original made a lot of contradictory statements themselves (the main one I remember being disagreement over whether the monster was a baby or not). That being said, assuming they DO take place in the same universe, my friends and I (who didn't know that they're supposed to be separate) were speculating that the monster in the original is an alien bioweapon, and represents the "phase one" Howard refers to taking out population centers, and MEW emerges during phase two when the controllers are on cleanup. Even if it's technically not canon I think it adds a dimension to the story - I'm also a firm believer in "death of the author", so that's a part of it for me. Otherwise I thought it was terrific, like most people said. Acting and sound editing really stuck out to me, and the score was loving excellent. Is it the same composer from the original? Cause Cloverfield only had that one song over the credits but it was loving dope, and this whole movie's score was at a similar level of quality.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2016 20:22
|
|
|
DoctorG0nzo posted:Now I know it's been mentioned that it doesn't take place in the same universe, but I know that writers and producers of the original made a lot of contradictory statements themselves (the main one I remember being disagreement over whether the monster was a baby or not). That's the definite thematic connection, but the films literally take place in 'the present day' - i.e. their theatrical release dates. The action in Cloverfield takes place in 2008 (with flashbacks to 2007, the date that it began filming), and Cloverfield Lane takes place sometime between 2014 (the date that it began filming) and 2016.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2016 20:53
|
|
|
I really like this, it reminds me of The Guest because they are both kinda secret origin stories.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2016 21:41
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:That's the definite thematic connection, but the films literally take place in 'the present day' - i.e. their theatrical release dates. The action in Cloverfield takes place in 2008 (with flashbacks to 2007, the date that it began filming), and Cloverfield Lane takes place sometime between 2014 (the date that it began filming) and 2016. Present day don't exactly mean "the day the movie came out" it means "the day you are watching this movie," but at the same time death of the author don't exactly mean "you can imagine there's a monster just outside the frame if you want" either so When they re-release cloverfield they'll edit the camcorder out in favor of a smartphone and apply random instagram filters to different shots
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2016 02:10
|
|
|
Space Hamlet posted:Present day don't exactly mean "the day the movie came out" it means "the day you are watching this movie," Tell that to Terminator 1.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2016 02:20
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:Tell that to Terminator 1. I suspend my disbelief as Hercules suspends a boulder
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2016 02:36
|
|
|
MIB2 takes place on the day the film came out. Also, I believe Cloverfield takes place in May. I know the Coney Island stuff was in April, according to the date via the camera.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2016 02:57
|
|
|
Just got back from this. Good movie, had a nice Twilight Zone vibe. MEW is really good at these kind of roles for some reason. I actually like how well the post-bunker sequence holds together as a little mini movie in itself. It's a slight shift in genre but it's pretty well done. Also I like the idea that the proper response to the apocalypse is not to huddle up in a bunker and forget the rest of the world but to get out there and fight. Howard is right about something coming but he's wrong about how to handle it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2016 03:24
|
|
|
So I read the crazy poo poo earlier where the guy in the thread kept calling the radio signal a honeypot. But did Howard actually know more about the attack then he let on? Cause the crazy guy in the thread did brought up that Howard claim to not be getting radio signals on his thing. And he did also lie about there being no survivors or driveable cars, so did he lie just to try to protect everyone from going out and helping people or was he just wrong about the nature of the attack completely?
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2016 03:32
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:That's the definite thematic connection, but the films literally take place in 'the present day' - i.e. their theatrical release dates. The action in Cloverfield takes place in 2008 (with flashbacks to 2007, the date that it began filming), and Cloverfield Lane takes place sometime between 2014 (the date that it began filming) and 2016. I hadn't thought of that. The iPhone in the beginning was a good way to establish that. I was kinda jumping through hoops to figure out how the timing of the attacks and the power outages being broadcast lined up too but I want to believe, damnit Space Hamlet posted:death of the author don't exactly mean "you can imagine there's a monster just outside the frame if you want" either so Wait poo poo is this why I got an F on my paper claiming that the sharks in The Old Man and the Sea were actually the Loch Ness Monster cause I mean, that'd be way cooler
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2016 03:38
|
|
|
PBS Newshour posted:So I read the crazy poo poo earlier where the guy in the thread kept calling the radio signal a honeypot. But did Howard actually know more about the attack then he let on? Cause the crazy guy in the thread did brought up that Howard claim to not be getting radio signals on his thing. And he did also lie about there being no survivors or driveable cars, so did he lie just to try to protect everyone from going out and helping people or was he just wrong about the nature of the attack completely? Wasn't it that Howard had a CB radio in the bunker, which would only pick up signals from other CB radios (presumably other survivors under the presumption of major communication being shut down), while AM/FM signals were where the reports actually came from? Though it's questionable Howard didn't also have any other radio down there, even if reception would be a bitch to get. And Howard was convinced the attack was nuclear in nature, so he believed opening the door meant certain death.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2016 04:14
|
|
|
I've never seen Cloverfield so I went into this without expectations, and I thought it was excellent throughout. I loved the contrast between Michelle's attitude in the end and the fundamental cowardice of paranoid preppers like Howard. Goodman should receive a nomination for this performance.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2016 05:02
|
|
|
If there were justice in the world Goodman would have like 2-3 Oscars already.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2016 05:14
|
|
|
The tension in this film was loving outstanding. Every minute on from Michelle discovering the help message was an incredible ride. This movie surprised the hell out of me.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2016 06:45
|
|
|
Maxwell Lord posted:If there were justice in the world Goodman would have like 2-3 Oscars already. How the hell has he never even been nominated?
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2016 07:45
|
|
|
PBS Newshour posted:How the hell has he never even been nominated? Not pretty enough.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2016 08:42
|
|
|
Chiming in to say this was a good movie, and also the girl in the photos was the same girl.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2016 11:50
|
|
|
Was the likely hood of Goodman stalking Michelle mentioned? There was full sized truck headlights behind her at the gas station at the beginning and she kept giving it weird looks. Not that a truck is unusual in the South. I'd presume he wanted another youngish brunette girl with him in the bunker for acid baths and whatnot.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2016 14:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 16:14 |
|
|
So John Goodman really was some kind of psycho girl killer or was that just implied but left open? The idea that you can have both a legit crazy guy like this and also the whole sci fi element in the same movie is pretty cool oswald ownenstein fucked around with this message at 20:29 on Mar 27, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2016 20:20
|
|
