Was any else just a little shocked when those two little kids bit the dust. I mean, it was good, they deserved it, but i don't think in any movie I've seen a kid's been killed like that. Occasionally one dies of a disease or something, but getting horribly ripped apart by mr bug man, I mean, shock much. And also, maybe I didn't notice it, but I iddn't see any women get killed. Maybe this movie had a bit of the Jurassic Park syndrome (a woman's never been killed in those ones either)
The kids asked for it, and I agree, its typical no women gets killed... But poor Manny... OF COURSE HE HAS TO GET KILLED!! Why couldnt the bugs take his son instead? He was annoying anyway!
The two kids getting killed shocked me as well. Thanks to that I was convinced taht also the autistic boy, Chuy, should get killed by the man-bugs, and it surprised me that he was found alive and well later on. So the kids getting killed realy added to the tension, as it showed that noone's safe from the killers. I was, however, a bit disturbed that the kids' death didn't trigger any other events or reactions within the plot, such a waste of a possibility to deepen the plot.
They didn't deserve it. They were two - what were they? Elleven? - children trying to make some money. But that's what I liked about this film. In other horror movies, children never gets killed, so it's always a little predictable when the killer is after a child. But in this movie, you couldn't be 100 percent sure what was going to happen next. I did think, though, that when the two bug kids died, that Chuy boy should've died too.
"Oh, she's seen a parrot! That must mean it's all gonna be okay!"
It used to be an unwritten law in Hollywood that there were two things that were not supposed to be deliberately killed in films: children and dogs. This film ignored that old convention and gave us both.
Personally, I thought that Chuy ought to have died. He could mimic the creatures' clicking sound, but he was NOT coated with the stuff from the bug guts, so they ought to have identified him as NOT being one of them and treated him accordingly. Even if they were confused by the clicking, the instant he stopped they would have known.
But of course if he'd been killed, we couldn't have had that syrupy "We have our child and we're a family at last" ending (*retch.*)
"An Archer is known by his aim, not by his arrows." -Li Chen-Sung (Richard Loo,) The Outer Limits
It used to be an unwritten law in Hollywood that there were two things that were not supposed to be deliberately killed in films: children and dogs. This film ignored that old convention and gave us both.
Ah, but everyone forgets the movie that first broke that rule. It was a film by an upstart young director who came out of nowhere to make one of the most well-recieved horror/action movies of all time. . . . Give up? Jaws! Yes indeed, both a dog and a little (I'd say 7-10 years old) kid die in the span of five minutes. To be perfectly honest... I was more angry that the dog died, lol.
Irony is lost on audiences. In the land of the blind, the man with one eye is a god.
reply share
Jaws may have been the first to break both rules at once, but one of those rules was broken way back in 1936 in Sabotage, a film by a young Alfred Hitchcock. It was apparently a pretty controversial film for that reason. Maybe 1936 was before the establishment of those rules?
In "Sabotage" it's disturbing but somehow it doesn't work. You're just left wondering why. (At least I was).
I think a much more effective (and brutal) example is Henry Fonda ("Frank") shooting a kid ("Timmy") after this:
Frank and his gang are standing in front of Timmy McBain, after killing the other family members Gang member: What are we going to do with this one, Frank? Frank: Now that you've called me by name?
..in "Once upon a Time in the West", of course.. ermm.. I mean.. "C'era una volta il West"
A dog got killed in jurassic park 2 by the T - Rex, if that counts :P, and it was released a month later that same year so del toro was still before that.
HAHAHAHA, ya the fact that those two kids in the sewer got mutilated like that kind of disturbed me, lol, but then again if I was that age, I don't think that I would be going down into a sewer like that....actually I don't think I will ever do that. If they were brave enough to go cutting cacoons the size of their bodies off a sewer wall, then they were brave enough to die as far as I'm concerned. Now, the fact that old Chuy didn't die disturbs me more (HE WAS A FREAK), and his poor pops got killed because Chuy thought "Mr. Funny Shoes" was his good buddy. A kid who thinks an 8-foot tall bug is his bud desserves to die, not his cool dad :(. LoL, but I like that movie over all!
Eh, you can't really blame Chuy, he was clearly mentally challenged, probably autistic... so he didn't really know the bugs were evil until it was too late, and that's even if he understood what happened to his father. Autism is really a tragic affliction...
Irony is lost on audiences. Sitting on the fence only gives you a sore bum.
Where I come from, mentally challanged a polite way of saying that somebody is stupid, but has nothing actually wrong with them. Don't you mean that he was Handicapped?
What "disturbs me" is your hateful attitude toward people and things that don't fit some neurotypical or physiological mold, people who simply are different, not because they're they're screaming for attention like misguided "Goth" kids but because they simply are through no choice of their own. Your attitude displays ignorance and fear. I'd like to see an intolerant jackass like you get eaten alive in a horror movie. Or a few Goth people.
For your information, the character Chuy represents an autistic child, more specifically one with Asperger's Syndrome. In the real world, people like Chuy might be hated by idiots like you due to their lack of social intelligence, but believe me they make up for it in other ways.
Due to your ignorance you wouldn't know this, but most of the greatest scientific discoveries in human history were - and continue to be - made by single-minded people with Asperger's Syndrome. Archimedes had A.S.; so did Einstein. Bill Gates is rumored to have the traits. There are MANY others, and the list of their accomplishments fills the history books and scientific journals.
We may have only had a label for it for a decade, but the genes responsible have been in the gene pool for a very long time, and they're still present because they're not universally detrimental. Most people with A.S. have extremely high logical intelligence and usually a singular obsession to go with it. Personally I think it's an evolutionary divergence, like Caucasians from Negroids and blonde and redhead from black and brunette. Didn't it ever occur to you that not all evolutionary changes are ones you can SEE?
Without entirely knowing it, Gene Roddenberry patterned his "Vulcans" in Star Trek after people with Asperger's Syndrome; he at least could see the value of some of these traits, however unlike neurotypical humans they might be. You don't have the intelligence, wisdom, or foresight of a Gene Roddenberry though, do you?
Chuey had a little bit more than Asperger's Syndrome. His repetitive behaviour and mimikry suggests some deeper form of handicap.
He also seemed to have an atypical mental age and/or capacity for learning. Which does not go along with textbook Asperger (many Asperger sufferers actually seem more intelligent than average because their lower level of social development is similar to that assosiated with 'nerds and geeks' in popular culture). Plus his underdevelopment appeared to stretch to his awareness stretched to his environment rather than to his social perceptions.
I would say that it was more likely to be poorly acted autism (he made eye contact which is a non indicator for autism, but he was only an actor).
Then again, I'm not trying to pick a fight so .....
It's a great scene. It's really bad that we almost never see in movies graphic death of kids or women. I mean killing adult white men in movies is cool, but watching women and kids killed in nasty/gruesome ways is good fun too
I loved that scene because you rarely ever get to see that kind of thing in movies, I mean come on tell me about another movie where kids get ripped to sheds (then eaten) by monsters. It just doesn't happen in movies these days. Film Studios don't like showing it because they know their going to get a complaint from some lady who stupidly thought it was ok to let her child go see a horror movie thats rated PG-13, 14A, AA, or otherwise. I mean I saw a lady take her 3 kids (somewhere between 3-8) to Alien vs Predator. Then hearing her after the movie say she was going to write a letter to the studio for making a movie which to her had disturbing images she didn't want her kids seeing. AVP wasn't all that disturbing (in fact I found the movie disrespectful of the Alien and Predator franchises because of it's lack of horror and disturbing images), but another person try's to kill off another movie she/he didn't want their kids seeing. So you know what you do before seeing a movie... YOU CHECK THE RATINGS AND WHY THE MOVIE IS RATED IT!!! Anyway I liked Mimic.
You have courage, too bad you don't have the skills to match. General Grievous
That scene was only there because it was necessary for the audience to believe that Chuy was in danger when he went into the church. Insects don't care about age, their nest has an intruder. Without that scene with the kids getting killed so brutally, people would've been a little scared for Chuy but, they'd say 'He's just a kid so he won't get killed.' People weren't supposed to like it, that was it's point.
"There's some weird sh!t down here, and lots of it." ---Leonard, Mimic (1997)
The most graphic child death that I know of was in the movie " Dead Men Wallking". There is a scene where you see a zombie bite off a little boys ear (about 8-10 years old) and in the same scene it shows a little girl's intestines being eaten by the same zombie as she watches!(age about 6-8) Thats pretty *beep* up right there!
A few drunken buddies and their girls are cruising the streets running people down for fun,keeping score as if it were a game.
They see a kid (Looks to be around ten/twelve) on a bike.They proceed to hit him,knocking him off the bike.They then run over his head causing it to explode.
That is the worst child murder on film I can remember.Very graphic.
I just looked that up, Wow that's horrible, it being over the top and even sickly humorous is the worst part, thank goodness I can always remind myself it's just cinema.
Yeah it was a bit of a shock,but the one that always shocked me,was both the little boy in jaws,and the little girl shot dead in escape from precinct 13(the original)
This movie is awful but the idea of it was cool. Even Guillermo del Toro said he disowns this movie and feels it was his worst ever because of the producers. The kids being killed is just a trademark of Del Toro. He normally has alot violence in his movies and with some of his better movies, children have died horribly. The children's death scene in Mimic always bothered me and was certainly the first I had ever seen but it was done wonderfully. I didn't expect it and is probably the best scene in the whole movie.
~I'm a reasonable man, get off my case, get off my case~