MovieChat Forums > DeckardCain
DeckardCain (20)
Posts
Replies
that's why they set up a sound proof nursery.
Wasn't explained in the movie, so imagination as Geff suggests is all we got.
but we do have some clues:
-We know the father was a tinkerer or sorts.
-We know that they lived near running water,
so we can guess that their power system was set up to be self sufficient prior to day 0.
a) hydro (my best guess)
b) solar
c) wind
we did not see any wind turbines, solar panels, hydro dam or energy storage location, but then we didn't see all that much outside the farm and their path to the river/town.
When you say the "family moved a lot of their equipment to the farm at some point". How do you know it wasn't there at the beginning, at day 0?
But overall yes I do agree that it does seem strange that they didn't want to move near the waterfall. MAYBE it took them sometime to realize that their sounds could be muffled by such sources. If we recall the scene with the father and son, it was the first time they he showed this to him... maybe he recently figured it out?
3 + 3B) The problem with "strategically placing speakers that are always giving off ambient noise" is that they must be turned on. The moment those speakers are turned on the creatures will investigate and attack the source of the sound.
PERHAPS, there is a way to spread the sound or make it difficult to localize, like with very low BASS... however anything like this would take some experimentation with noise... which is dangerous.
ah yes, that makes a lot more sense... I would like to see the scene again and see where the kids are looking.
still I would say my idea that the monsters were getting better at hunting has some evidence (the racoon on the sand path, and this old man's group also being wiped out)
Indeed, probably a specific time. But the kids should have been aware as to what time that would actually be at.
Hmm when I go back to watch it again, maybe the date stamps will provide more clues.
I think "suicide" is a good theory but not sure about calling it "premediated"... I don't think it was planned, but a reaction.
I have two theories on this one... one is a little farfetched admittedly. First one is more inline with your suicide idea and I consider the most plausible:
1) The old man saw the Dad and Son (alive and well) and they they still had each other. Which may have put him over the top emotionally because he just lost his entire family. Essentially, just that seeing two loving people together overwhelmed him emotionally and he just lost it... and committed suicide in the grief.
2) Its possible the old man actually saved the Dad and son... I know wait here me out! So if we remember the scene where Lee lit the fire on the Silo and there were many other fires lit up in return (their community showing others they are still alive)... there were quite a few lights that lit up. When Lee's kids were up there later and they lit up the fire there were no lights that had come up; suggesting that everyone was killed and that Lee's family were the last survivors.
If everyone was killed... it means the creatures were becoming more sensitive or figured out some of the tricks they were using or figured out their paths. Remember those raccoons that were scurrying on the sand path near the farm that were taken out?
Maybe this the old guy knew that if the Father and Son continued on the path, they were going to get caught by the creature like the rest of the old man's family/party. By screaming he would have forced Lee to take a different path, one the creatures are not laying a trap on. This is a little farfetched because it would have made much more sense for the character to just indicate not to go in that direction with gestures. And the evidence that the creatures were getting better at hunting them is a little weak.
*all you have to do is read the other posts.. There's no need for the OP to have repeat what people are saying quite frequently.*
If there is no point in the op to have to repeat other posts... then perhaps the op post is pointless to you. I actually enjoy reading others opinions on material I am interested in and would be nice if people backed up what they said.
*Their statements are not grand, sweeping, nor broad. They're just summing up what everyone has already posted. There's no need to spoon feed you for "evidence".*
"This movie rapes your intelligence" and "plot holes".... that is grand sweeping and broad...
*I'm getting so sick of the production company's marketers/employees/fanatics/debaters/script writers coming onto these boards.. If you don't like what the OP stated, or what others have stated - just keep scrolling to something that suits your tastes..*
I am not in any way affiliated with the production company not that it should matter in a public discussion forum. I and many others enjoy discussions of films, especially with people who have different perspectives and tastes so I will continue to do that. If you don't like discussions where posters have differing opinions, then this is concerning attitude on a discussion forum.
No clue what you are insinuating with the "cheap porn..." comment. Seems to be an attempt at an insult though... seem unnecessary and inappropriate.
Lol this post is so ironic...
a) Grand sweeping statement.
b) Excuse for not having evidence.
c) Suggests others follow a course of action based on a + b....
...and then compares the movie to Trump's ... tweets or wits? either way, still ironic.
4) *sound-proofing* : wasn't just a mattress, they had to put stuff all over the walls/roof. I'm not sure its that common knowledge on how to sound proof a room properly... I certainly don't know much on this topic but I am not a musician... neither were any of the family members apparently.
As Kurt, already mentioned many of your points are seem to be character decision making, and not "plot holes"; but I get your overall point that you think the characters are a bit unbelievable because their decisions are not congruent with the character personality/intelligence/culture/etc.
But lets go over your points, I have a different perspective on a few.
1) *family grocery store trip*: the kids were very quite: they were moving around on their tippy toes. If you ever try to move on your tippy toes, you will see that moving slower is actually more dangerous, its easier to lose your balance... like riding a 2-wheel bike to slowly you just tip over. Furthermore, the parents were teaching the kids to survive, while many scenes might be classified as the parents being reckless, the parents had to teach their kids to survive in the world without them because they could die at any moment.
2) *Living near the river* : or the waterfalls. I think the main issue here is that all of their belongings, tools, food are at the farm. Perhaps they considered transferring all these things too dangerous.
3) *setting up speakers* : well they did have the fireworks set up. And they did have some sounds traps (like the alarm clock). But sure, they could have done more in this department. Keep in mind this was what they had only after 1 year. And in a world where sounds kills you its hard to get a lot of stuff done
3B) *Draw them away from the house* : we do not know exactly how smart these creatures are, but these are predators and looked like they have some degree of intelligence. If they blasted sounds to get them "away" from their home its possible that the creatures would only figure out that they are being distracted... its a trick that can probably only be used a few times. This would explain why at the end of the movie the creature would not leave the farm and continously was hunting for them.... the jig was up.
View all replies >