Underwater - There's a Hole in the Bottom of the Sea

The Something Awful Forums > The Finer Arts > Cinema Discusso > Underwater - There's a Hole in the Bottom of the Sea

Xenomrph: Dec 9, 2005; AvP Nerd/Fanboy/Shill

Just got back from watching Underwater, I liked it quite a bit. I liked how (largely) grounded it felt, things felt like practical sets and not CGI constructs when the characters were on-screen, the props and costumes had a tactile, "used" feel to them, it made things more believable.

If I had to fault the movie for anything, it's the pacing - it moves a little too quick and doesn't quite give its scenes enough room to breathe. It's not as manic as, say, Rise of Skywalker, and I suspect it was trying to keep things moving to keep the tension and the sense of urgency going, but it's still just a *little* too quick. The movie does know how to slow down, and it's got some cool tense parts, but even those could have been made better by slowing things down a tad.

I agree with a point that Jeremy Jahns made in his review that the movie leans on its "lack of a budget" CGI, and mostly uses it to its advantage - the exterior undersea stuff is murky and inscrutable, and most of the time that works. However there are other times where it feels like you're meant to spot something in the murk and a more skilled filmmaker/editor/CGI wizard might have framed it better or made it clearer so more than once I found myself frustrated at what I couldn't see instead of creeped-out by what I thought I saw.

I'm a big fan of the "underwater thriller/horror" niche subgenre for whatever reason, maybe it's the inherent claustrophobia and ever-present dangers before you even introduce whatever the particular movie's monsters/hazards/conflicts end up being. The deep ocean is just fuckin' scary, man.

For some non-movie fun in the genre, I recommend checking out the videogames Soma and Narcosis. They're both great rides and for very different reasons.

Going back to an earlier post, I was reminded pretty heavily of the comic book The Wake (BIG spoilers for both The Wake and Underwater) when you learn that there's a shitload of the mer-creatures, and once the big one shows up and they start following the escape pods to the surface I was starting to think Underwater was going to follow 'The Wake's bonkers "twist" and have a full-on surface-world collapse as the end of the movie. I'm hesitant to recommend The Wake to fans of the genre looking for more non-movie fun, because it's got two distinct halves; without going into crazy spoilers, the first half is real good and is extremely reminiscent of 'Underwater' (or vice versa, 'The Wake' came first), and the second half starts out great and then devolves into nonsense and kind of sours the entire experience. Like, read it for the first half I guess, but expect things to nosedive in the last act.

Cool movie, looking forward to buying it when it comes out on video.

# ¿ Jan 11, 2020 06:07

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 27, 2024 15:09

Xenomrph: Dec 9, 2005; AvP Nerd/Fanboy/Shill

Space Cadet Omoly posted:

Wait, what? I didn't see that, was that an after the credits thing?

Think about who you're quoting.

God Hole posted:

there's a shot from within the bridge that lingers on her face as she looks down that chronologically occurs after she blows the station, yes.

I took that to be more like the end of 'Sunshine', where time essentially becomes meaningless at the moment of detonation.

# ¿ Jan 12, 2020 19:16

Xenomrph: Dec 9, 2005; AvP Nerd/Fanboy/Shill

BiggestBatman posted:

This take is reinforced by the ending titles of the film too. While we're accustomed to horror movies ending with a sign that the monster hasn't quite been defeated, here what we get is a newspaper headline that the company is going to start drilling again.

I believe the implication is that the creatures may still be down there, and the company knew about them and was covering them up essentially the whole time (the movie both opens and ends with newspaper headlines about strange unconfirmed sightings), and when Norah finds the Captain's old stuff at the abandoned Sheppard station, the map inside his locker implies that he knew about the creatures in some capacity, and that the drill site was specifically chosen because that's where they were.

# ¿ Jan 13, 2020 06:37

Xenomrph: Dec 9, 2005; AvP Nerd/Fanboy/Shill

Sphere is a great novel, but I actually prefer the movie. It�s paced better and it moves the whole �causally, we can�t survive otherwise the ship doesn�t go back in time� thing from the last 3 pages of the book to the middle of the movie where it can actually work as a point of tension and conflict.

# ¿ Jan 14, 2020 19:42

Xenomrph: Dec 9, 2005; AvP Nerd/Fanboy/Shill

gently caress it, I'll take the bait.

SuperMechagodzilla posted:

In Alien 1, the higher-ups in the corporation accidentally program the Mother computer to kill the crew because (as with Skynet) Mother takes their orders more seriously than they themselves do. So a simple order to obtain alien samples for profit is executed with ruthless efficiency where a human would have some �commonsense� self-limitation.

Wrong, Special Order 937 full on says "crew expendable", like it's literally in the order itself. There was no accident there, it's not like this was a HAL9000 situation where the AI had conflicting orders and went nuts. Special Order 937 flat out says "get specimens, and if the crew gets in the way then kill them".

SuperMechagodzilla posted:

In Alien 2, the corporation is presented as totally neutral. The bad stuff happens because greedy, scheming criminal Burke violates company policy, while Ripley works with the company - for the company - to secure their operations and stop Burke.

Wrong, Burke goes out of his way to insist to Ripley that "he's an okay guy", in contrast to the apparently common view that the Company isn't exactly viewed in a positive light. Burke is a self-serving toadie, but he does what he does because he knows that if he doesn't act as fast as he can, that someone else will. That's why he even tries to cut Ripley in on the deal when she finds out what he did. Nothing Burke does violates "company policy", as he's fully confident that he'll not only get away with it, but that he'll get a huge payday for doing so. Ripley isn't acting in the company's best interest, she openly advocates destroying the atmosphere processor and the colony - when Burke brings up the colony's substantial dollar value, she says they can "bill her".

SuperMechagodzilla posted:

But this isn�t due to the company doing anything atypically egregious for a corporation. Rather, it�s because Ripley is out of her gourd having apocalyptic visions.

You're right that it's not atypically egregious for a company to be horrendously shortsighted (and that's objectively a real big fuckin' problem, which Ripley correctly takes issue with), but her "apocalyptic visions" have a very real basis given what the Company is attempting to harness.

SuperMechagodzilla posted:

Like, as a direct contrast, W-Y does nothing to disguise the fact that they manufacture bioweapons. It�s all legal and above-the-board.

No it's not - Burke's plan involves trying to sneak a dangerous organism past quarantine by deliberately infecting Ripley and Newt, and scheming to kill the Marine survivors to eliminate them as witnesses. That tells us that even if the Company's bioweapons division is common knowledge, that there's still rules and regulations that they have to follow.

Like, I think you might need to re-watch the movies; there's a lot of surface-level text stuff you're using to support your readings that just full on isn't in the movies.
Why we're talking about this in the Underwater thread is beyond me, though.

Xenomrph fucked around with this message at 08:15 on Jan 16, 2020

# ¿ Jan 16, 2020 08:11

Xenomrph: Dec 9, 2005; AvP Nerd/Fanboy/Shill

SuperMechagodzilla posted:

I did not say that Mother is like HAL (who accidentally develops a humanlike psychology after being programmed to lie). I wrote that mother is like Skynet (who unexpectedly takes her programming to its logical extreme). You need to be careful to prevent mistakes like this. Read carefully and be mindful of context.

I referenced HAL because it�s the closest thing to how you were (mis)characterizing Skynet, who (depending on the movie you�re watching) either decides humanity is a threat and preemptively strikes (T1), tries to defend itself (T2), or actively plots humanity�s destruction (T3).

quote:

Since this is not the Alien thread, I�ll quickly isolate the specific point where you get tripped up. Using only information from the movie Alien (and none of the comics or whatever), answer the following:

1) Who gives[/i Special Order 937?
2) Who is it given to?
3) [i]When[i] is it given?

[B]Answer:[b] Mother herself gives the Special Order directly to Ash shortly after the characters wake up. The order is not given by anyone at the company; they are out of communications range at that point.

If you answered that �the order is given by Weyland-Yutani executives to Mother long before the events of the film�, that is incorrect. That plot is a retcon of the film�s events, from various EU sources. The first line of the order is �Nostromo rerouted to new co-ordinates.� That�s past tense, meaning the ship was already en route to this specific location when the order was written.

Also, Mother�s programmers obviously didn�t [i]intentionally authorize her to kill the CEO of the company or blow up the Earth in the pursuit of an alien. But those are unavoidable possible interpretations of her �First Priority�. That�s the joke: mother is super-humanly capitalist.

Special Order 937 is pre-existing, Mother didn�t write it, it�s a contingency present in her routines whose conditions are met and then she acts on them, using Ash as her surrogate. Dallas explains that the ship met �certain conditions� which is why they were re-routed and woken up - Mother detects a signal, Special Order 937 takes effect, and she follows it (re-routing to the signal with intent to acquire a lifeform, all other priorities rescinded).

There�s more you can say about Mother�s prior knowledge and intent, but it�s probably best saved for the Alien thread.

quote:

Everyone at the start of the film is well aware that bad things are going to happen, but they�ve resigned themselves to it - trudging towards disaster because everyone feels powerless to effect change. The company�s like �eh, we�ll figure something out�.

How so? I don�t get the impression the characters know anything untoward is happening, at least until Norah finds the Captain�s locker.
If anything the �company is in on it� subplot feels a little half-baked, since it�s relegated to the opening and ending credits and one blink-and-you-miss-it bit in the locker that Norah doesn�t even react to.
I mean, unless her lack of reaction is your point? Even then, I�d say the characters aren�t �expecting� danger so much as they might be expecting a lack of response if something bad happened, which is typical of pretty much any corporation nowadays.

# ¿ Jan 16, 2020 18:09

Xenomrph: Dec 9, 2005; AvP Nerd/Fanboy/Shill

Alternately, the first line is providing context and the rest is the standing Special Order, pre-written prior to departure, that came into effect after getting re-routed.
Keep in mind that the Nostromo was re-routed to the signal, Ash was added to the crew at the last minute prior to departure, and both Ash and Mother mis-characterized the signal as a distress beacon despite knowing it was a warning. The Nostromo�s entire trip there was a pre-planned attempt to make a low-key investigation of a signal that someone at the Company knew was of interest because the signal had been detected and decoded before the Nostromo even left port. Whether it was just a rogue actor at the Company (similar to Burke) or was a widely known corporate decision or something is unknown.

# ¿ Jan 16, 2020 21:28

Xenomrph: Dec 9, 2005; AvP Nerd/Fanboy/Shill

Your interpretation would make more sense if Ash hadn�t been swapped just prior to departure, Mother hadn�t mischaracterized the message, and the ship hadn�t been re-routed to the signal. You�re presuming Mother is the one who did the re-routing, not the Company at the point of departure.

I mean if we want to go the EU route, the movie�s novelization is pretty specific that it was a pre-determined decision independent of Mother and not her being some kind of homicidal rogue actor, so it�s less of a �retcon� and more of �present in the movie from release�.

Also you�re saying that the hyper-literal computer that only responds to command overrides is able and willing to take the initiative and fabricate a custom special order on the fly that deliberately includes the phrase �crew expendable� because it is solely programmed to operate in the Company�s hyper-capitalist best interests no matter the cost? I�m not sure you get to have it both ways. :raise:

Xenomrph fucked around with this message at 22:39 on Jan 16, 2020

# ¿ Jan 16, 2020 22:31

Xenomrph: Dec 9, 2005; AvP Nerd/Fanboy/Shill

Sir Kodiak posted:

Nobody is saying that Mother is a homicidal rogue actor.

SMG was, he was saying she was acting with ruthless efficiency in excess of what the Company or a rational human would want, including killing the crew. This is only the case if she herself wrote Special Order 937, which includes killing the crew. That would make her a homicidal rogue actor.

However...

quote:

She's acting on priorities established by the company. The company's configuration of the computer makes gathering a specimen of an alien lifeform a high enough priority that it overrides all other considerations. The logical conclusion of this, as Mother explains to the science officer, is that the crew is rendered expendable.

This i essentially agree with, the Company�s interests and protocols are present, Mother knows them, and acts to fulfill them - it�s called Special Order 937. Whether Mother literally �wrote� the specific words on the screen for Ash�s benefit is semantics if she�s carrying out the Company�s directive of getting an Alien at all costs.

quote:

unlike Mother, [Ash] has sympathies for the crew.

There�s no evidence of this - Ash doesn�t even know the crew, having joined the ship just before departure. All of his interactions we see involve either directly or indirectly procuring the Alien, studying it, or keeping it safe.

quote:

Ash joining the crew at the last minute helps sell that they don't know he's a robot. It's just part of the ongoing automation the company is doing.

it would be more convincing that this was all random happenstance if Ash had been present with the crew doing mundane stuff for an extended period. I don�t see how putting him on the ship has anything to do with �ongoing automation�, which you seem to have inferred out of thin air to explain what�s otherwise a hell of a coincidence - a coincidence so conspicuous that Ripley and Dallas pick up on it. It sure is a lucky break that the specific ship that happens to randomly stumble across an extraterrestrial signal also happens to have an unflinchingly loyal synthetic join the crew right before departure.

Also more evidence that the Company knew where it was sending the Nostromo and what to expect: Special Order 937 specifies gathering a lifeform - how would Mother know there even was a lifeform to gather?

quote:

In regards to the timing of when the re-routing happens, we see the navigation system activate at the start of the movie after the ship has already been in space. This is the re-routing:

And, of course, if a destination is set prior to departure, that's known as a "route." Not that we need this sort of parsing of the language, given we see the re-routing happen.

We don�t see any sort of change in course, it�s just displaying its location. The re-routing is that the ship was originally meant to go to Earth, and it doesn�t do that.

quote:

Also, as a final note, I gotta say I'm baffled by the idea that something being in the novelization of the movie makes it "present in the movie from release." That's a weird one.

Because the book is based on the script, and the author isn�t being influenced by outside �EU� materials or even other movies in the series that might have retconned something (since none exist) so the conclusion that gathering a specimen was a Company directive is either something genuinely present in the script, or at worst a logical conclusion that a person could infer from it.

Edit�. SMG, your point about �depoliticizing� is an interesting angle to take, but I ultimately don�t agree with it although I respect your right to hold it.

Xenomrph fucked around with this message at 00:48 on Jan 17, 2020

# ¿ Jan 17, 2020 00:44

Xenomrph: Dec 9, 2005; AvP Nerd/Fanboy/Shill

Sir Kodiak posted:

Carrying out the company's orders bluntly in a manner a human wouldn't is not going rogue. A human commander wouldn't say "you're expendable," they'd just treat people that way. But the end result is the same.

I dunno man, when SMG's point is "Mother is willing to get people killed, something the Company wouldn't approve of", which hinges on the Company not approving of Special Order 937. Either Mother wrote it, in opposition to what the Company would approve of, making her a rogue actor, or the Company wrote it, meaning they approve of it. You can't really have it both ways.

Sir Kodiak posted:

Ash's final words to the crew are literally "you have my sympathies," in a conversation in which he talks about how he wishes he shared the xenomorph's lack of conscience and remorse. And we shouldn't be surprised to find a robot that is a little too human in a Ridley Scott movie.

While this is a salient point, I stand by Ash not caring about the crew. Given his (hilarious) smile after saying it, I interpret "you have my sympathies" less as "I am genuinely in sorrow over the predicament you're in" and more of "good loving luck, you're gonna need it."

Sir Kodiak posted:

You don't see the connection between a robot crew member and the automation of ship functions? It's a literal automaton replacing a human crew member.

By that logic, why not replace the whole crew and automate the whole thing? That would save on the need for life support or supplies. Ash's disguise is meant to be duplicitous, the crew isn't meant to know he's a robot; that's why he's in cryosleep with them (contrasted with, say, David from Prometheus), why he eats food, and why he doesn't disclose to the crew that he's not a human being. The Company hot-swapped a member of the crew with an unflinchingly loyal ringer, just before sending the ship on a new course that the rest of the crew wasn't aware of.

Sir Kodiak posted:

And you can tell this is something the company does because the highest authority on the ship is a computer, that re-routes the ship without the crew being involved.

Mother maintains functions on the ship while the crew sleeps, but the highest authority is Dallas. If Mother was the highest authority, I'm not so sure that functions like self-destructing the ship (and thereby endangering Company assets) would be outside her control.
Additionally, this presupposes Mother re-routed the ship, and that the course change wasn't made at departure by the Company.

Sir Kodiak posted:

the source of the misunderstanding of the movie represented in the EU may be the novelization.

This is a salient point, but not exactly for the reason you're saying - the EU does miss a lot of points from the movies, and WY's portrayal is a big one that's cropped up fairly often. The EU (and by proxy, a lot of viewers) view Weyland Yutani as all-powerful, actively malicious and, to use an imprecise phrase, "cartoonishly evil". It's something that even the fan base has picked up on and objected to in recent times. WY isn't all-powerful in the movies - the only Company representative present at Ripley's interrogation in 'Aliens' is Burke, everyone else is some kind of government official. There's a reason why the Company's actions in 'Alien' are so duplicitous, sending a civilian crew with a sleeper agent out to a "distress signal" under the guise of not knowing what's going on. Or why, in 'Aliens', Burke is essentially acting solo. The closest you get to the Company showing some kind of "power" is in Alien3, when the Company representative shows up in a warship alongside armed PMCs who don't hesitate to kill their own employees.

The Company in the movies isn't "cartoonishly evil", it's amoral to a degree that's meant to make the audience say "the Alien isn't the bad guy, the Company and the kind of culture and employees it breeds are". Like Ripley says, you don't see the Aliens loving each other over for a goddamn percentage. It's not actively trying to murder anyone, but it sure doesn't care if it tramples over some lives if it thinks it can get away with it.
As I said before, at the time 'Alien' and 'Aliens' were made (and you could make a similar case with Robocop, although that's arguably more complex), the portrayal of such an amoral corporation is meant to shock and disgust the audience.

The unfortunate joke is that in today's corporate culture, "the evil corporation" isn't just a well-worn trope, it's a literal facet of modern society in real life. The Deepwater Horizon disaster is the Nostromo incident in real life - "crew expendable" wasn't literally written in big green letters where the rig's crew could read it, but BP's pursuit of the Almighty Dollar was more valuable to them than human lives. The American healthcare industry and pharmaceutical corporations make Weyland Yutani's casual disregard for human life look like amateur hour.

That's what takes the wind out of Tian Corporation's sails - seeing them do a "coverup" and having it just thrown on the screen at the last minute of the movie isn't going to shock anyone, nor is it giving a particularly scathing commentary on anything we don't already see every day in real life, so it just feels like "why bother?"

SuperMechagodzilla posted:

the fish men aren�t valuable, and the company doesn�t pursue them. The mining operation is simply profitable enough to offset the cost of the inevitable disasters.

This is what feels like a mixed message - Norah notices the plans to drill in the precise spot where the fish men are, but no attention is given to that point. So were Tian after the fish men or not? Having Tian drilling for the fish men but disguising it as a mining operation is a potentially interesting twist, but the movie only barely even hints at that being the case and then does nothing with it, almost barely paying it lip-service in the end credits because of a "cover-up".
Okay, so if Tian doesn't care about the fish men, why cover anything up? When the disaster hits, the crew surmises it's an earthquake and that alone almost destabilizes the reactor, which would vaporize the mining rig. And that's the obvious way any bystander would read it - an earthquake damaged the rig, and then it exploded. What is there to cover up?

On that topic, maybe I missed it during the end credits but does it specify that there are only the two survivors of the disaster? Like, when we first see the captain he indicates that he personally launched other people out in life pods, but he opted to stay behind.

# ¿ Jan 17, 2020 03:38

Xenomrph: Dec 9, 2005; AvP Nerd/Fanboy/Shill

SuperMechagodzilla posted:

I wrote nothing of the sort. Like, nothing about �approval� at all. I�ve warned you to be careful.

Yes, you did:

SuperMechagodzilla posted:

In Alien 1, the higher-ups in the corporation accidentally program the Mother computer to kill the crew because (as with Skynet) Mother takes their orders more seriously than they themselves do. So a simple order to obtain alien samples for profit is executed with ruthless efficiency where a human would have some �commonsense� self-limitation.

Self-limitation implies they wouldn't do what Mother did, ergo they wouldn't approve of it.

Also, knock off the condescending "be careful" nonsense, thanks.

quote:

No, they are not drilling for fishmen. That�s ridiculous - like saying that the companies producing carbon emissions are trying to obtain Australian wildfires and dead koala bears. There is zero ambiguity here. They are not drilling for fishmen.

Lol okay, I suppose you weren't paying attention. Again, what was there to "cover up"? The characters spell out a ready-made natural explanation for the disaster that removes all culpability from the corporation.

I'm trying to give you the benefit of the doubt, but I think we'll just have to agree to disagree. Serves me right for taking the bait I guess. :shrug:

Xenomrph fucked around with this message at 06:11 on Jan 17, 2020

# ¿ Jan 17, 2020 06:07

Xenomrph: Dec 9, 2005; AvP Nerd/Fanboy/Shill

Stupid_Sexy_Flander posted:

Saw it tonight, and frankly it was a pretty good film. Didn't start out great, but got better as it went along.

2 questions though, cause I got confused about a point.

1: Why did the captain suddenly ascend? I know they were fighting with the merman thingie on that platform, but suddenly he rockets up but he's not blasting out air bubbles or anything, just flying upwards. Did I miss something?

2: What the hell caused that bigaas explosion when he decided to detonate himself? I saw him hit the button but I don't recall any sort of tech talk earlier in the film about these suits being fusion powered or whatever.

Not trying to be nitpicky, and I did enjoy the movie, I just have the feeling I might have missed a thing or two while eating popcorn.

I thought one of the fish men grabbed him and was dragging him up.

As for the explosion, I think his suit was failing because of the rapid pressure decrease from ascending too fast. I don�t know if it would have caused an explosion like that but that�s how I rationalized it.

# ¿ Jan 17, 2020 18:06

Xenomrph: Dec 9, 2005; AvP Nerd/Fanboy/Shill

Stupid_Sexy_Flander posted:

Good point on the first one. I didn't see that happen but honestly I could have missed it while grabbing popcorn.

Second one, I'm still confused about, because the first guy imploding was messy and weird, but not exactly a giant explosion like his was

I think that might be the difference - the first one was an implosion because the suit�s integrity was compromised, and the captain�s suit was an explosion because it was rapidly going from a high-pressure environment to a lower-pressure one. Maybe? Like that makes sense in my head I guess. :shrug:

# ¿ Jan 17, 2020 23:32

Xenomrph: Dec 9, 2005; AvP Nerd/Fanboy/Shill

Sir Kodiak posted:

Auto companies didn't lay off every worker simultaneously and replace them all with robots on the same day. Yet it's still accurate to say they're increasingly automating their factories.

They didn't lay everyone off at once, but it was abundantly clear to those being replaced that the changes were coming as they were gradually replaced by non-humanoid robots. Similarly on the Nostromo, there's distinctly non-humanoid automation that would replace human operations - there's an autodoc in the medical bay in place of a doctor, and a food replicator that would take the place of a cook, and myriad computers on the bridge that allow 7 civilians to perform the functions of an interstellar spacecraft that, in today's world, would require a team of trained astronauts supported by dozens of planetside mission control specialists. Not to mention Mother herself.

Auto companies also didn't roll out humanoid laborers meant to integrate with the crew, and ultimately deceive them as they were being replaced one by one until there were no humans left. No, the guy who normally did the welding was told "we're replacing you with an articulated robot arm that can do your job six times as fast as you can", and then they installed the robot arm.

Like, think about what you're trying to suggest - the Company, in its efforts to cut costs, are going to invest millions in R&D to create lifelike humanoid robots that can integrate with humans in order to replace them one by one. In doing so, they're going to make sure that these humanoid robots can pass for human in every regard to the point that they can effortlessly deceive the people they work alongside, which means they're nominally consuming the same resources a human would.
In doing so, they're going to gradually replace each member of a ship's crew one by one, unbeknownst to the still-human members of the crew, until there's one human left who doesn't realize all his friends are robots or something. Like it's a really funny and sadistic idea I guess (and could make for the plot of its own movie, like a robotic "invasion of the body snatchers"), but it's the opposite of practical in a corporate setting. :v:

To clarify, there are reasons to have humanoid robots, and reasons to make them seem convincingly lifelike, but the people working with them know what's going on right from the start (i.e., Bishop in 'Aliens'). Even if Ash being an android was beneficial to the crew, the crew would have known ahead of time - heaven forbid something malfunction with him, or he stumble off a ladder and crack his head open, and the rest of the crew is totally caught off guard and can't help him because they had no idea he was a robot and didn't prepare for that.

No, Ash's presence wasn't some kind of corporate automation initiative, he was there as an act of deception. What you're suggesting is something you'd expect from a bizarre corporate apologist looking for the "good" justification for obviously bad behavior.

Xenomrph fucked around with this message at 22:03 on Jan 18, 2020

# ¿ Jan 18, 2020 22:00

Xenomrph: Dec 9, 2005; AvP Nerd/Fanboy/Shill

Per a recent interview, Underwater's director confirmed that in the last act the big honking monster is meant to be Cthulhu.

# ¿ Jan 19, 2020 23:08

Xenomrph: Dec 9, 2005; AvP Nerd/Fanboy/Shill

Inspector Hound posted:

Ok that's what I figured. I didn't catch any references hinting at that beyond his appearance though, no one mentioned graduating from Miskatonic University or anything.

There�s an hour-long interview with the director on YouTube and he says that that was pretty much intentional. His logic was that that would be how �cosmic horror� would really play out - you wouldn�t know you were looking at it until suddenly you were looking at it, and like the characters you have to just mentally deal with what you�re seeing without any time to brace yourself. He felt blindsiding the audience was the best way to achieve that.

It�s a neat interview, he spends the first half talking about technical filmmaking stuff, and the second half talking about spoiler plot stuff.

https://youtu.be/SK0sk6JXYyI

# ¿ Jan 25, 2020 06:25

Xenomrph: Dec 9, 2005; AvP Nerd/Fanboy/Shill

Yarbald posted:

fuckin� double post: saw the Color Out of Space for the second time tonight, movie is loving awesome, go see it

Is that in theatres, or on a streaming platform or anything?

# ¿ Jan 26, 2020 20:25

Xenomrph: Dec 9, 2005; AvP Nerd/Fanboy/Shill

escape artist posted:

What an absolute piece of poo poo. I can't believe the hype it got from this thread. It wasn't even okay. It was bad. It has the Game of Thrones problem in that you can't see half of what it even happening.

The visibility thing was probably at least partially intentional, because visibility at the bottom of the ocean tends to be awful.

# ¿ Jan 28, 2020 05:57

Xenomrph: Dec 9, 2005; AvP Nerd/Fanboy/Shill

I think the �cant see anything� stuff may have worked for me because the inability to discern your surroundings and whether you�re safe or not is one of the things that scares me the most about deep ocean in real life.

# ¿ Jan 28, 2020 16:53

Xenomrph: Dec 9, 2005; AvP Nerd/Fanboy/Shill

While poking around on the Amazon Prime app I noticed that 47 Meters Down: Uncaged is available to stream with Prime. Is that worth my time? I haven�t seen the first one.

For that matter, is the first one worth my time? It�s not available on Prime right now but maybe it�ll get rotated in someday. :shrug:

# ¿ Feb 25, 2020 01:24

Xenomrph: Dec 9, 2005; AvP Nerd/Fanboy/Shill

LemonLimeSoda posted:

I liked it
Picture a Halloween movie where Michael Meyers is a shark and they're all scuba diving in underwater ancient ruins

I watched it the other night and I dug it! The blind sharks were creepy-looking and effectively menacing, whether they were just prowling around or actively attacking. The jump scare when one of the sharks bites the little drone thing got me real good, Jesus Christ.
The bit with the dad monologuing and then getting murdered mid-sentence had to be an intentional Deep Blue Sea reference, right? I mean the more it went on the more obvious it was where it was going and what was going to happen.

# ¿ Mar 12, 2020 19:22

Xenomrph: Dec 9, 2005; AvP Nerd/Fanboy/Shill

My Best Buy preorder says it�s not out until the 14th, hm.

# ¿ Apr 7, 2020 20:42

Xenomrph: Dec 9, 2005; AvP Nerd/Fanboy/Shill

Can anyone spoil the alternate ending?

# ¿ Apr 21, 2020 02:30

Xenomrph: Dec 9, 2005; AvP Nerd/Fanboy/Shill

A4R8 posted:

C�thulhu in the same universe as the xenomorph makes sense.

There�s an Aliens comic where this all but happens.

https://www.avpgalaxy.net/website/a...ens-elder-gods/

# ¿ Apr 28, 2020 04:32

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 27, 2024 15:09

Xenomrph: Dec 9, 2005; AvP Nerd/Fanboy/Shill

Deep Rising, Virus, Ghost Ship, and Event Horizon are all the same movie, but all four are worth watching for their own reasons.

# ¿ Jun 8, 2020 00:20

The Something Awful Forums > The Finer Arts > Cinema Discusso > Underwater - There's a Hole in the Bottom of the Sea