MovieChat Forums > Larva (2005) Discussion > Why 'MorphMan'?

Why 'MorphMan'?

posted 13 years ago by WarpedRecord
4 replies | jump to latest

I bought this film as "Larva," but I see the original title is "MorphMan." Why is that? So it can be packaged with "MosquitoMan" and the like?

There's no morphing here to speak of. Actually, there wasn't enough larva for my tastes either. It was a lot of batlike creatures popping out of people's stomachs and flying around. Still, it was well made and entertaining, even if it didn't quite live up to the cover.

[–] hatr 12 years ago

Not a bads film but `morphman' makes no sense. I also saw it as Larva

[–] WarpedRecord 12 years ago

Yes, "Larva" is a much better title, and certainly less awkward than "MorphMan" (which isn't appropriate anyway).

[–] Woodyanders 9 years ago

Agreed. It's a terrible and misleading title that makes this film sound like a third-rate cash-in of "Ant Man."

I am the Duke of IMDb bio writers! I am A#1!

[–] WarpedRecord 9 years ago

You are correct as always, Wood-man! "MorphMan" sounds generic and stale, while "Larva" is a cool and gross title that will find its audience.