The Creature? - The Tunnel (2011) Discussion

[–] bps3013 13 years ago

Watched this last night with the Missus and we were both pretty rattled by it, especially when the reporter listened to the recording from the bell room for the first time and then again when the transit guard met his horrific fate. Very strong stuff indeed. As to what the creature was, it seemed to definitely have some sort of intelligence as it used their night-vision cam, and when it dragged the reporter into the water it seemed to be chuckling/laughing as it "spoke". This would imply that it was once human, or a human offspring that went wrong. The way it moved suggested superhuman attributes, but I don't think there's anything inherently supernatural about it. The best horror films are the ones that force you to fill in the blanks yourself, and The Tunnel has accomplished this well. And for the record, it took me a bit longer to fall asleep last night than usual.

:)

reply

[–] m3-ryan 13 years ago

Is it a carzy homeless dude who's being eating people for too long?
Or is it supernatural? I couldn't tell.

reply

[–] rissa-rissa 13 years ago

"So is it a homeless man who has become insane and whose physical attributes changed due to years of living underground,...."
~~~~

That's what I was leaning towards, although it very well could have been a victim of government "experimenting," like you said. Either way, I enjoyed this film a lot. I'm a female and just finished watching this at night, alone in the dark and it was pretty spooky. If I had to compare this with another flick it'd be [REC] and The Descent, and maybe also Them(2006).

reply

[–] turistas902 13 years ago

WHEN...
the man came in and told them they had to leave, and once he said "had to go" the thing ran right by him and took him.

scared you? i jumped badly.

KILL OR BE KILLED
FINAL DESTINATION 5

reply

[–] iceguy0077 12 years ago

thanks for reminding me why i didn't like the movie, jump scares aren't scary

reply

[–] kdp90125 12 years ago

sometimes a jump scare setup is sooo bad that the jumpscare is laughable - i thought they were ok in this flick

Most jumpscares in a film?

Insdious has the most - *beep*
Shutter
Coming Soon

reply

[–] l_Atol_l 13 years ago

Them? Seriously? If you can compare this to Them (assuming you mean Ils) you most certainly haven't watched it. In that case you could might as well compare it to The Strangers...

reply

[–] tranxHDR 13 years ago

For the budget this was a pretty good horror film. wished they showed more scenes of the creature and at least one clear shot so that we can see what it really looks like. to me it's probably a mutated human being that has lived down there in the sewers for many years and adapted to living in dark cave-like conditions. not sure why it seems to have superhuman abilities. guess the filmmakers thought that would make the movie more exciting.

reply

[–] hexrei 13 years ago

You'd need multiple generations to do that. You can live in a dark cave all your life and you won't get superfast and strong.

reply

[–] Strazdamonas 13 years ago

He wanst super fast r super strong. living in dark cave all your life will certainly allow you to develo higher sensitivity to light, better hearing and would probably lower your smell reception. also it would train you to use the caves well which may require some physical strenght, thus you have advantage.

----------
I've been vandalized by Elvis! -Ernest, Ernest Goes to Jail (1990)

reply

[–] oliver-nordgren 12 years ago

Have you even watched the movie? In the scene where Nat har run off by herself whilst being hunted by the creature and she turns and faces the corner of the room you can see through the night vision camera the entrance of the room and that effing creature climbs the motherf roof! No, that aint supernatural, every bum can do that, of course.

And the scene where the guard tells them to leave and get jumped by the monster, that wasn't superfast?

That thing is not just a ordinary bum living in the tunnels, collecting eyes and *beep*
I rest my case.

reply

[–] Der_Schnibbler 11 years ago

I think you need to look up "supernatural" in the dictionary.

--
"Den Gleichen Gleiches, den Ungleichen Ungleiches."

reply

[–] Hancockenstein 9 years ago

lol couldn't you have made your case without being such a condescending twat?

Plot hole - Aspect of a film that is misunderstood or missed while using your smart phone.

reply

[–] jeff-1076 8 years ago

Not only super-fast but super-strong as well considering that it picked up the guard like he was made of styrofoam and kept going without even slowing down.

reply

[–] Mrpinkeye 13 years ago

i think it was charlie sheen

reply

[–] eric2959 13 years ago

it's the aussie version of C.H.U.D. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0087015/

reply

[–] joshdestardi 13 years ago

I have no idea what it was; I prefer to think it was something other than a C.H.U.D. though...something 'new' and 'unknown'.

Doesn't make since why the government wouldn't want to flush it out, especially if there was only one.

Interesting concept, but meh.

reply

[–] Zius_Maximus 13 years ago

Loving the theories people. :) Especially the one about it being Charlie Sheen haha.

I would go so far as to say it ties with Wolf Creek as one of the best Aussie Horror films, and the best internationally of it's genre(Docu-Drama, Found Footage, Blair Witch, Cloverfield genre).

HEEEEERES JOHNNY!

reply

[–] anglophilejen 11 years ago

Have you seen "Lake Mungo?" If not, highly recommend! That movie was brilliant!

reply

[–] BoundByHonor 13 years ago

So is it a homeless man who has become insane and whose physical attributes changed due to years of living underground

When you get a glimpse of the creature shortly before it lunges at the camera when Nat is holding it you get an idea it is pretty deformed. Genetic devolution of that caliber would take years to accomplish and possible multiple generations of inbreeding as someone else pointed out. If you lived in a dark and damp environment you would deform, but not at that rate and deformation like that probably wouldn't occur in your own lifetime.

Going by the scarce clues the filmmakers left behind I'm leaning towards a sociopathic mutant. When they were looking for Tangles did anyone else notice the big red door they went through which had the radioactive symbol and the biohazard warning? My best guess would be a schizophrenic bum that fell into some pretty nasty contaminated *beep* and over the years deformed by the means of accelerated mutation due to extreme radiation poisoning.

By the way, when it was dunking Nat's head under the water in the lake it was saying something when it pulled her back up. I'm so glad to see someone else point that out because I was starting to think I was the only person who noticed that (none of my friends whom have seen the movie seemed to notice it).

I think the creature was reciting a black prayer from a satanic bible. I make this inference based on two things:
[1] The cult like altar they found which gives religious/spiritual implications
[2] One of the times it pulled Nat up from the water I could've sworn I heard it say something along the lines of, "the blood is the life..." I could be wrong, but that's what it sounded like to me.

Do not be fooled by what I am saying...try to hear what it is I am not saying

reply

[–] CyrusLemont 13 years ago

I'm 100% certain when she gets back above the water at about 1:18:12, the creature says "muahahahaha I've never dealt with a human/thing like this before" then it mumbles a few things after that that but I can't them out.

So you can be sure it has some sort of human background, maybe I'm the only one who noticed this, but when she first encounters the creature, it looks like a monkey? And then they go to that room where it keeps the eyes and it looks like it's a broken cage, perhaps the government was doing experiments on them and one escaped? (LOL Planet of the Mutated Apes)

reply

[–] muTNTninja 13 years ago

I have a theory, perhaps a bit far fetched, but still.

Far into the movie the remaining crew members enter a room with a big "nest" surrounded by bear bottles. Someone in this thread also mentioned the nest and referred to it as a shrine, another person mentioned the creature was doing a satanic prayer when pulling Nat under water,
My theory is that maybe some homeless or other people made a satanic ritual at the nest/shrine and got possessed by some form of demons?

Bear bottles prove someone must have been there, probably before the nest/shrine was even there, since I don't think anyone would sit down for a couple of bears while being chased by a monster. Also the creatures behavior indicates it might have been human once (filming the crew and talking for example).

Another thing is the collection of eyes, placed in the middle of the shrine. Sacrifice?

I just watched this and have only seen it once, but I think I saw the creature wearing clothes, another thing pointing to a previous human direction.

reply

[–] Loveunderlaw 12 years ago

WRONG! That's not how or what a Satanist would do, stop believing all the hype, & lies you're hearing from your religious organization about Left-Hand Path people. We're NOT the monsters they portray us as, you should be more worried about all of the sickos out there, doing so many killings, rapes, & thieving in "God's" name.

________________________________________
http://www.youtube.com/user/loveunderlaw

reply

[–] wight1984 12 years ago

Oh grow up.

Satanism as a part of Christian myth pre-exists the juvenile attempts to turn it into a 'real religion' in the late twentieth century.

Quite frankly, if you're going to choose such a ridiculous label for yourself then you deserve whatever misunderstandings you get.

reply

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] wight1984 12 years ago

First of all I was NOT talking to your religious wacko

Lol. I'm an atheist, I just don't think that people should have to alter the way they use terms like 'Satanist' just because some people have, very recently, decided to use it to mean something different.

There are also 'real life vampires' walking around but that doesn't mean that the original definition is suddenly false just because a few attention-seeking idiots have put a twist on the word.

did I ******g say that "I was a Satanist"? No you ******g moron I DIDN'T

Actually, you did lump yourself in with that group:

"We're NOT the monsters they portray us as"

Pretty funny to call me a moron for making assumptions given that you seem to have assumed that I'm Christian.

a proud Luciferian Pagan to be precise.

If you're not thirteen or younger, you ought to be very ashamed.

There are so many inconsistencies in Islam, Christianity, & Judaism I don't even know where to begin.

Whilst 'Luciferian Paganism' is where all the intellectuals are gathered, right. :oP

First of all Paganism was here FIRST, all other things that followed were CHEAP copies

Anyone who knows what the term 'pagan' actually means should find this a pretty vapid statement.

it's been around 17 years since I've
been a regular member of a church, & I've NEVER been happier:)

Oh dear... that's far too long to have been suckered into something like that.

You mentioned critical thinking; I suggest you go pick up some books on it and develop your mind some more; it might rid you of the need for such ridiculous crutches.

Can you say the same? I don't think so, you're one miserable ***k from what I can see

For instance, anyone who had any basic familiarity of critical thinking would not make such a bizarre leap. Previous to this comment, I've not mentioned anything about my political, religious or cultural affiliations, nor commented on anything that would form a logical basis for an assessment of my emotional state.

Of course, anyone with a good grasp of logic isn't likely to describe themselves as 'Luciferian'.

reply

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] wight1984 12 years ago

Dogmatic Atheist,

This is why people shouldn't evoke critical thinking if they don't know how to use it.

There is nothing in either of my posts that lays out my own belief structure aside from the absence of deity. There is no possible logical foundation for accusing me of having a dogmatic attitude towards atheism because you know nothing about the nature of my atheism.

If I had my way logic would be taught in schools because it would avoid this kind of silliness.

You're the kind of "person" that deserves to be in the Triangle Of Art during a ritual evocation, just remember to wear your diaper, because you'll certainly need it.

Did this sound scary to you when you wrote it?

The only people I could imagine this sounding at all scary to are either under ten or especially gullible Christian fundamentalists.

reply

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] wight1984 12 years ago

Actually you're speaking about yourself, Atheism is worth less than the big Three monotheistic religions IMO, due to the simple fact of the Universe's
overwhelming complexity precludes that it all just "happened" by accident.

That's a pretty trite attempt at a teleological argument for the existence of deity(s).

Unless you're going to attempt something more sophisticated then I'll just note that nothing about complexity logically implies a designer.

If you believe that, then you're MOST certainly a Dogmatic Atheist!

Heh.

(1) You've just rendered the distinction implied in the term 'Dogmatic Atheist' redundant.

(2) I'm not convinced that you really understand what the term 'dogmatic' means because it's not implied by anything you just said.

The primaty difference between me, & you is that I know that God exists, but IMO he's not worth following since so much misery has been inflicted on Earth in his name.
Lucifer is the exact opposite, he promotes independence, & preserving the Earth from further harm, by "people" that are dis-connected from her.

Here's one definition of dogmatic as given by the Meriam-Webster dictionary: "characterized by or given to the expression of opinions very strongly or positively as if they were facts"

Your attempt to present your fringe nut-job religious beliefs as facts is exactly the sort of attitude that the term 'dogmatic' describes.

You claim to know these things but the only argument you have come up with for the existence of God is an incredibly weak version of a teleological argument and your claims about Satan are baseless (and fairly silly).

It's not meant to be "scary", if you're afraid it's due to the fact your belief system is fundamentally flawed at it's very core.

If you think that anyone reading your posts is at all scared then you're kidding yourself.

As said, the only people who take your sort of wacko religious nonsense seriously are either very, very young or indoctrinated into similar levels of religious absurdity and even those people aren't likely to be scared of you in particular because you are unable to present yourself in a manner that commands any respect.

All you've done is make a buffoon of yourself and invited the ridicule of others.

reply

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] wight1984 12 years ago

Are you kidding me?

Here's some advice; next time you're pretending to be so knowledgeable about religion, at least take the time to use google search to find answers to simple and basic questions.

Teleological arguments for the existence of deity are arguments that rest on evidence of design in the world around us. The argument that deity must exist because there's no way that a world of such complexity could not come about without a being to create it is a very basic and simplistic form of such an argument.

It's the second most common argument for the existence of God behind cosmological arguments.

Given that I'm supposedly a 'dogmatic atheist', it should really not be the case that I've taken more time to study religious philosophy than you seem to have undertaken.

reply

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Der_Schnibbler 11 years ago

Look, children. It's another one of these overzealous "I can disprove God because I took Logic 101 during my sophomore year" fagboys on the internet.

--
"Den Gleichen Gleiches, den Ungleichen Ungleiches."

reply

[–] wight1984 11 years ago

I don't think anyone was trying to disprove the existence of God. Not me in any case.

reply

[–] Loveunderlaw 12 years ago

You know nothing, you're so full of yourself you think you know it all. But you don't, instead of jumping into other people's conversations, take a long hard look into the mirror, then TRY to love what you see.

It must really suck ass badly for you to be so empty, & so self-loathing that you try projecting your hatred towards others. And again, your Atheism FAILS on ALL levels.

You're such a laugh too, because you pre-judge people without knowing a damned thing about them, or their belief systems. I will ask Lucifer, & the hierarchy of Hell to open your arrogant, & blinded eyes. I have nothing further to say to you, IMO you're profane beyond help, due to your deeply flawed mindstate.
________________________________________
http://www.youtube.com/user/loveunderlaw

reply

[–] wight1984 12 years ago

Heh, did you really just delete all your posts and throw a hissy-fit? Well done for confirming everything I believe about the emotional maturity of the sort of person that calls themselves a 'Luciferian'.

I've given you every opportunity to discuss this rationally and for you to justify your daft claims. I accept no responsibility for your inability to do so.

reply

[–] Loveunderlaw 12 years ago

Heh, did you really just delete all your posts and throw a hissy-fit? Well done for confirming everything I believe about the emotional maturity of the sort of person that calls themselves a 'Luciferian'.

I've given you every opportunity to discuss this rationally and for you to justify your daft claims. I accept no responsibility for your inability to do so.

reply

[–] wight1984 12 years ago

You're deliberately making yourself look bad, aren't you?

reply

[–] Loveunderlaw 12 years ago

You're deliberately making yourself look bad, aren't you?

reply

[–] wight1984 12 years ago

Wow.

Okay, I take it back.

Clearly you are under the age of fourteen, which makes your daft posts semi-excusable.

reply

[–] Loveunderlaw 12 years ago

Wow.

Okay, I take it back.

Clearly you are under the age of fourteen, which makes your daft posts semi-excusable.

reply

[–] !!!deleted!!! (6732138) 12 years ago

Careful dude, he's casting a 'copycat' spell on you and you're just feeding your doom.

If you push it too far he may step that up to a 'I know you are but what am I?' hex

reply

[–] hatsAreForLosers 12 years ago

^^ROFL

reply

[–] MrZoolook 12 years ago

I would click 'like' if I could!

--
Insert signature here.

reply

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Der_Schnibbler 11 years ago

lulz... get a girlfriend, dude.

--
"Den Gleichen Gleiches, den Ungleichen Ungleiches."

reply

[–] Loveunderlaw 11 years ago

Get a life dude!

________________________________________
http://www.youtube.com/user/loveunderlaw

reply

[–] Der_Schnibbler 11 years ago

none of my friends whom have seen the movie seemed to notice it

"Whom" is for objects, not subjects. The 'm' isn't there so you can randomly stick it in whenever you wish to sound intelligent.

http://www.dummies.com/how-to/content/choosing-to-use-who-and-whom.html

--
"Den Gleichen Gleiches, den Ungleichen Ungleiches."

reply

[–] second-exodous 13 years ago

The movie made it sound like it wasn't a creature that had been there for long. I don't live in Australia, are those tins that they found that the homeless people had old, like stuff not made for some time?

Anyway, I got the impression that it had just moved in, that homeless people had just started vanishing when they started investigating to put a water recycling plant down there. This kind of throws me because what could be that well adapted to the tunnels and be newly introduced? I was thinking deranged vampire but that would be extremely stupid so I hope it wasn't that. Maybe it was locked up down there in the past and the government let it loose when mucking around. Look at where it sanctuary is, in a collapsed tunnel, which is odd because what is it hiding from? Did it move there when the government started mucking about or did they remove some debris looking for another tunnel letting it loose? This leads me to believe that it was supernatural in some way. The sanctuary was also a really weird room, the circular area in the middle, what was that about? It sounds like the tunnels were abandoned in WWII, maybe an experiment that went wrong, some contaminate was let loose, and a section of tunnel was collapsed to contain it? Maybe something recovered from WWII, a humanoid experiment or some substance, maybe occult material from the SS.

reply

[–] Mesy09 13 years ago

It's hard to know what it exactly is. It would have to have to be of humanoid decent or was a humanoid at some stage or is one just massively deformed etc. Because it has intelligence. It's obviously smart enough to know the whole area and to know satanic rituals (I'm assuming with the candles in that room and what not) I'm not going to say anything stupid and be like "It was a homeless person possessed by the devil and now feast on people blood" non of that Paranormal Activity bull*beep*.

I'm going along with the theory that it had something to do with a mutation. With the radiation symbol on the red door when looking for Tangles. (As mention in other posts) Can lead to the assumption that it could of been mutation of some sort. To be honest I don't really know. I just wish that they actually showed a bit more of the actual creature rather than pointless interviews near the end.

reply

[–] Carnivale-Freak 13 years ago

I would say that this is the films main fault, by not actually providing the audience with a good reveal. I'm a big [Rec] and Descent fan and this is very much in the same vein but to not give the audience a payoff for what has actually been hunting them is sloppy in my opinion.

I had the idea that there would be alot of them in the shadows or at least there was the main creature and his dog monster type thing.

So it's either:

A Demon (possessed homeless guy)

Mutant (soldier from WWII)

I thought it could be a Vampire after re-watching the small amount of scenes that you actually get to see the creature it looks quite Vampirish (its a word lol) and it did seem to bite the neck of the guy with no eyes.

It could also be an Alien?

But theres just to many questions looming:

Why did it take Tangles to what looked to be a slaughter room and everyone else to the lake?

How did Trevor the homeless guy experience the creature and live to tell the tale?

And why would the Government try to cover it up?

I supposed we'll need to wait for the sequel which is one of the only reason I can think as to why a film company would endeavorto make a found footage shaky cam horror and not provide us with the creature.

reply

[–] deadbodieseverywhere17 12 years ago

I don't remember it taking Tangles to a slaughter room? I remember they found a slaughter room (assuming you mean the blood stained room with the chair), but in the end it says Tangles still hasn't been found.

I've read through most of the suggestions and I'm leaning more towards mutant than demon. Reason being for that is that it seems as if Pete fought them off. I doubt he could have stopped a demon, but a mutant, quite possibly. Just my opinion.

We Are The Corps!! "Left the GL boards after two years when the trolls showed up."

reply

[–] KutWrite (1220) 5 years ago

Don't forget the bell. That spooky thing definitely either attracted or released it... or unleashed it.

reply

[–] Jamil_Neate 13 years ago

It's interesting that it takes eyes, making me wonder if it is the Aussie cousin of the Jeepers Creepers monster.

reply