Hello, so i just watched this. I need the ending explained. So i was told it wasn't a sasquatch it was rednecks that would kidnap girls for sex slavery. Someone said they saw a naked lady but i didn't see a naked lady at all. So please help me out with this. i don't get it.
shareDid you see it at IFC tonight? If so, I believe I was the one who said I saw a naked lady. I did. She literally appeared for two seconds before whatever it was attacked them. I said lady cause I saw boobies. The reason I believe it was multiple people most likely gone crazy and imatating Bigfoot was that during the last couple seconds you heard four different howls at the same time indicating four different animals or beings. Its ambiguous but I believe that's the right way to look at it.
Bobcat was great too.
Judging by the monsters sound and the speed the guy (still inexplicably holding into his stupid camera) was dragged, it came off to me as an actual monster, as opposed to some rednecks gone crazy.
The naked woman was pretty hard to miss. The camera focuses on her for a couple seconds. While I'm not positive what this signifies, my first thought was that women captured by the 'Bigfoot' creatures were kept around, perhaps for breeding purposes or something.
I'm all for a slow burn film, but I really hated this movie too much to give it much more thought. The end was pretty straight forward, in my opinion.
I believe the naked lady at the end was the missing person pictured in the restaurant. She was probably feral now and hanging out with the bigfeets
I believe the naked lady at the end was the missing person pictured in the restaurant. She was probably feral now and hanging out with the bigfeets
Yeah, I didn't get a good look but I'm sure it was her, otherwise having them focus on her missing poster in the diner for so long wouldn't have had much point.
I suspect it might be a nod to the old tabloid stories (or perhaps joke stories) about women claiming to be having Bigfoot's baby.
The headline "I'M HAVING BIGFOOT'S BABY" was a pretty common reference back in the 80's or so, right up there with Elvis sightings and stories about Elvis' ghost. Tabloids, back the, couldn't seem to make up their minds on if Elvis was dead or not. :)
They actually used to be a lot more fun back then than they are now with nothing but celebrity non-sense.
The naked woman was pretty hard to miss.
"She seemed happy to be kidnapped."
shareThat remark was so stupid - the picture was obviously taken BEFORE she got kidnapped.
share"That remark was so stupid - the picture was obviously taken BEFORE she got kidnapped."
imdb has become flooded with autists. It's a sad thing but what can you do? Their understanding of nuance is pretty much nil.
-------------------------
"It's better not to know so much about what things mean." David Lynch
also thought she was pretty obvious, though it only showed her for a sec. it did pan from her feet up. naked and dirty except for some granny panties.
shareThey needed to lower Arnold into the lava because of the chip in his head needed to be destroyed.
Hahaha brilliant! shoeloverbundy
"They needed to lower Arnold into the lava because of the chip in his head, which needed to be destroyed."
Thank You :) Your comment cracked me up!!
After just sitting through this whole film, I don't reckon that I'm in any way exaggerating when I say that your comment was the highlight of the film for me, so Thank You!
>^._.^< xx.
Yes, it was the missing woman. The Sasquatch apparently keep human women around as f--ktoys. That's the fate that's befallen the girl in the movie as well.
Bobcat was winking at us earlier in the movie when he had them joking about her posing for her "missing woman" flyer, and even more so when she was joking about Sasquatch member size or giving a handie to that Sasquatch statue, because those things were all in her immediate future....
Holy smokes. That's gotta be it. And honestly, that makes this movie better just because of how bizarre that is. The last 30 mins were pretty dope though. High tension for sure.
shareI believe what Bobcat was going for was combining Bigfoot theory and lore with the mystery of all the unexplained disapearances at national parks. When somebody(usually a small child),is found alive, they often have stories about being taken by a big hairy thing. They are usually found in places they couldn't get to by themselves, really high up elevations, or in the middle of a swamp, with the story the thing brought them there. There used to be stories about the wildmen taking people and integrating them into their group. The impression given is these Bigfoots kill males, and keep the females.
Add to that the government doesn't keep a database of all the missing people, and really doesn't want people promoting how many people have gone missing in national parks over the years (It's a lot!)and you can easily start surmising our government is aware of something strange and for some reason allows it to happen.
It more likely is like the people in Jaws not wanted it promoted that tourists are getting eaten by a man eating shark during business season.
Add to that the government doesn't keep a database of all the missing people, and really doesn't want people promoting how many people have gone missing in national parks over the years (It's a lot!)and you can easily start surmising our government is aware of something strange and for some reason allows it to happen.
Our government is capable of many things, including the monitoring of our cell phone conversations, our e-mails, our internet activity, which they do on a constant basis. Why would you doubt for one moment that they would use cover up to keep the truth hidden about many things?
shareWell, for one, they couldn't keep it a secret for long that they monitor our e-mails, internet activity etc. etc.
Sorry, in this day and age where everyone has a camera of some sort on them at all time, there's still no convincing evidence for the Sasquatch. There are tonnes of really weird and interesting animals which do exist, why aren't they enough for some people?
There's tons of convincing videos that aren't hoaxes if you look for them.
It could be God, the Devil, Buddha, an Alien...or it could be a kid playing a video game. - onn1320
How do you know they're not hoaxes? If there was verifiable proof of a Sasquatch, people would know about it.
shareIt's not verifiable. But you don't need to verify dark matter to believe it exists either. Circumstantial evidence is still evidence.
It could be God, the Devil, Buddha, an Alien...or it could be a kid playing a video game. - onn1320
You just proved you know nothing about the scientific method or what the difference between scientific theory and the layman's definition of "theory" is, congrats.
shareAre you saying that your government pay or harass people not to let anyone know about their missing friends and loved ones? And those people don't then tell the newspapers? Or are they not believed because they have nothing to show that their friend or loved one ever existed? Or does the government just kill every single friend or loved one of the missing person?
There's no way that your government could pretend people hadn't gone missing unless they were the only ones who knew about the disappearance in the first place.
[deleted]
When somebody(usually a small child),is found alive, they often have stories about being taken by a big hairy thing.
Just what I was thinking!! If someone could link some articles in relation to this supposed commonplace occurrence, I'd be delighted (and surprised!) to read them!
[sword]*Nothing of me is original, I am the combined effort of everybody I've ever known*[sword]
WTF are you talking about? I never heard of any child found alive talking about bigfoot kidnapping them.
[deleted]
[deleted]
Yeah I agree that the big foot creatures killed him and took her captive and the naked woman was the missing woman who had been the captive of the creatures for a long time. I really liked this movie...it was a well done little thing that wasn't trying to be anything but a little thing. The characters were likable and funny...it was realistically found footage-like. The last 30 minutes really were creepy and the ending was scary too. My one and only complaint is the rockin' music right at the end....it took me out of it and I think it would've been a lot more effective to have no music. All in all, I thought it was lots of fun and accomplished what it set out to be.
shareI liked it too. I thought the tent scenes were very effective, and it was an overall fun movie. If you are looking for huge production value, this is obviously not your film, but for all us horror fans, this was a really nice take on a mystery like this. And I love that they went to the actual town (i believe i read that).
sharebut for all us horror fans
Of coarse you're still a horror fan...there are millions of different kinds of horror fans. In fact, I think there are many who might dislike this one for different reasons. But I do think that the people who really like this are mostly horror fans of some kind. It might not be much of a movie to people who don't like horror or haven't seen much of it.
share-Am I not a horror fan if I disliked it then?
well jumping in on the Godzilla comment. I do like my movie to be about Godzilla. We've had the original 50+ years ago. But now when you call a movie Godzilla, it shouldn't be a cameo. That and the fact that Aaron Taylor Johnson not a bad actor.. but Bryan Cranston was great and them swapping them out felt like a bait and switch.
I think most people coming into Godzilla at a certain point are expecting a creature feature. That would be like making James Bond and having him poolside until the last 20 minutes. Would you call that a "Bond" film?
I don't think that has anything to do with having to see the creature.. But it does make the title of the film misleading when you are expecting the main thruat/character of the film to be an 80 story radioactive nuclear lizard and you get the guy from "Kick Ass"?
It just feels like kind of a bait and switch, especially after being an established film for as long as it has been. At least in the case of "Willow Creek" I can say I had no qualms about not seeing big foot cause it had no previous films to really compare to. You can enjoy one type of film, and another.
They showed a lot of Godzilla, enough for my appetite. Too much of one thing isn't good. I don't think a Godzilla focused film would retain my attention or if they would even have it in the budget. I enjoyed the take on the film. There was enough action in it. There are Bond films without him being poolside btw....
It could be God, the Devil, Buddha, an Alien...or it could be a kid playing a video game. - onn1320
I'm in my mid-forties and thought it was awful, mainly because it was a boring film. I love horror and found footage, so it's nothing to do with gore.
I dislike it when people make generalizations about who will dislike a film and why--all appreciation of films is subjective, anyhow. Funny that you mention the new Godzilla movie--I thought the pacing of that film was dreadful.
-------------------------
"It's better not to know so much about what things mean." David Lynch
Seems like there is a correlation between liking Godzilla and liking this film. Seems to be different people like different pacing.
It could be God, the Devil, Buddha, an Alien...or it could be a kid playing a video game. - onn1320
I don't mind films with a slow pace; I love films like The Seven Samurai or really any Bergman is fine.
But for horror films like this, and especially in the case of Godzilla? That movie was miserably plodding and desperately needed one great action sequence.
The scene in the tent was similarly maddening in that I got the point and stopped being frightened about three minutes in. At that point it just felt like showy directorial BS.
-------------------------
"It's better not to know so much about what things mean." David Lynch
Nope. My dad wanted thought the movie was stupid, fast-forwarded half of it, he said at least they could have showed someone dressed up like bigfoot. I didn't mind. I also really loved Godzilla. WHERE'S YOUR STEREOTYPES NOW?!?!? ;)
It could be God, the Devil, Buddha, an Alien...or it could be a kid playing a video game. - onn1320
Geez. Over sensitive a bit.
shareThe tent scenes were SO annoying!
Okay, so they've come there to see Bigfoot, right? Now there's possibly a Bigfoot outside the tent. GREAT!
He thinks it's Bigfoot. She thinks it isn't Bigfoot. They have pretty much a whole ten minutes before there's any indication that it's next to the tent and they don't say that it's dangerous to leave the tent. Why don't they get out and film? Either he'd be proved right and they'd have footage of a Sasquatch, or she'd be proved right and they'd know what was out there.
But just sitting in the tent with the camera light on, making the tent stand out in the darkness? What idiots!
I just kept on thinking about how much better Troll Hunter was.
I don't know dude. If I were in that tent I would probably be too petrified to move. But then again maybe not. Who knows. Just happy I was never in that tent really
And yes - Troll Hunter was miles and miles better than this!
Follow the latest films around the world!! http://7films.dendelionblu.me
[deleted]
What doesn't seem to be fully explained, is the attitude of that one redneck at the top of the road they took before heading out into the forest.
Didn't he throw a rock at their car...? And didn't they have rocks thrown at the tent later on that night?
Not much to explain really...could have been bigfoot/bigfeet (we didn't see anything in the movie that suggested it was sasquatch) or could have been rednecks. The Naked woman and Kelly who eventually was captured were probably used for sex/breeding purposes.
My take on it was the noises came from rednecks trying to scare tourists off and if they didn't go they were either captured (women) or probably killed (men).
Overall the film was average at best and the budget must of spanned to about £100 although the acting was reasonable. Wouldn't recommend it.
I think it helped me, approaching this from a completely "Pff, alright then I'm bored..." frame of mind. I expected nothing and got a few slow-burn scares along the way. Satisfying.
Perhaps real Bigfoot enthusiasts () would probably find the lack of a tangible Bigfoot another crushing failure in their otherwise stellar career of collecting bear fur and deer *beep*
In fact I spent an "enjoyable" Saturday early morning watching a YouTube series on Bigfoot sightings. One of the highlights was a ten minute segment on why a lens flare wasn't a lens flare (Although how this tied into Bigfoot...? I have no idea...)
It's such a stubborn and entrenched community of believers that this movie would probably be akin to a kick in the nuts for them.
I'm an enthusiast and I liked this film. There's more to it than collecting hairs. There's countless eyewitness testimonies you can't write off, also there are credible videos that haven't been hoaxes. You really shouldn't stick to just one Youtube channel or community, there are extremists in every subject really.
It could be God, the Devil, Buddha, an Alien...or it could be a kid playing a video game. - onn1320
I guess that's part of the good part of the film. I actually agree with you. I think it was redneck pot farmers trying to scare them off. And why not kidnap some women while you're harvesting your pot? But it can be read as that or Bigfoot, however you really choose to see it. And I am sure even Bobcat has his own intention of it.
Not the greatest film ever or anything.. won't win any awards but was entertaining enough for 80 minutes. It won't be one of his films that I revisit unlikes Shakes or God Bless America but I can't say I regret having seen it either.
I thought the rednecks were the children of the Bigfeets with the kidnapped chicks, actually. Hence the bad attitudes.
And the necklaces. Those were some weird tribal Bigfoot thing.
-------------------------
"It's better not to know so much about what things mean." David Lynch
It seemed to me the grannie panties woman was a sex slave used by the bigfoots and at the end they kill the guy and take kelly as the new bride at the end when they all howl that is the "wedding ceremony" or whatever u want to call it.
Lose the Game!!!!!!!