Thread: does anyone really know the reason for the tumors on his chest?

A few people have mentioned that it was mentioned in the commentary and though I love Cronenbergs adaptation of The Fly and usually consider an homage a nice touch of fun, I still consider the scene a bit pointless, if not just outright bad for the storytelling of the movie. If his attempt was to create a “WTF” moment then he full on succeeded. On the other hand it makes it a sort of poor homage since the original scenes were...

THANK YOU! Amen, dude. Let this be the end of this stupid thread. Laquer Heads know but one desire! Laquer Head sets his skull on fire!

"a person has to sit thru the commentary to understand a plot point of the movie? i'm pretty sure that ranks up pretty high in the DONTs of story telling." No, people who can pick up on simple plot points figured it out. You asked for confirmation, and I gave it to you. "My name is Buck, and I'm here to party!" -Kill Bill Television edit

You have every right to attack me I didn't say you couldn't but when someone is being an ass I feel I have the right to say so to them. You have every right to say what you want as do I, to that end here is my witty retort. You can look at the film and check this out it's all in there: The man has growths of some type on his chest. Do healthy people have growths on their chests? Unless they are female they do not. At the end of...

If his attempt was to create a “WTF” moment then he full on succeeded. On the other hand it makes it a sort of poor homage since the original scenes were showing the transformation of Seth Burndle into Brundle-Fly and his acceptance of it. I get what you're saying. I hate gratuitous "film-trivia homages" (ie: any moment of any Rob Zombie film), but I considered this one more of a subtle nod to...

Man I am glad I found this thread. I was so curious about that stuff and even after reading the thread I found the whole thing kind of esoteric. It is like the filmmmaker was so into his story that he did not realize what was obvious to him was in the end too confusing for his audience. I mean I kind of drew the same conclusions but at the end his loose loose skin left a lot of loose ends.

cancer

Bah. Cancer shmancer (apologies to Fran Drescher). It's obvious to me that as the butcher is getting old and slowing down, barnacles are attaching themselves to him. Seriously, it's Clive Barker, not Shakespeare.

Its safe to assume it. When Leon's wife and friend are in Mahogany's apartment, they discover he has been killing since the 1920's. This is impossible if Mahogany is just a normal serial killer. So its safe to assume: 1. Mahogany's lifespan is supernaturally extended to serve the purposes of the creatures. A. The things on his chest are there to show he has been alive a long time. OR B. The things on his chest represent...

ive gotta laugh at that....barnicles....hahahaha don't point that beard at me, it might go off... Groucho marx