MovieChat Forums > It's Alive (1974) Discussion > SPOILERS: the ending

SPOILERS: the ending

posted 20 years ago by XtroTerrestial
22 replies | jump to latest

If you haven't watched this movie yet, please don't read this, because I'm about to discuss the ending to "It's Alive"

Ok, let me begin:

Even though I saw this when I was 10 years old, and I was deathly frightened of the "baby", I still felt a bit of sadness when it was killed at the end. Even though it was dangerous, and killed people when frightened, I kept thinking to myself that it was only an infant. It was just scared. It attacked people or anything that posed as somewhat of a threat to him. So when his father found him in the sewers crying, I, like the father, started to not be so much as afraid of it, but felt sympathy for it. So watching it die at the hands of the police was like watching a normal baby die as well. It just left and upsetting, unpleasant feeling inside me. Of coarse keep in mind I was young when I saw it the first time. Even now when I watch it, I almost think to myself, "Who's the real 'monster' of this story?": The baby or the person who ordered to open fire on it? I know I sound a bit strange saying all this, but that just how I feel. I still think the baby's "cry" is very eerie. I watched this the other night at 2 in the morning, and when it was over , I could still hear the baby's "crying" when I was about to fall asleep. That's how effective it was for me.

I didn't like the sequels as much (It Lives Again and It's Alive III: island of the Alive), but i still was entertained by them. I have just heard that there's going to be a remake, and normally when I hear the word "remake" and "horror classic" in the same sentance, I almost gasp. But since I heard Larry Cohen is involved in it, I'm sure it won't be bad.

But no remake can possibly be as bad as Psycho (1998). LOL

"Meet at the waterfront after the social" -- Angela Baker, "Sleepaway Camp"

[–] SnowLeopardCat 20 years ago

I haven't seen this movie, only read the novelization. But I felt the same way. I thought it [the baby] was a monster until it got to the end. It was just a scared baby who happened to have claws, meaning it could kill. I thought it was sad (but too predictable). It reminded me a lot of Frankenstein.

[–] XtroTerrestial 20 years ago

I just hope the remake has that same kind of dramatic feel to it like the novelization and the original movie.

"Meet me at the waterfront, after the social." -- Angela Baker, sleepaway Camp

[–] PinkDog 20 years ago

Pinhead, I think what you've said is at least part of the point of the movie. Who is the monster? And how something can seem ugly and frightening, but if you understand it, it ceases to frighten or be ugly. When you realize the baby is not purposely trying to kill people, it just wants its Mom and Dad and happens to have an insatiable appetite for raw meat and have claws instead of fingers and is otherwise slightly deformed, well...how can you keep on hating it??

A way of life inspired by the homeless, vagrants, and crack whores!

[–] CaptainStigmata 20 years ago

Just imagine if the baby had grown up...

"I don't hate you because you're beautiful. I hate you because you're a bitch!"

[–] XtroTerrestial 20 years ago

They wre grown up in It's Alive 3: Island of the Alive.

"Meet me at the waterfront, after the social." -- Angela Baker, Sleepaway Camp

[–] CharlesVariations 20 years ago

Yeah, they are fully grown and are a lot less frightening then the babies were. They were a lot less scarier then they were in 1 and 2. Even when it shows them as infants in number 3 they aren't scary, since it shows them way too much. It use to be creepy and suspenseful now it's just dumb fun. I still can't help but love It's Alive 3, but the first is still my favorite.

[–] ColinHarvey 19 years ago

I think Cohen was trying to get people to think "is this thing really evil for doing what it can't help doing?" Or are the people trying to kill it more evil? Or are the pharmaceutical companies that were likely responsible for it more evil?

Much the same could be said about the creatures in the "Alien" films (I love the first two, the third was barely tolerable, "Alien Resurrection" was horrible). Are they evil, or just doing what comes naturally - reproducing by whatever means necessary?

[–] the_thing_what_squeeks 18 years ago

For some reason I responded to the death of the infant, like I would to the death of an animal. It was a very misunderstood creature that didn't understand the concept of malice, only fear and thus acted violently as any animal would.

[–] tawdry_hepburn 18 years ago

no, the stop motion babies are some of my favorite parts of the whole series!

said the shotgun to the head
-Saul Williams

[–] CharlesVariations 18 years ago

I didnt say anything about the stop motion, i jsut said it shows them a lot in part 3, making it less scary. Oh well, i still like 3 better then 2.

See you in the funny papers

~Chuck T. Butcher

[–] tawdry_hepburn 18 years ago

naw, i mean, the babies looked the best in part 3 because of the stop motion. the gore was also way better. the first act of part 3 is one of the best things in the whole series, but once they get to the island...the whole movie falls apart.

said the shotgun to the head
-Saul Williams

[–] CharlesVariations 18 years ago

hah yeah...and only the middle of the movie is set on the Island. Cohen could have written it as a horror movie taking place completely on the island, with all the characters camping out on the island on their little exhibition and getting attacked, ambushed, and killed off.

See you in the funny papers

~Chuck T. Butcher

[–] copdude1993 18 years ago

umm. the real monster is the killer baby!

*ooo a piece a candy oo a piece a candy oo a piece a candy oo a piece a candy oo a piece a candy!

[–] XtroTerrestial 18 years ago

Accually, when I said "who's the real monster?", it was really just an analogy I was using.

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] XtroTerrestial 15 years ago

Theoretically, no. It was like a scarred animal (in this case a baby animal). It was just killing because it was frightened and/or hungry.

[–] dja7316 13 years ago

I have not sceen this movie yet (planning on renting it over weekend), but I have read the synopsis on wikipedia. After reading the plot line, I couldn't help but to feel the same way Xtro. Since I have no idea what the monster looks like or maybe since I just recently became a dad I can't help but to feel the same way. It actually broke my heart when the dad finds IT in the sewer crying alone and considering that he had just shot him the baby is just happy to be with his father wrapped in a warm blanket. It just wants to be loved and only kills when it feels threatened. I don't think I can even watch the ending knowing what happens.

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] irvberg2002 10 years ago

You refer to "his father" as if you know it's male, but is there anything in the movie that establishes its sex, assuming that it has a sex?

[–] scubadivergeek 9 years ago

<<You refer to "his father" as if you know it's male, but is there anything in the movie that establishes its sex, assuming that it has a sex?>>

The mother clearly says the baby is a boy. This is just before the father runs down into the basement and shoots the baby.

[–] irvberg2002 10 years ago

Why do you refer to it as "him"? Is there anything in the movie that establishes the sex of it? Assuming that it has a sex.

[–] lm362 9 years ago

The ending saddens me, too. I think the person who was trying to get them to kill the baby should have been told to keep quiet and that if he made a move toward the baby or his father, the person would be shot. I wish an alternate ending would have been shown where the baby was only wounded, not killed, even if it died soon after. Now that would have been a really sad ending.