Cloverfield Monster is... Aphynos

I wrote an article back in October where I hypothesized that if the Cloverfield monster becomes iconic like Godzilla or King Kong, that we the fans, the early adopters, are contributing to the monster's lore. That is to say, in 5, 10, 20 years, our contributions will be an important part of the modern myth. A bit lofty, and for sure we're just having fun, but still.

So I was betting on the movie's title being the monster's name. A bet I lost. Nevertheless, the monster has to be called something, and that something will eventually be what everyone calls it, and the movie(s), and the merchandise, and the fans, etc. That's my take anyway. And with that in mind, I've been keen to spot the name of the monster. With this past update of Tagruato, I couldn't help but zero in on Aphynos. It was a unique term. A term for an animal. Now I know that it has since been argued that Aphynos was a misspelling of Aphyonus. Because a misspelling would be consistent with past grammatical errors of in game sites, it's even more likely that Aphynos is a purposeful misspelling. Purposeful being the key word, since these aren't really English-as-a-second-language-people writing this stuff. On the contrary, they are "writers", and therefore deliberate in their errors.

So Aphynos is a purposeful new word. The question is how much purpose to attribute to it. Just a misspelling designed to contribute to the allusion that English is a second language of the fictional Tagruato personnel? Or more, a coherent use of that established idiosyncrasy as a way to give a unique name to the Cloverfield monster? Who is to say the beast isn't the evil Dr. Abe's experiment gone wrong? Debatable, all of it, and I'll admit . . . unlikely.

However, I see here an opportunity to flex our collective contribution. We are, after all, putting in a hell of a lot of time and effort into the project. No one has said that JJ Abrams and Co. will give the monster a name. And if they don't name it, who will? Why not us? What I'm saying is, if we want to, we can be responsible for naming the monster. That assumes, of course, that the powers that be don't name it. But if they don't, if they leave it an open question, the people will eventually christen it ____________. So I think that should be us. If nothing else, we've earned more right than the Johnnies-come-lately, or the overpaid critic, or the crackpots.

So I say we take matters into our own hands. Think of it as a grand experiment. Simply start referring to the monster as Aphynos. That's all you have to do. If someone questions it, be honest. It's our name for the monster. So that's a plan. Maybe it sounds stupid. I don't know. I lack objectivity (read: see Aphynos). But I have to say that right here, right now, it sounds like it's at least worth a shot, given the potential payoff--to have named a legendary monster.