are you even listening to me? THE CABIN IN THE WOODS thread (WARNING: SPOILERS! SPOILERS! SPOILEROS! SPOILIDAD!)

Dude who wrote that also "adored" CLOVERFIELD so.

I just figured "Cloverfield" was improvised.

It's kinda sad because the monster's best takes were left on the cutting room floor

This was a blast. Really wasn't expecting the broad-brush satire, the trailers had made the whole meta aspect pretty clear but not the comedy so that was a nice surprise.

Scariest moment for me was maybe the pull-out reveal on all the monster cages with our protagonists trapped in the middle. Just for a moment I had the chilling thought that the film would end there, abandoning them in that maze of horrors. (Where did they all come from anyway? All the ghosts and monsters and aliens and witches. This is obviously some Alan Moore type metafictional world where all horror figures are real, must have been a herculean effort to catch and cage them all.)

Slightly disappointed with the giant stubby-fingered humanoid hand at the end. Wasn't aware that the elder gods were in the habit of making people in their own image.

nb the actual scariest moment was when there was a lot of thumping on the back of my (otherwise empty) row of seats and I looked round and saw, three seats away, a bare foot protruding through from the row behind.

Slightly disappointed with the giant stubby-fingered humanoid hand at the end. Wasn't aware that the elder gods were in the habit of making people in their own image.

Agree with you, but it was obviously there as a nod to the many classic horror callback with the hand emerging from a grave

oh aye, i suppose.

I'm glad you could understand that sentence, cos reading it back it's pretty garbled

did anybody else wish the end credits had rolled over a montage of the only ones completely annihilating the world. like with "holiday road" or something instead of nine inch nails? cuz i sure did.

― BEMORE SUPER FABBY (contenderizer), Sunday, April 15, 2012 12:08 AM (1 week ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

I just want to say that this would be the greatest ending to every movie ever made. Can we kickstarter the shit out of this?

thought an interesting almost throw away line @ the end was "i dont even think Curt has a cousin"

I thought this line was really weird... If it was meant to be a joke, it wasn't a particularly funny one. And if it wasn't, wouldn't it imply Curt knew what the cabin really was? Because why would he be talking about his cousin's cabin, if there was no cousin? But if he knew they were set up, why didn't he ever mention it, even at the point where his girlfriend had been beheaded and he was about to get killed as well? That was just a weird line.

Dammit, I liked this one. Why are all the backlash reviews making me nod my head in agreement?

http://filmfreakcentral.net/screenreviews/cabinlockout.htm

― jungleous butterflies strange birds (Eric H.), Monday, April 23, 2012 10:41 AM (4 days ago) Bookmark

walter chaw's a pretty good critic

i like this (somewhat negative) review too: http://outlawvern.com/2012/04/17/the-cabin-in-the-woods/

Outlaw Vern is so great. I bought his book.

which one? seagalogy's second edition was just released!

http://i.imgur.com/XcRd7.jpg

Nah, his broader collection. Not into Seagal enough to invest in the other one.

I have to say, while I enjoyed the film, I thought it's idea of the formula that the Old Ones (i.e. horror movie viewers) crave for felt out-of-date. Wasn't all this horror movie archetype stuff (final girl/virgin survives, lustful girl/whore dies first, the jock is punished for being a bully, etc) already effectively deconstructed 15 years ago in Scream? I'm not a big horror movie buff, but all the post-scream American horror movies I've seen have either twisted that formula in one way or another, or scrapped it altogether. So basically it felt like TCitW was criticizing horror movie fans for expecting a formula that no one actually expects these days.

Because of the above, until the very of the movie I thought there would be an extra twist that would be more in line with what horror movies of today are. After the corporate people had been killed by the various monsters, I actually expected the Director to explain that all this was part of the show, that nowadays Old Ones don't care for the classic horror formula but expect the story to have shocking twist (this would've also been an effectice criticism of the post-6th Sense fad of adding a twist ending to every horror movie) and even more bloodshed. So the massacre ending would've been part of the Old Ones' entertainment (this would've explained the more corny bits in the finale, like the Big Red Button or the complex's lack of proper security); the corporate people would've been just the second level of the show instead of the ones who run it, and there would've been an even larger group of employees manipulating them.

Maybe this solution would've been too complicated, but as such I felt the ending was kinda weak, as all it did was have Sigourney Weaver "reveal" things that the audience could quite easily guess halfway into the movie, the first time the Old Ones and the sacrifice were mentioned.

thought an interesting almost throw away line @ the end was "i dont even think Curt has a cousin"

I thought this line was really weird... If it was meant to be a joke, it wasn't a particularly funny one. And if it wasn't, wouldn't it imply Curt knew what the cabin really was? Because why would he be talking about his cousin's cabin, if there was no cousin? But if he knew they were set up, why didn't he ever mention it, even at the point where his girlfriend had been beheaded and he was about to get killed as well? That was just a weird line.

― Tuomas, Friday, April 27, 2012 5:45 AM (3 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

presumably he forgot he didn't actually have a cousin, for the same reasons he forgot he wasn't actually a dumb jock

xp i like that idea! but yes it would perhaps be tricky to pull off.

I actually expected the Director to explain that all this was part of the show, that nowadays Old Ones don't care for the classic horror formula but expect the story to have shocking twist (this would've also been an effectice criticism of the post-6th Sense fad of adding a twist ending to every horror movie) and even more bloodshed. So the massacre ending would've been part of the Old Ones' entertainment (this would've explained the more corny bits in the finale, like the Big Red Button or the complex's lack of proper security); the corporate people would've been just the second level of the show instead of the ones who run it, and there would've been an even larger group of employees manipulating them.

I'm really glad they didn't make a particularly pointed ending, like saying "oh audiences really love a twist" or having there be no apocalypse because the audience doesn't REALLY give a shit about cliches, just the industry. They just had the world blow up cuz that's way more fun an ending than trying to make a critical point overt.

i didn't see it as a "critique" of anything, just as play with signs and symbols, meta referentiality

the new tagline should be "to keep from being butthurt, just keep telling yourself...it's only a comedy. it's only a comedy."

i didn't see it as a "critique" of anything, just as play with signs and symbols, meta referentiality

Regardless, I thought they could've taken that play further. Because now they were playing with rather old-fashioned concepts of horror, and once you figured out what the game was about, there weren't too many surprises left in the second half of the movie. (Except for the monster rush, which I didn't expect, and which was admittedly awesome.)

I mean, upthread someone said this was supposed to be an answer to torture porn or something, but I didn't see much of that reflected in the movie. The concepts it was playing with were pretty much the same ages-old slasher fic/Halloween/Friday the 13th tropes that were already deconstructed in Scream, except that TCitW did it with a more clever concept (though as a result of that concept, with less actual horror).

Whedon just referenced torture porn in an interview as an inspiration to make something more fun, less focused on the details of murder, and that got the more defensive horror fans worried Joss thinks ill of their art or something.

I have to say, while I enjoyed the film, I thought it's idea of the formula that the Old Ones (i.e. horror movie viewers) crave for felt out-of-date. Wasn't all this horror movie archetype stuff (final girl/virgin survives, lustful girl/whore dies first, the jock is punished for being a bully, etc) already effectively deconstructed 15 years ago in Scream? I'm not a big horror movie buff, but all the post-scream American horror movies I've seen have either twisted that formula in one way or another, or scrapped it altogether. So basically it felt like TCitW was criticizing horror movie fans for expecting a formula that no one actually expects these days.

yeah agreed. vern goes into that in his review too

Part of the meta commentary in the movie was that the rituals of horror change throughout time (and vary between cultures, hence the Japanese scenes that played with very different archetypes): that's why you had the pictures of human sacrifice in the beginning, one of the controllers saying that it was easier when all you needed was to throw a girl into a volcano, the later comment that even the virgin doesn't have to be genuine virgin these days, etc... So it was weird that the movie didn't take these changes into account, instead it seemed to assume they're still the same as 20 years ago, like Scream and Sixth Sense and movies like that had never happened.

(xx-post)

part of why i think the movie makes more sense if the Old Ones represents movie execs rather than "the audience" is that execs are pushing those Michael Bay remakes, not Martyrs

i'm not sure how scream did anything better, because scream was overtly referential to horror movie conventions in an entirely different manner, and to a different result. those characters lived in a world approximating ours; the killings are sadistic and inhuman, but they aren't supernatural in nature; the characters know and explicitly invoke the same movies and tropes we are familiar with. it 'played with' the idea of the serial killer more than anything else. in the end the killer(s) are two fanboys obsessed with horror films, which played off the 90s moral concern of violent entertainment in america or whatever.

it seems to me that CITW's characters explicitly don't share in our cultural knowledge, so it heavily relies on that dramatic irony for it's first half. the only character who suspects anything is the stoner, who ends up being surprised that he's right. it also draws on a wider tradition of supernatural horror, and conceives of a universe where these abominations all coexist with a specific purpose, and in a way that i think was pretty clever.

once you figured out what the game was about, there weren't too many surprises left in the second half of the movie. (Except for the monster rush, which I didn't expect, and which was admittedly awesome.)

do agree with this. made the same complaint upthread.

So it was weird that the movie didn't take these changes into account, instead it seemed to assume they're still the same as 20 years ago, like Scream and Sixth Sense and movies like that had never happened.

like i said before, i saw the attempts to force the kids into archetypes as more of a joke than as a "serious critique of the current genre" or w/e. resonant enough to get a chuckle of recognition, but that's about it.

the idea is that these guys have to make a HIT horror movie that appeases the Gods, and that America is better at scoring a HIT than other countries (though Japan's been doing alright) since they stick to the formula. It's not suggesting that there hasn't been evolution or really interesting horror movies of late.

i'm not sure how scream did anything better, because scream was overtly referential to horror movie conventions in an entirely different manner, and to a different result.

I'm not saying Scream did the same thing, just that after Scream horror audiences haven't been taking those cliches quite as seriously (instead expecting them to be subverted in one way or another), and yet the movie seemed to think they still do.

the idea is that these guys have to make a HIT horror movie that appeases the Gods, and that America is better at scoring a HIT than other countries (though Japan's been doing alright) since they stick to the formula. It's not suggesting that there hasn't been evolution or really interesting horror movies of late.

^ this is a very good point. the "old ones" aren't hardcore horror fans, really, they're the way the american audience in general responds to horror films (and perhaps, as was suggested a couple times upthread, they're also the demands of studio execs).

there's even a call during the wrap party that they need to do a reshoot

like i said before, i saw the attempts to force the kids into archetypes as more of a joke than as a "serious critique of the current genre" or w/e. resonant enough to get a chuckle of recognition, but that's about it.

This I think was the movie's biggest flaw: the high concept ensured there weren't too many genuinely scary scenes in it, but on the other hand the concept wasn't clever or poignant to enough carry the movie all the way through. So it felt a bit half-assed as both a horror movie and as a deconstruction of horror movies.

they're the way the american audience in general responds to horror films

If you look at most successful horror movies of the last 15 years (i.e. the ones the general audience likes), have many of them followed the classic slasher formula? I'm not sure.

So it felt a bit half-assed as both a horror movie and as a deconstruction of horror movies.

it's a comedy

tuomas, the filmmakers have said that this was a direct response to the saw / hostel vein of torture porn in horror, which i think hews far closer to genre conventions & archetypes than you are admitting.

http://www.joeutichi.com/profile/joss-whedon-interview/

It was the 2009 remake of Friday the 13th that first set Whedon’s mind racing on what would become The Cabin in the Woods. “I did walk out, but I found it fascinating that the movie opens with a group of expendable teens, which Jason kills – not, by the way, very inventively – and then the movie starts, and an even more expendable group of teens shows up. It was as hateful as anything I’ve seen. There’s an element of this ‘torture porn’ promulgation that’s made me as angry as I can remember being.”

If torture porn is Whedon’s kryptonite, then Hollywood must be his super-villain, for the continued adventures of fictional serial killers like Jason Voorhees, Michael Myers and Jigsaw have kept studio balance sheets ticking over healthily. He can’t subscribe to such amoral filmmaking. “The disconnect between movie behaviour and normal human behaviour starts to strain,” he says. “It starts with, ‘I’ll drop the knife now, because it’s a really good time to be unarmed while I have my back to the thing,’ and goes further into, ‘I’m an unbelievable asshole and also I’m doing drugs and crime and sex all at the same time, so not only might I die but I deserve to.’ Punishment for youth-y behaviour is bizarre to me, and unsettling.”

He regrets having called it a “hate letter” to horror. In fact, he says, it’s a sonnet, to some of the genre’s best examples. “The joke of the whole thing is that this is the silliest movie I’ve ever made, and Drew and I just had an enormous amount of fun with it. The political message was very clear to both of us. It was just, ‘this is how we feel; this is a really fun way of expressing it; how can we figure in a unicorn?’”

also

Whedon remembers outlining his premise to Lionsgate by ranting about the ills of the Saw franchise. It was only as he glanced around the room, at a wall full of Saw movie posters, that he realised they had produced the movies. “But you know, they’re not precious about it. They love horror, and if they didn’t they wouldn’t know how to market this film.” In any case, he says, he hasn’t actually seen a Saw film all the way through.

it's a comedy

― congratulations (n/a), Friday, April 27, 2012 9:31 AM (3 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

this sounds like a cop-out in response to tuomas criticisms, but i think it's really otm. i agree that the movie wasn't particularly scary and that its deconstruction of the genre wasn't terribly compelling, but i saw it primarily as an absurdist comedy based in affectionate ribbing of genre conventions.

Just saw this last night and I think is wonderful. The way I read it is the characters (young victims) slowly become self-aware of themselves as characters (though that was only really true for the redhead girl and the stoner), realizing they circumstances are absurd; and finally subverting their fate, carefully planned by the "Puppeteers" on order to please the "Ancient Ones" (audience). A key thing about it, though is that the movie never abandons the perspective of the characters (the sets, cameras, crew, etc. is all hidden and even when they discover it, it doesn't resemble a conventional film productions, plus all the creatures are REAL!) only gives them a glimpse of perspective and understanding of their universe. In that sense, I saw the final scene as (perhaps) a reference to Plato's Cave. I think the 1998 glitch they refer to is Funny Games, where the characters (though in this case, the bad guys) subvert the rules and take control.

except that movie's not American

written by joss whedon and drew goddard

almost walked out of the theater when i saw this

gtk

that's the thing, the whole system purge bit is all about the pure joy of horror. All those scary creatures in the same place. It's just fun!

― Number None, Sunday, April 15, 2012 2:45 AM (1 week ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

i lol'd. it was pretty much the 2012 version of

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0thH3qnHTbI

This was definitely a hoot, but I think I'm getting kind of burnt out on the whole Hugo/The Artist/Cabin "movies about movies" thing.

Like Evil Dead IN ITSELF was kind of a winking parody of George Romero and Three Stooges, and now this runs THAT whole concept through a meta-mirror. And the whole "five archetypes" thing is basically a Wes-Craven-on-adderal concept for onion/tvtropers to lustily update their databases. Again, this movie was real fun and hilarious, but like all pop culture is slowly leaning towards towards a specific type of retromania that basically says "ayo-I-read-a-lot-of-wikipedia." Its kind of starting to bum me out, but I guess the alternative is mumblecore idk

also, like, quibbling over whether something is "horror" or "comedy" is the stupidest thing in the universe. Like gangsta rap, pretty much 90% of it is supposed to be fun/funny.