The Cabin in the Woods Spoilers from post 180

Fysh · 26-04-2012 8:26am

Millicent wrote: »

Ah yeah, I got that, and understood why it was there. It didn't bother me massively but I did kind of think, "Well that's a bit shitty of you." :pac:

I like a good metaphor and all but I don't know that it worked on a basic level. Although, I suppose given all the other deaths, especially a jock hero wiping out spectacularly, it kind of works...

Dunno. Wasn't a deal breaker in any way for me but I thought the "Let someone else have a chance" was a bit thin on a literal rather than metaphorical/parody/didactic level.

Great answer though!

While their motivation wasn't really fleshed out in any detail, I thought it was a refreshing change to end the way they did. Too often we see characters subjected to extended and extreme trauma, only for them to muster superhuman reserves of courage when presented with a simplistic Deep & Meaningful Reason for their torment. Between the instinctive "no, go **** yourself" response that would be expected from two people surviving such an ordeal and the simplistic moralising of "Human sacrifices are WRONG" that the opening credits hint at (at least when coupled with the stoner's paranoid ramblings) I thought the ending was a more honest and realistic one than we get from most horror films of the sort it mocked.

mystic86 · 28-04-2012 2:30pm

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

A fantastically fun film. This is what I like to see: a clever central concept, a confident execution, plenty of unusual twists and turns, a consistent wit and a convincing knowledge of the genre it giddily dismantles. It's refreshingly like what Scream did so many years ago before it was ruined by redundant sequels, but has a tonne of tricks it plays around with throughout. I honestly could have lived with it just being a straight-up deconstruction of the 'teens in the woods' film, but it had an enjoyable and often thrilling horror lore of its own: thought the pacing and revelations were very thoughtfully considered, and I thoroughly enjoyed the way the film slowly put the puzzle pieces together in the opening half. Proof that an amusing and entertaining night at the cinema does not necessarily warrant a complete switching off of the brain. Also loved some of the creature design - loving homages to classic monsters, but with their own identity too.

I think some of the nitpicking in here is unwarranted, because frankly the film is ridiculous at its heart, and it's wholly aware of this. The only negative, IMO, is that the budget sometimes can't quite keep up with the imaginative situations being hurled at the screen. It's a small concern, and given the insanity of the things being rendered it's a flaw that's easily forgiven.

It's a film fully aware of the rules it breaks, satirises and homages. However, the film ends on perhaps the strongest punchline of all (even if the very last shot was a little iffy). Unlike most horror films that are just dying to hint at an inevitably inferior sequel, this concludes on a punctuation mark rather than an ellipsis, meaning a sequel is nigh on impossible. And that, more than anything, summed up the mission statement and tone of this film to a tee.

Although I'd love to see the full Japanese scenario.

You are a powerful word smith and debater. What do you do for a living?

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

a clever central concept, a confident execution, a consistent wit and a convincing knowledge of the genre it giddily dismantles.

You could be talking about your own movie reviews/game reviews/opinion pieces.

Anyway, I didn't overly enjoy this movie myself. It was OK. However I lack the skill to write, debate and form a fully fledged argument like yourself. So I'm just going to make these statements here and run away.

I found it silly rather than fun.
I didn't really find the central concept that clever.
I didn't really notice much wit in the movie.
I found the rolling out of the creatures/stars from other movies a bit, I don't know, silly/sad.

It was OK, but I'm surprised it is rated so high (on IMDB, for example).

However I do always enjoy reading your opinions Mr. Ultimate, even when my reactions range from wholeheartedly agreeing to anger, and everything in between.

Mickeroo · 28-04-2012 2:52pm

Fysh wrote: »

While their motivation wasn't really fleshed out in any detail, I thought it was a refreshing change to end the way they did. Too often we see characters subjected to extended and extreme trauma, only for them to muster superhuman reserves of courage when presented with a simplistic Deep & Meaningful Reason for their torment. Between the instinctive "no, go **** yourself" response that would be expected from two people surviving such an ordeal and the simplistic moralising of "Human sacrifices are WRONG" that the opening credits hint at (at least when coupled with the stoner's paranoid ramblings) I thought the ending was a more honest and realistic one than we get from most horror films of the sort it mocked.

i'm not sure I would consider the main characters condemning everyone/thing they know and love to a horrific and possibly slow & painful death as honest or realistic, but I agree it was a refreshing ending

Ape X · 28-04-2012 8:47pm

WoollyRedHat wrote: »

I got scared once or twice, but only because it was jumpy, am I weird?

I jumped when the big bold title appeared on screen near the start

Very good film though. Thoroughly enjoyed it's wit and invention.

Nervous Wreck · 29-04-2012 3:37am

Mickeroo wrote: »

i'm not sure I would consider the main characters condemning everyone/thing they know and love to a horrific and possibly slow & painful death as honest or realistic, but I agree it was a refreshing ending

In a way, I agree with Fysh when it comes to the honesty/realism of the end. Cos, tbh, we are hopeful, naive creatures. And I would fully believe that many people would refuse to kill themselves or their friend (in order to save the world) in favour of just hoping that their act of defiance/hope would result in things 'just working out'. So many people would be unwilling to kill themselves or their best friends in that situation and blindly assuming that the main character would definitely 'summon the courage' to 'make the hard choice' is kinda unrealistic in itself.

Fysh · 29-04-2012 9:12am

Mickeroo wrote: »

i'm not sure I would consider the main characters condemning everyone/thing they know and love to a horrific and possibly slow & painful death as honest or realistic, but I agree it was a refreshing ending

Well, bear in mind that one of the two survivors was paranoid as hell to begin with and they've both been put through a highly traumatic ordeal. After all that, someone swanning in and saying "oh but you have to, for the sake of The Entire World!" would most likely get a "**** off" response. Most humans can't conceive of the idea of their actions having a global-scale world-changing response on an intuitive level, so it takes a lot of effort to understand the implications of what Weaver is telling them. After the night they've had, they're not in a state of mind to sit down and work out just how many people would suffer as a result of their defiance (or to debate the ethics of human sacrifice as justified by utilitarianism) so "yeah yeah, whatever" both fits the personalities we've seen (young and overconfident about how much they know of the world) and makes sense in context.

At least, that's how I interpreted it.

Phony Scott · 29-04-2012 10:45am

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

It just seems a common criticism running through this thread and some of the more negative critical responses to it: that Cabin in the Woods is not scary, and that therefore is a flaw of the film. If so, does the same criticism apply to Evil Dead 2?

I've seen this mentioned a couple of times in the thread. To go back to one of your comments earlier, and to paraphrase, you said that sequels blunt the original film; well I would say something similar with regards to Evil Dead 2.

Inferior rip-off’s of Evil Dead 2 – and there are many – have blunted the frightening element of that film. The camerawork in that film was off-kilter, frenetic and the intensity of the film just never let up - fresh at the time. In hindsight, it’s difficult to see that this film was frightening at all.

Now it has been done to death through inferior rip-offs. It still remains a great laugh though :-) The same has gradually applied to Scream.

On a completely different note, I’ve seen a few people mention

the button pressed in the film which releases all the monsters. I see that as a reference to Ghostbusters and the moment in which the ghosts are released from the containment unit. That seems to be only re-enforced by Sigourney Weaver’s appearance in Cabin in the Woods.

S.M.B. · 30-04-2012 2:17pm

Saw this last night and loved it. Not a massive horror fan but I've a lot of time for Whedon and those in the Whedonverse.

I don't have a whole lot to add to the discussion as it's all been said before.

However, I believe that those questioning the morality behind the protagonists decision at the end were always going to be disappointed

This movie was never to be taken as a morality tale imo.

What initially seems like social commentary (Martys views on the current state of society, "Maybe it's someone elses chance") is just an extension of the deconstruction of the horror genre.

plastic glass · 30-04-2012 2:24pm

really liked this film. Once they started showing all the monsters I was glued to teh screen. People say it wasnt scary, which it wasnt, but I did have an awful feeling in my stomach when all the monsters were being released. I mean the workers in the bunker must have been really really afraid. Was obvious they were gonna die horribly.

Bits in the Japanese school were hilarious by the way.

Also some people asking what the film roll would have conjured. I automatically assumed it would have been something like what was in teh Japanese school/from ringu. This is probably wrong as the demon couldnt be in two places at one time. Amd the link is a bit tenious to say the least.

Galvasean · 30-04-2012 11:08pm

The Cloverfield Monster or Super8 maybe?

Warper · 01-05-2012 4:37pm

I thought this was absolute garbage. The first film in a while i contemplated walking out after about 60 mins. Who is this geared at - 12 year olds? The humour is so childish, you would want to be braindead to find it funny. Not funny, not scary, avoid.

Fysh · 01-05-2012 5:19pm

Warper wrote: »

I thought this was absolute garbage. The first film in a while i contemplated walking out after about 60 mins. Who is this geared at - 12 year olds? The humour is so childish, you would want to be braindead to find it funny. Not funny, not scary, avoid.

No husband bulge for you so, I take it...

I reject your assertion that you'd need to be braindead to enjoy it. No need to insult other people for enjoying something you thought was lacking. (Though I have to say, if you thought the humour was childish and didn't think about walking out until an hour in despite the film quite clearly staking out its territory in the opening 20 minutes or so, I'm not sure that's the film's fault....)

PWEI · 01-05-2012 7:31pm

Wanted to go watch this in Movies @ Swords but it's not showing there.
Yet it's showing in the other Movies @ cinema in Dundrum. Strange!

tomissex · 01-05-2012 7:38pm

PWEI wrote: »

Wanted to go watch this in Movies @ Swords but it's not showing there.
Yet it's showing in the other Movies @ cinema in Dundrum. Strange!

Weird! I saw it both times in Swords! Wonder why they're not showing it anymore...

johnny_ultimate · 01-05-2012 8:11pm

Warper wrote: »

I thought this was absolute garbage. The first film in a while i contemplated walking out after about 60 mins. Who is this geared at - 12 year olds? The humour is so childish, you would want to be braindead to find it funny. Not funny, not scary, avoid.

Way too much of this type of post around these parts recently. There are better ways to critique and discuss a film than blindly insulting everyone you disagree with.

Skinfull · 02-05-2012 10:42am

Saw it last night in Cineworld for the 2nd time and it totally holds up. Actually found it just as good and some of the off hand conversation pieces, that are in the background on first viewing make so much more sense and are clever and hilarious in some cases!

Its not scary but there are some tense scenes. Its really funny and clever and has some fantastic shots. i.e. when the red phone rings during the party, love the shot of both of them looking at each other then to the phone.

A friend pointed out the harbinger of doom being there to warn the kids not to go to the cabin, but also the fact that he calls the control room, as if warning them of impending doom!

Great movie, I look forward to the DVD with commentary from Whedon and Goddard.

Galvasean · 02-05-2012 2:06pm

tomissex wrote: »

Weird! I saw it both times in Swords! Wonder why they're not showing it anymore...

The Swords one is a bit smaller IIRC so less seats to distribute between movies.

Princess Peach · 02-05-2012 4:30pm

Saw it last night, I loved it! It was a great twist on a teen slasher film, the plot was so unexpected as I hadn't seen any long previews for it so not sure how much they gave away. But I had just expected a group of kids in a cabin get killed, it was great!

It was so interesting, and I found it really funny too! Thought the writers were so creative with the monsters too.

Andy!! · 02-05-2012 7:02pm

Warper wrote: »

I thought this was absolute garbage. The first film in a while i contemplated walking out after about 60 mins. Who is this geared at - 12 year olds? The humour is so childish, you would want to be braindead to find it funny. Not funny, not scary, avoid.

Trollers gonna troll.

Warper · 04-05-2012 12:41pm

Andy!! wrote: »

Trollers gonna troll.

Why, does speaking my mind equals trolling??

I just this found this film to be one of the worst i have seen all year. Tbh the posts on this thread must be mainly from teenagers which is fair enough as that is the market this film is aimed at. The usual teeny characters -the buff, the archetypal movie version of a slack stoner who is really annoying and so far from being an actual stoner its ridiculous. Then the babes, one an airhead, the other smart and of course the black friend.

Hey everyone is entitled to their opinion but for anyone out there that isnt into this childish type of humour, then trust me, this is bad.

jpm4 · 04-05-2012 12:57pm

Warper wrote: »

Why, does speaking my mind equals trolling??

I just this found this film to be one of the worst i have seen all year. Tbh the posts on this thread must be mainly from teenagers which is fair enough as that is the market this film is aimed at. The usual teeny characters -the buff, the archetypal movie version of a slack stoner who is really annoying and so far from being an actual stoner its ridiculous. Then the babes, one an airhead, the other smart and of course the black friend.

Hey everyone is entitled to their opinion but for anyone out there that isnt into this childish type of humour, then trust me, this is bad.

Oh man, you are going to get lynched here.......

Galvasean · 04-05-2012 1:22pm

Warper wrote: »

Why, does speaking my mind equals trolling??

Speaking one's mind does not equal trolling.
However, making a thinly veiled insult at the intelligence of everyone who has different tastes in film to you is.

johnny_ultimate · 04-05-2012 1:33pm

Warper wrote: »

Hey everyone is entitled to their opinion but for anyone out there that isnt into this childish type of humour, then trust me, this is bad.

Indeed everyone is entitled to an opinion. You are not entitled, however, to call everyone who liked the film 'teenagers' (what an odd insult) or 'idiots'. Enough of that nonsense.

pixelburp · 07-05-2012 2:38pm

Finally got around to seeing this last night, been meaning to for the longest time - particularly once the good reviews came flooding in; although those I know seemed to either love or hate it with equal measure.

I'm fairly conflicted by it really: on the one hand as a lover of old-school horror films, the various winks, nods & obvious affection the script had for the genre was great to see. I spent a lot of my time trying to spot all those nods (eg, I liked the shoutout to The Thing with the shot on the monitor of an arctic base in flames). The scenes in the control room were well done & a unique idea; laughed at the merman gag(s). I tire a little of Whedon's joe-everyman dialogue, but in general it made the people seem relateable anyway.

On the other hand I don't think the film was quite as good, or clever, as it thought it was: The 'twist' seemed quite obvious after the first teenager's death, although I guess to be fair it never seemed to be straining to conceal the mystery; the stoner character felt like a knock-off of Scream's own 4th-wall breaking persona; and the motivations for the elaborate horror scenarios were never adequately explained. No, I don't expect to be led by the hand, but it just felt like the script-writers hadn't really thought the idea through, or at least not beyond the initial pitch.

And I dunno why it annoys me so much, but if you're creating a complicated, hightech zoo, containing almost every nightmare imaginable & monster made flesh, why the fook would you have a big red button that purges the cages & releases them all into a staff hallway? To quote the stoner, that makes what kind off sense? Maybe I just wasn't thinking meta enough, but that just struck me as dumb.

Still a good movie, just not that good. I enjoyed it, but

Lamper.sffc · 07-05-2012 2:59pm

pixelburp wrote: »

Finally got around to seeing this last night, been meaning to for the longest time - particularly once the good reviews came flooding in; although those I know seemed to either love or hate it with equal measure.

I'm fairly conflicted by it really: on the one hand as a lover of old-school horror films, the various winks, nods & obvious affection the script had for the genre was great to see. I spent a lot of my time trying to spot all those nods (eg, I liked the shoutout to The Thing with the shot on the monitor of an arctic base in flames). The scenes in the control room were well done & a unique idea; laughed at the merman gag(s). I tire a little of Whedon's joe-everyman dialogue, but in general it made the people seem relateable anyway.

On the other hand I don't think the film was quite as good, or clever, as it thought it was: The 'twist' seemed quite obvious after the first teenager's death, although I guess to be fair it never seemed to be straining to conceal the mystery; the stoner character felt like a knock-off of Scream's own 4th-wall breaking persona; and the motivations for the elaborate horror scenarios were never adequately explained. No, I don't expect to be led by the hand, but it just felt like the script-writers hadn't really thought the idea through, or at least not beyond the initial pitch.

And I dunno why it annoys me so much, but if you're creating a complicated, hightech zoo, containing almost every nightmare imaginable & monster made flesh, why the fook would you have a big red button that purges the cages & releases them all into a staff hallway? To quote the stoner, that makes what kind off sense? Maybe I just wasn't thinking meta enough, but that just struck me as dumb.

Still a good movie, just not that good. I enjoyed it, but

Im guessing the big red button thingy is just another part of the overall p1sstake

pixelburp · 07-05-2012 3:10pm

Lamper.sffc wrote: »

Im guessing the big red button thingy is just another part of the overall p1sstake

Well like I said, maybe I wasn't thinking meta enough, but I'm struggling to see how it was also an element that lampooned the genre. It just actually seemed like dumb writing, as opposed to another nod towards a convention of some kind.

Skinfull · 07-05-2012 3:14pm

pixelburp wrote: »

...On the other hand I don't think the film was quite as good, or clever, as it thought it was: The 'twist' seemed quite obvious after the first teenager's death, although I guess to be fair it never seemed to be straining to conceal the mystery; ...

There was no twist. It was quite clearly telegraphed what was going on here from the get go though some of it only making sense in hindsight. But Still there was no, guessing where this is going, it was just a joyous journey. Virginal death, optional. :cool:

pixelburp · 07-05-2012 3:26pm

Skinfull wrote: »

There was no twist. It was quite clearly telegraphed what was going on here from the get go though some of it only making sense in hindsight. But Still there was no, guessing where this is going, it was just a joyous journey. Virginal death, optional. :cool:

Well a twist in the sense that we didn't initially know why the teens were being bumped off. And a twist also in the sense that there was a fairly-legitimate reason for all the bloodshed. As soon as I saw the first lever pulled and the blood pouring into the stonework I twigged it was part of some blood-sacrafice-for-gods dealy. Not trying to be 'that guy' who pretends to have guessed all the unknowns btw

S.M.B. · 07-05-2012 3:46pm

Well why else would they be pulling a lever that lets blood pour into some stone work? The whole sacrificial theme had been clearly hinted at in the opening credits and the painting scene.

There was no big twist, no big reveal. Just well paced story telling imo.

I do think your "red button" complaint is a valid one but it didn't irritate me in the slightest.

johnny_ultimate · 07-05-2012 4:05pm

I was very fond of the pace they made the main story revelations at. In fact it may have been my single favourite thing about the film. Even the first lever is a good forty, forty-five minutes in and even then the full details are only slowly leaked out. Thought Godard and Whedon showed a real mastery of pacing throughout the film.

I'd compare it to something like The Chaser or I Saw the Devil: films that take a while to reveal their true intentions (or twist, if you'd prefer), but then play with expectations and explore the implications of said reveal in some detail. I actually much prefer that sort of storytelling than the Shyamalan style final minutes reveal.

The Cabin in the Woods *Spoilers from post 180*

Comments

The Cabin in the Woods Spoilers from post 180