The Cabin in the Woods *Spoilers from post 180*

johnny_ultimate

Galvasean wrote: »

Doesn't really matter to me if an iconic idea/character etc. get's distorted in a sequel/prequel/spinoff as I can still enjoy the original. Granted you get a lot of slosh, but when you consider 3 of this years most anticipated movies are The Avengers (multi sequel/spinoff), The Dark Knight Rises (threequel) and Prometheus (prequel/spinoff) I wouldn't be too quick to tow the 'damn all sequels etc.!' line towed on the internet all too readily.

Not dismissing the concept of a good sequel at all, but horror series are all to likely to continue on indefinitely (really: can we name many horror sequels that genuinely improve on the original?). Since Cabin in the Woods goes out of its way to achieve finality and a scathingly satirical dismissal of potential sequel opportunities, it stands out as a unique case that actively discourages follow-ups and actually seems to critique the concept. Unless Whedon and Godard were to get back on board with a great idea - given their statements in the film and IRL, that seems wholly unlikely - I think it would be absolutely fantastic if CitW was to remain a glorious once-off. I can only imagine a sequel out of their hands would achieve S. Darko levels of redundancy.

For those reasons, I think we as viewers and fans of the film should make it our business to reject a potential sequel

Galvasean

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

For those reasons, I think we as viewers and fans of the film should make it our business to reject a potential sequel

Stop arguing with me against a CitW sequel as that is clearly not what I am calling for. I have gone on the record more than once on thread saying that I would be interested in a Cube Zero style prequel - something which could ad to the mythology of the original film, but by no means be essential viewing or indeed 'canon' for those uninterested.
Plus, I'm not too big on the 'pitchforks' approach in relation to hypothetical movies we know nothing about.

johnny_ultimate

Galvasean wrote: »

Stop arguing with me against a CitW sequel as that is clearly not what I am calling for. I have gone on the record more than once on thread saying that I would be interested in a Cube Zero style prequel - something which could ad to the mythology of the original film, but by no means be essential viewing or indeed 'canon' for those uninterested.
Plus, I'm not too big on the 'pitchforks' approach in relation to hypothetical movies we know nothing about.

If you're interested in a prequel, that is more than fair enough, and I also think there's no point getting up in arms about hypothetical sequels that will likely never happen. Apologies if I misinterpreted your point, which I seem to have done.

I just personally think Cabin in the Woods acts as an absolutely definitive once-off, prequel or sequel, and it's so rare to see a film of this type that makes that so utterly clear. IMO, it was one of the great strengths of the film as a whole, and it was a giddy feeling to leave the cinema on (even with a very last shot that was a bit silly).

Canis Lupus

Watched last night not having heard of this but seeing great reviews across the board before leaving for the cinema.

I left feeling mostly meh. I'm not sure what it was missing but for me I was itching to just leave towards the last 15 mins. I didn't care what happened. Don't really understand all the hype.

johnny_ultimate

I'm just reading through some of the reviews for the film out there in critics-land, and I'm genuinely rather bamboozled by the amount that dock it points on the basis that it's not scary. I think it's pretty self-evident from even the brilliant title sequence (an hilariously unnecessary jumpy bit) that we were in comedy town?

Galvasean

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

I'm just reading through some of the reviews for the film out there in critics-land, and I'm genuinely rather bamboozled by the amount that dock it points on the basis that it's not scary. I think it's pretty self-evident from even the brilliant title sequence (an hilariously unnecessary jumpy bit) that we were in comedy town?

Perhaps the trailers promos (which I have not watched) paint it as horror?
It's definitely not supposed to be a straight up horror, more a dark comedy which celebrates the horror genre, embracing it completely but not too proud to make light of the silly staples often associated with it.

WoollyRedHat

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

Zero-Cool

Just saw it there, thought it was very good! Very Whedon. Is there any scene after the credits? I left when the credits were rolling but noticed the cinema stayed dark. Did I miss anything?

OldeCinemaSoz

i was right!

the trailer for cabin in the woods gave the game away.

:rolleyes:

sad film distributors haven't got a clue!

krudler

fantastic,fantastic stuff, flipped the tired old jock/slut/brain/virgin/stoner character models on their heads and messed around with horror movies, some fantastic one liners, great setpieces and it was...fun, something that movies lack as a whole these days. knew exactly what it was and ran with it. I'd happily sit through it again right now.

Millicent

sheehy83 wrote: »

Just saw it there, thought it was very good! Very Whedon. Is there any scene after the credits? I left when the credits were rolling but noticed the cinema stayed dark. Did I miss anything?

Nope. I was expecting something at the end so waited till the credits ended and then felt very silly. :pac:

Links234

can anyone tell me, what the

merman

was a reference to?

Xevkin

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

I'm just reading through some of the reviews for the film out there in critics-land, and I'm genuinely rather bamboozled by the amount that dock it points on the basis that it's not scary. I think it's pretty self-evident from even the brilliant title sequence (an hilariously unnecessary jumpy bit) that we were in comedy town?

Avoided any exposure to trailers going into the film, and have to say that there was a middle section for me that had plenty of decent scares and tension. I admit, too often a cut to the control room may disrupt things, but I found scenes such as the wolf-dare to have a . . .chill

I may have been enjoying myself so much that I let that happen, on reflection. The film made my week.

jpm4

It was good fun, very enjoyable but I think Scream was a a more cohesive and less laboured satire of the horror genre. Great fun seeing everything running amuck towards the end!

Galvasean

Links234 wrote: »

can anyone tell me, what the

merman

was a reference to?

I'm not sure exactly, but probably

something Lovecraftian, perhaps Dagon. Personally I like to think it's a reference to this guy: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/b/b6/Merman-motu.jpg/422px-Merman-motu.jpg

The King of Moo

I saw this last night and loved it, and I wouldn't really be much of a fan of the Whedonverse.

I like that it doesn't just deconstruct the tropes of the genre and just reveal these tropes and leave it at that, a la Scream.
It did something a lot deeper and looked at what horror really is and why we enjoy it.

I also think the trailers were fairly well-pitched for the most part. They revealed that it's not just a regular horror (I can't believe anyone went into it expecting that!) but not what it really is at all.

Necronomicon

I utterly loved this. I haven't left the cinema with that kind of feeling since Drag Me To Hell, certainly as far as horrors go anyway; it was bordering on giddy. The take on the genre, wonderful homages (

to my eyes it was essentially the cabin from The Evil Dead; and seeing the screenshots of the whiteboard which had Deadite and rape-tree references has me swooning

), the sharp dialogue (wouldn't expect anything else from something co-penned by Whedon), the humour; I loved it.

I'm not sure if I'm alone on this, but I genuinely thought that the film was coming to an end when the 'virgin' was on the pier with the redneck zombie while the party was going on in the facility. That made the actual last half hour or so all the more impactful. Once the creatures were released into the facility I wore a grin from ear to ear that didn't fade even after I was back in the car park.

gazzer

Millicent wrote: »

Nope. I was expecting something at the end so waited till the credits ended and then felt very silly. :pac:

Me too I made my 2 friends wait with me (we were the only 3 left in the cinema) because I was convinced there was going to be an extra scene after the credits .... Possibly Buffy or Angel fighting the demons

Galvasean

Gonna go see this again on Sunday.
Ah shure, why not? Keeps me away from Battleship.

krudler

Galvasean wrote: »

Gonna go see this again on Sunday.
Ah shure, why not? Keeps me away from Battleship.

I wanna see Battleship

Nervous Wreck

Something I forgot to comment on earlier. Some people were kinda complaining about

Sgourney Weaver's cameo

being lame cos it

happened only last year in Paul

. What those people are forgetting is, The Cabin In The Woods

was originally supposed to be released in 2010. TCITW did it first; Paul was just released first.

fluke

Aw what a great film, saw it last night with a mate and we both felt at the halfway mark this was gonna be mildly entertaining and that it wouldn't be as smart as it thought it was, but wow did the last 20 mins or so turn the whole film into a great ride.

Killer unicorn go!

IRL_Sinister

What an awful movie.

johnny_ultimate

IRL_Sinister wrote: »

What an awful movie.

Care to elaborate? Curious to hear why.

IRL_Sinister

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Care to elaborate? Curious to hear why.

It was plain old silly. I got what it was trying to achieve but I didn't find it entertaining. It had some good 1-liners but it wasn't scary at any point. It had a bit of tension here and there. Personally found it all-round retarded.

I particularly disliked the part where

they were in the elevator and they were surrounded by all the other 'deaths' in the boxes.

. That part was terrible and was like looking at a horrible production of a kid's horror movie. Don't even get me started on how terrible the ending was.

Nervous Wreck

IRL_Sinister wrote: »

It was plain old silly.

That was kinda the point...

IRL_Sinister wrote: »

I got what it was trying to achieve but I didn't find it entertaining. It had some good 1-liners but it wasn't scary at any point.

It's not a horror film...

IRL_Sinister

Nervous Wreck wrote: »

That was kinda the point...



It's not a horror film...

Yes I know that was the point, but you'd never have gathered that from the trailer. I dislike silly movies, especially when I pay money for them. It's not my cup of tea, as suggested by me saying I did not find the movie good. I, according to the policies and rules of this forum, am entitled to say such opinions.

I know it's not a horror film. At no point did I say it was. I said it wasn't scary because one of the captions, alongside funny, was 'scary'. I did not find a single moment of it scary. It was very predictable. Guy and girl go to woods, get killed. Guy stands by window, gets pulled through. I KNOW that's the point. I just did not like it. I'm sure there are many people out there who do, probably many who saw this as fresh and new but I was not one of them nor did I enjoy this at all.

dan1895

Nervous Wreck wrote: »

That was kinda the point...



It's not a horror film...

Not what the trailer would have you believe though. If I had been expecting something silly I wouldn't of wasted my time going to see it.

vangoz

IRL_Sinister wrote: »

Yes I know that was the point, but you'd never have gathered that from the trailer. I dislike silly movies, especially when I pay money for them. It's not my cup of tea, as suggested by me saying I did not find the movie good. I, according to the policies and rules of this forum, am entitled to say such opinions.

I know it's not a horror film. At no point did I say it was. I said it wasn't scary because one of the captions, alongside funny, was 'scary'. I did not find a single moment of it scary. It was very predictable. Guy and girl go to woods, get killed. Guy stands by window, gets pulled through. I KNOW that's the point. I just did not like it. I'm sure there are many people out there who do, probably many who saw this as fresh and new but I was not one of them nor did I enjoy this at all.

It has silly parts, but to call the overall movie silly would be a bit far stretched. It has intellegence and self awareness woven throughout, it makes you think on a few levels what the creators are trying to repesenbt with the various plots.

For example, I felt the Gods were in fact us the audeince, the people runnig the cabin represent the writers and the proccess they go through writing a script, the mistakes commonly made and especially the abundance of deuce ex machina they're are guilty of (ie the feramones, the purge monsters button, the little girl zombie)

People have different tastes and thats fine, but its not fair to judge something and call it stupid if you dont grasp the basic concept.

IRL_Sinister

vangoz wrote: »

It has silly parts, but to call the overall movie silly would be a bit far stretched. It has intellegence and self awareness woven troughout, it makes you think on a few levels what the creators are trying to repesenbt with the various plots.

For example, I felt the Gods were in fact us the audeince, the people runnig the cabin represent the writers and the proccess they go through writing a script, the mistakes commonly made and especially the abundance of deuce ex machina they're are guilty of (ie the feramones, the purge monsters button, the little girl zombie)

People have different tastes and thats fine, but its not fair to judge something and call it stupid if you dont grasp the basic concept.

I do grasp the basic concept. The concept of the 'virgin' was interesting. It was actually a very clever spin on the traditional 'cabin in the woods' (best term i can come up with) story/plot. I think you're thinking too much about it though when you compare the guys 'underneath' as the guys who wrote the movie. I think the Gods thing at the end was a piss-take.

EDIT: Although they at least did leave the most likeable character alive at the end.