Sho_Nuff82
Member
The ending sounds stupid as hell.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Cabin in The Woods - April 13th - Best horror film in years?
- Thread starter anaron
- Start date
- Status
Messofanego
Banned
Dude, how can you not figure out the reference?! If you haven't watched much horror, I can understand the confusion.
Neuromancer
Member
That's kind of the whole premise/joke behind the movie though...
Holy shit @
angry molesting tree
As someone else said,
different cultures probably have different objectives
I think the idea is
just one team all over the world has to be successful, for any given round of sacrifices
Well there's a big difference between actually seeing a movie just versus having it spoiled for you.
you don't deserve your avatar picture son... prometheus in june, c'mon now, lay off the hyperbole.
cabin was a good fun movie. scream is a better deconstruction, and there are certainly better true horror movies. a good movie, but it doesn't deserve to be on a pedestal.
Messofanego
Banned
Actually, it makes sense why he might enjoy this more, because he had no expectations unlike Prometheus where everyone has been waiting for it for so long. There is a greater chance of disappointment if Prometheus isn't perfect, while Cabin in the Woods probably didn't have as much of a mindshare in his mind so more chance to enjoy with no pressue.
Prometheus is my most anticipated movie of the year and before I saw Cabin in the Woods I thought for sure it would be the years best movie.
I completely disagree with you about Scream.
Mango Positive
Member
Your face sounds stupid as hell.
Sorry. This wasn't a serious insult! It was the journey, not the destination.
BattleMonkey
Member
Lot of things in the movie would sound stupid if you don't see it. The ending fits with the rest of the movie quite well.
I really can't say this movie was a deconstruction of the genre like Scream tried to be. This is a much more overt movie that pays lot of homage to stuff, and some parody.
Fun movie but at no point would I have considered this to be anything but a dark comedy. Already guessed some of the plot because they showed
in all of the trailers and in recent trailer I caught a glimpse of
. It was fun to see how far they were willing to take it though.
At least it was a nice break from the usual Gross Out horror stuff that seems to be the majority of horror movies in theaters nowadays.
the wall
the view of one of the monsters from the "elevator"
At least it was a nice break from the usual Gross Out horror stuff that seems to be the majority of horror movies in theaters nowadays.
They mention how Japan usually always win, and when they failed how the pressure was on them. Also, the others in different countries don't have to know about the grand scheme of things, they maybe just escaped or defeated their monster.
TheChewyWaffles
Member
A competent film with some cool moments, but does not live up to thread title.
Anton Sugar
Member
Great movie, probably one of the funner movies I've seen in a looong time, but a horror movie, this is not. It's more of a
Writing was unique, but still had Whedonisms, though in the context of this particular film, they may have been tongue-in-cheek.
Also, anyone else incredibly disappointed by the very last shot?
monster-movie fan's wet dream.
Writing was unique, but still had Whedonisms, though in the context of this particular film, they may have been tongue-in-cheek.
Chasm scene:
"You gotta give it all you got!"
"I always do."
:-|
"You gotta give it all you got!"
"I always do."
:-|
Also, anyone else incredibly disappointed by the very last shot?
Gimme some Lovecraft shit, not this generic human hand.
faceless007
Member
Damn that was a fun ride. Intelligent send-up and critique of horror but not in a didactic way. It paid homage to well-done horror but still pointed out its flaws.
I'm interested in anyone's subtextual analysis of the film. I'm kind of torn as to whether we're supposed to root for the office people or not. My feeling is that once they unleash the monsters on the office people, we the audience are supposed to be on the kids' side and feel triumphant as all the workers are brutally killed, because they're evil people and deserve to die for their inhumanity. It's a Crowning Moment of Triumph. My friend though thought otherwise, that since the fate of the world depends on them being killed, we're supposed to root for the kids to die. I disagreed, since that wasn't even explained until the last 5 minutes.
And yeah, the final shot of just a hand coming up was a little anticlimactic. Edit: I actually wrote this before seeing the post above me, so we thought the same thing independently.
I was kind of surprised that they showed the girl's boobs. The entire point of the buildup to that scene is to tell the audience "You guys are dirty old man pervs for wanting to see that." And especially knowing Whedon was involved, I was really expecting it to cut away at the last second as a "fuck you" to the audience.
And yeah, the final shot of just a hand coming up was a little anticlimactic. Edit: I actually wrote this before seeing the post above me, so we thought the same thing independently.
I was kind of surprised that they showed the girl's boobs. The entire point of the buildup to that scene is to tell the audience "You guys are dirty old man pervs for wanting to see that." And especially knowing Whedon was involved, I was really expecting it to cut away at the last second as a "fuck you" to the audience.
Anton Sugar
Member
Not to reduce the "message", but I felt that the movie regarded the
"modernity" of sacrifices to no longer just be a sacred ritual, but something that had twisted into a game and showed how out of touch "we" had become with our own humanity.
Thus, the "maybe it's time to give some other species a chance".
Thus, the "maybe it's time to give some other species a chance".
RiderKairuu
Member
WHY did I read the spoilers for this movie instead of just seeing it...fuck.
I actually think that
the old gods are supposed to be the modern horror movie audience. The Director and her staff do their best to appease us with the same old tropes, because the horror movie audience demands gore, nudity, and formula. The fact that the initial villains were Zombie Redneck Torture-porn worshippers spoke to the played out formula that modern audiences seem to buy into. What I'm not sure of is what the writers want us to think about the old gods awakening: is this supposed to represent the core-audience waking up to bitch at anything that doesn't follow genre rules, or is this a "Brand New Day" for audiences, being shown a new way that doesn't rely on cliche?
Or am I just talking like the stoner character?
Or am I just talking like the stoner character?
EDIT: A spoiler-filled review at aintitcool that shares a similar idea - http://www.aintitcool.com/node/54997
FlyingTeacup
Member
they shouldn't have spoiled in the trailer, unless there are more surprises in the movie...
BattleMonkey
Member
Don't know which trailer you mean but if you mean some of the "secret" stuff going on in the movie that the trailer shows later on, it's no big deal. They basically go into that in the first 5 mins
Jinfash
needs 2 extra inches
That became obvious almost instantly, but it was still interesting to see develop (Re: comedy). Even when the main cast TRIED to joke, it was a very familiar type of horror movie comedy. The office scenes on the other hand felt like being ripped from an entirely different movie, direction, script.
So yeah, intentional, but still: Office <3
No, you misunderstood the plot.
Normally, in all the previous rituals, many groups succeeded with Japan historically finishing first and the US finishing second. This special time, every single group failed except the US.
There aren't loads of survivors from previous rituals. There's maybe one a year from each country. Even if that one person believes in one kind of monster (remember that person would have only seen one kind), all it would do is feed back into what the female chemist said. The things we have nightmares about and put into our culture are being inspired by real things, not the other way around. But we treat them as fake.
There aren't loads of survivors from previous rituals. There's maybe one a year from each country. Even if that one person believes in one kind of monster (remember that person would have only seen one kind), all it would do is feed back into what the female chemist said. The things we have nightmares about and put into our culture are being inspired by real things, not the other way around. But we treat them as fake.
Allow me to repeat myself: Fuck you. Don't watch movies ever. You're the viewer everyone hates.
I think it's more than a good, fun movie, but hey that's up to you.
Scream, I think, doesn't quite compare. I do admire Scream for its cultural literacy and all, but it doesn't have much to say about how horror films work. It's simply very well educated, which leads to an exciting film. Cabin has the same amount of knowledge, but it uses it to get a point across.
They don't spoil it in the trailer. Put simply, you don't know a goddamn thing.
Because you're very weak.
I don't think either are the "good" guys. I think a couple awesome readings above mine are right: the old gods can represent horror audiences, or suppressed aspects of society, or whatever. The kids are sacrificed to them but eventually, over the years and through countless rituals, learn enough to be above being sacrificed. The office workers originally don't LOVE killing kids, but they eventually become disconnected and jaded enough to trivialize the proceedings and to underestimate the targets. So basically, what these people said:
There's a healthy serving of blood and guts, but it's never the focus of the film.
vincent vega
Member
a knife to the back is about as bad as it gets. they hide the really gruesome stuff from the camera
Expendable.
Member
Did anyone else love the
Laughed so hard at that conclusion.
Asian kids bit?
TJ Bennett
TJ Hooker
That was definitely my biggest laugh of the movie.
Neuromancer
Member
Mango Positive
Member
EliteArtist
Member
Did anyone else get a kick out of the whole collapsible bong bit?
This was my favorite.
This is covered near the end.
Sigourney says something like "it's different in every culture, but there must always be at least five." Suggesting that the different horror tropes that have dominated cinema in every culture have all derived from this ritual and the reason horror is different in other countries is they have approached the ritual differently. That also explains the whole "we're just behind Japan" in that a huge percentage of samey horror cinema has come from the US using the archetypes of athlete, whore, scholar, fool, and virgin but Japan with its creepy girls and child murders has been slightly more prolific of late.
Thank you, I agree with this 100%. It was a pretty mediocre/average film, but it had some great ideas and was funny at times.
Get off your high horse. The ending was pretty badly done and if it was trying to be serious, it was lame, and if it was trying to be humorous, it was lame. The whole situation could have been resolved better.
That's a valid opinion. One I entirely disagree with, since I think the ending is consistent with the rest of the film thematically. It's valid nonetheless. Because you've actually seen the film.
But do you seriously think someone who looks up two sentences online and uses that to evaluate a film has an opinion worth considering?
Neuromancer
Member
Been thinking about the movie non stop since I watched it. One question:
Not as a plot device but its actual function, in the house.
what was the point of the 1-way glass/mirror connecting the rooms?
My friend pointed out a... well, I don't wanna call it a plothole, but something that didn't make much sense.
How did the directors think that the stoner was dead? We see that they have cameras everywhere. There is never anything that happens that they don't see, even when the characters are running around in the woods. Except for this one instance, this character's supposed death was out of view of any cameras, and then he managed to stay out of view for the rest of the game.
They're so knowledgeable about horror movie tropes, on account of they invented most of them. Surely it would be standard procedure to double check the bodies and not assume anything.
But even aside from these things, there's the fact that, early on, we see that they have screens of vital signs for all of them. Wouldn't they have noticed that he wasn't dead based on the fact that he still had vital signs?
They're so knowledgeable about horror movie tropes, on account of they invented most of them. Surely it would be standard procedure to double check the bodies and not assume anything.
But even aside from these things, there's the fact that, early on, we see that they have screens of vital signs for all of them. Wouldn't they have noticed that he wasn't dead based on the fact that he still had vital signs?
Speaking of plot devices, I think the script definitely feels truncated and some subplots are setup and go nowhere. Honestly I'll excuse it all because at the end of the day it's just a fun movie that succeeds in being fun.
For instance re: subplots
For instance re: subplots
You setup the new staff member at the facility in the beginning. First day on the job and throughout the film he's having ethical issues over what is going on. And in the end that plotline resolves in....him just getting attacked and blown up first thing when monsters come through the room? Seems like there was supposed to be a subplot there.
Also stuff like the two way mirror not really having a clever use later on despite making such a prominent display of it early on.
Also stuff like the two way mirror not really having a clever use later on despite making such a prominent display of it early on.
The ending is totally Buffy style
Neuromancer
Member
Judging by their complete lack of professionalism throughout (placing bets, making jokes the whole time) I could see them getting real sloppy. Once they figured he was dead they completely wrote him off and probably stopped paying attention to any cameras where they weren't tracking the remaining survivors.
The last point about heart rate monitors/etc is a good one. Maybe they turned it off once they figured he was dead.
The last point about heart rate monitors/etc is a good one. Maybe they turned it off once they figured he was dead.
Oh yeah I forgot about that. I'd just chalk it up to incompetence.
The movie stated why the vital signs wasn't on, after he got stabbed his vital signs stopped.Fred mentioned that pot was the reason for this.
I thought of it as just a thing planted by the workers to tempt the virgin or the scholar or whatever. No matter what pairing saw the 1-way mirror, it would have caused some sort of conflict that raised suspicion. If the kids see that and still stay, it's even more their "fault".
I thought of this; I thought it was implied that once he fell into the grave (and then when the two continue further into the facility) their monitoring devices do not work. So he falls in, they lose signal and assume he's dead, and they stop monitoring his vitals. It is a stretch though. This was the one possible hole that I think should have been explained.
EDIT: Oh, I didn't hear the above either. I thought the weed just made him more aware of the weirdness instead of less.
EDIT: Oh, I didn't hear the above either. I thought the weed just made him more aware of the weirdness instead of less.
The new worker was an audience surrogate so the other characters had an excuse to explain some parts of the system.
That was explained in the movie by
Marty messing around with the electrical box in the elevator. The "higher-ups" were the people on the surface, i.e. those not in the bunker.
Neuromancer
Member
Yeah they should have done more with
the new guy. I think he should have tried to help them somehow at the end. He's a good actor, I recognize him from Men of a Certain Age.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked