Cabin in The Woods

Recommended Videos

Axolotl

New member
Feb 17, 2008
2,401
0
0
ilovemyLunchbox said:
Axolotl said:
But the Director stated it at the end. They weren't doing it for fun. They weren't getting back at the Foundation for tormenting them. If that was the revenge, then Mission Accomplished the second they unleashed the monsters. By letting the Ancients destroy the world, they basically negated the whole premise of fighting for your life. What was the point of anything in the movie if it all culminated in giving up? I don't care if the Ancients destroy the world or not. Whatever ending is reached needs to be earned. You can't have something that dramatic happen just because your characters are assholes and don't want to sacrifice themselves, despite the fact that they'd die no matter what. Hell, that's not even true. They could have just killed the Fool and the Virgin would still live. She actively killed herself just because the guy who's been high the entire time said it would be a good idea. It's an anti-climax because there is no excitement. We've seen the world end in a ton of other movies, why does that still count as an exciting event in itself? It needs more meaning than that.

I'd give the movie a 9/10*

*The ending is shit, make up your own instead and you'll agree with 9/10.
Name 3 other films where evil gods of an bygone age wake up and wipe humanity from the face of the earth, because I have to say I haven't seen it happen before. Look it was set up that unless she killed her only living friend the world would end, she wasn't willing to do it and thus the world ended. There's no other way the film could have ended without it being the same sort of bullshit cop-out most films have.
 

Forgetitnow344

New member
Jan 8, 2010
542
0
0
Axolotl said:
ilovemyLunchbox said:
Axolotl said:
But the Director stated it at the end. They weren't doing it for fun. They weren't getting back at the Foundation for tormenting them. If that was the revenge, then Mission Accomplished the second they unleashed the monsters. By letting the Ancients destroy the world, they basically negated the whole premise of fighting for your life. What was the point of anything in the movie if it all culminated in giving up? I don't care if the Ancients destroy the world or not. Whatever ending is reached needs to be earned. You can't have something that dramatic happen just because your characters are assholes and don't want to sacrifice themselves, despite the fact that they'd die no matter what. Hell, that's not even true. They could have just killed the Fool and the Virgin would still live. She actively killed herself just because the guy who's been high the entire time said it would be a good idea. It's an anti-climax because there is no excitement. We've seen the world end in a ton of other movies, why does that still count as an exciting event in itself? It needs more meaning than that.

I'd give the movie a 9/10*

*The ending is shit, make up your own instead and you'll agree with 9/10.
Name 3 other films where evil gods of an bygone age wake up and wipe humanity from the face of the earth, because I have to say I haven't seen it happen before. Look it was set up that unless she killed her only living friend the world would end, she wasn't willing to do it and thus the world ended. There's no other way the film could have ended without it being the same sort of bullshit cop-out most films have.
I didn't specifically state that gods did it. In recent memory, the movie Knowing ended with the world being swallowed by a solar flare (or something). It didn't need a cop-out, but it didn't need to fall into those two choices: die with them or die for them. It would have been PERFECT if he had announced, "Neither!" and done SOMETHING more actively defiant than NOTHING, even if it resulted in the world being destroyed. My issue is with the main character just sitting down and giving up. He didn't even try. What was the point?

There's a question. At the end of the movie, what was the fucking point?
 

BreakfastMan

Scandinavian Jawbreaker
Jul 22, 2010
4,367
0
0
Yeah, I did not think it was very scary either. I also thought the actions of the characters at the end (in addition to some other stuff) made no sense with their characters. All in all, it was a fun movie, even if it was a bit pretentious.
 

Axolotl

New member
Feb 17, 2008
2,401
0
0
ilovemyLunchbox said:
Axolotl said:
ilovemyLunchbox said:
Axolotl said:
But the Director stated it at the end. They weren't doing it for fun. They weren't getting back at the Foundation for tormenting them. If that was the revenge, then Mission Accomplished the second they unleashed the monsters. By letting the Ancients destroy the world, they basically negated the whole premise of fighting for your life. What was the point of anything in the movie if it all culminated in giving up? I don't care if the Ancients destroy the world or not. Whatever ending is reached needs to be earned. You can't have something that dramatic happen just because your characters are assholes and don't want to sacrifice themselves, despite the fact that they'd die no matter what. Hell, that's not even true. They could have just killed the Fool and the Virgin would still live. She actively killed herself just because the guy who's been high the entire time said it would be a good idea. It's an anti-climax because there is no excitement. We've seen the world end in a ton of other movies, why does that still count as an exciting event in itself? It needs more meaning than that.

I'd give the movie a 9/10*

*The ending is shit, make up your own instead and you'll agree with 9/10.
Name 3 other films where evil gods of an bygone age wake up and wipe humanity from the face of the earth, because I have to say I haven't seen it happen before. Look it was set up that unless she killed her only living friend the world would end, she wasn't willing to do it and thus the world ended. There's no other way the film could have ended without it being the same sort of bullshit cop-out most films have.
I didn't specifically state that gods did it. In recent memory, the movie Knowing ended with the world being swallowed by a solar flare (or something). It didn't need a cop-out, but it didn't need to fall into those two choices: die with them or die for them. It would have been PERFECT if he had announced, "Neither!" and done SOMETHING more actively defiant than NOTHING, even if it resulted in the world being destroyed. My issue is with the main character just sitting down and giving up. He didn't even try. What was the point?

There's a question. At the end of the movie, what was the fucking point?
To be entertained? To see the cliches of the horror genre taken apart? To watch a the monsters from a dozen or so classic horror films get set loose on a bunker full of people? Take your pick really. For my money it was 95 minutes of pure awesome with the best ending I've seen for a film in a long time.
 

Forgetitnow344

New member
Jan 8, 2010
542
0
0
Axolotl said:
ilovemyLunchbox said:
Axolotl said:
ilovemyLunchbox said:
Axolotl said:
But the Director stated it at the end. They weren't doing it for fun. They weren't getting back at the Foundation for tormenting them. If that was the revenge, then Mission Accomplished the second they unleashed the monsters. By letting the Ancients destroy the world, they basically negated the whole premise of fighting for your life. What was the point of anything in the movie if it all culminated in giving up? I don't care if the Ancients destroy the world or not. Whatever ending is reached needs to be earned. You can't have something that dramatic happen just because your characters are assholes and don't want to sacrifice themselves, despite the fact that they'd die no matter what. Hell, that's not even true. They could have just killed the Fool and the Virgin would still live. She actively killed herself just because the guy who's been high the entire time said it would be a good idea. It's an anti-climax because there is no excitement. We've seen the world end in a ton of other movies, why does that still count as an exciting event in itself? It needs more meaning than that.

I'd give the movie a 9/10*

*The ending is shit, make up your own instead and you'll agree with 9/10.
Name 3 other films where evil gods of an bygone age wake up and wipe humanity from the face of the earth, because I have to say I haven't seen it happen before. Look it was set up that unless she killed her only living friend the world would end, she wasn't willing to do it and thus the world ended. There's no other way the film could have ended without it being the same sort of bullshit cop-out most films have.
I didn't specifically state that gods did it. In recent memory, the movie Knowing ended with the world being swallowed by a solar flare (or something). It didn't need a cop-out, but it didn't need to fall into those two choices: die with them or die for them. It would have been PERFECT if he had announced, "Neither!" and done SOMETHING more actively defiant than NOTHING, even if it resulted in the world being destroyed. My issue is with the main character just sitting down and giving up. He didn't even try. What was the point?

There's a question. At the end of the movie, what was the fucking point?
To be entertained? To see the cliches of the horror genre taken apart? To watch a the monsters from a dozen or so classic horror films get set loose on a bunker full of people? Take your pick really. For my money it was 95 minutes of pure awesome with the best ending I've seen for a film in a long time.
It was 90 minutes of pure awesome with an ending that should have rocked the horror genre, but it wound up as a fart in the bath.
 

JoeAverage1977

New member
Oct 27, 2011
2
0
0
to me the ending was simply
a way of subverting yet another horror movie trope: the never ending series of sequels. Can't have much of a sequel if the world ends ... unless they make another similar movie but instead of horror they play with the tropes of disaster movies, that could be neat actually.
 

Forgetitnow344

New member
Jan 8, 2010
542
0
0
JoeAverage1977 said:
to me the ending was simply
a way of subverting yet another horror movie trope: the never ending series of sequels. Can't have much of a sequel if the world ends ... unless they make another similar movie but instead of horror they play with the tropes of disaster movies, that could be neat actually.
You know what? I actually kind of accept this. It's still anti-climactic, but at least it makes more sense than the face value.
 

Misho-

New member
May 20, 2010
398
0
0
ilovemyLunchbox said:
MorganL4 said:
ilovemyLunchbox said:
Axolotl said:
But the Director stated it at the end. They weren't doing it for fun. They weren't getting back at the Foundation for tormenting them. If that was the revenge, then Mission Accomplished the second they unleashed the monsters. By letting the Ancients destroy the world, they basically negated the whole premise of fighting for your life. What was the point of anything in the movie if it all culminated in giving up? I don't care if the Ancients destroy the world or not. Whatever ending is reached needs to be earned. You can't have something that dramatic happen just because your characters are assholes and don't want to sacrifice themselves, despite the fact that they'd die no matter what. Hell, that's not even true. They could have just killed the Fool and the Virgin would still live. She actively killed herself just because the guy who's been high the entire time said it would be a good idea. It's an anti-climax because there is no excitement. We've seen the world end in a ton of other movies, why does that still count as an exciting event in itself? It needs more meaning than that.

I'd give the movie a 9/10*

*The ending is shit, make up your own instead and you'll agree with 9/10.
You have got to figure, If you have just seen all your friends die and then got mauled by a werewolf, would you be willing to kill the last of your friends when he is the one who just killed the werewolf? AND saved you from the redneck zombies? I mean she was pretty stressed out and at that point I don't know if you would give a damn about the rest of the world... I mean seriously? Would you, after "the rest of the world" required you to be tortured in order for it to live, you are then supposed to show it compassion? I don't think most people would. Also, if greek mythology ( and star trek) have taught us anything it is that gods need worshipers, so they'd have made someone else I mean they are gods...
Then most people are cowardly. I would sacrifice myself for the world in a heartbeat. Think about this: no matter how worthless you feel, wouldn't it be nice to trade your life for every other human life on the planet? How worthwhile would you feel? It's absolutely shameful to just sit and huff about it and it makes the movie unwatchable a second time around.

Lol such a Spoilerific thread, every other reply is a Spoilers: Click to view kind of response.

Let me fall into the same trappings to reply:

Well, there is always someone else... Mass Effect style (Or even just evolution style, maybe some bacteria will evolve into life again after millions of years and some other intelligent race will come along. Besides in stories about Ancient Ones (similar to the Old Gods) there is always some race that came before humans or dinosaurs and always will be one. But anyhow even if there isn't anyone else, it is a great way to end the movie. Basically their point (The Fool and the Virgin) was that humanity was rotten, how rotten?? They will accept a horrific ritual in order to save themselves (maybe for a higher goal) but it also shows the guys doing bets on which monster will kill the teenagers this time. That is the mentality of the defeated, accepting their reality and looking for no other choice, they were even willing to kill a bunch of 8 year old to keep the process. And the Virgin apologizes for almost killing him at the end seeing how it is all pointless, if they save the world by killing the Fool, the process will only keep on going and going... It's like stoping the timer on a nuclear bomb every hour by some great sacrifice only to have it restart and do it all again, or do a random straw draw when a village population grows too big in order to pick who must be exiled into a hazardous environment to die. Flipping them off (the system, the rules, the ritual, even the old gods themselves) It's a great send off, it's like saying "You are not the boss of me, I could die, but to save this assholes??? They don't deserve it, do your worst" Positive highlights, the guy lives (outlives the girl) and the "Monster is still alive bullshit" set up for a sequel is simply brilliant because there is NO sequel :D
 

HigherTomorrow

New member
Jan 24, 2010
649
0
0
Personally, I wanted the movie to end with the "fool" and "virgin" roles being switched. Marty suddenly realizes that he was the virgin (although it's not expressly stated, it's somewhat implied that he is when Jules mentions their thing in college not going anywhere) and that Dana, who had made quite a lot of stupid decisions throughout the movie (and even before it had begun; the first scene reveals that she had dated her college professor despite her friends' warnings) was originally intended to be the fool. It would've switched the movie (and the horror genre itself, which Cabin in the Woods was made to do anyway) on its head and I really, really thought that was the way it was going to end-- Marty, had, after-all, escaped almost certain death. It was obvious he was important to the plot.

In fact, I imagine that that's how it originally was supposed to end, but something made them change their minds about it at the last second. I think them not going this way was the biggest surprise.

This was really the only disappointment in the entire movie. I otherwise loved it.
 

Forgetitnow344

New member
Jan 8, 2010
542
0
0
HigherTomorrow said:
Personally, I wanted the movie to end with the "fool" and "virgin" roles being switched. Marty suddenly realizes that he was the virgin (although it's not expressly stated, it's somewhat implied that he is when Jules mentions their thing in college not going anywhere) and that Dana, who had made quite a lot of stupid decisions throughout the movie (and even before it had begun; the first scene reveals that she had dated her college professor despite her friends' warnings) was originally intended to be the fool. It would've switched the movie (and the horror genre itself, which Cabin in the Woods was made to do anyway) on its head and I really, really thought that was the way it was going to end-- Marty, had, after-all, escaped almost certain death. It was obvious he was important to the plot.

In fact, I imagine that that's how it originally was supposed to end, but something made them change their minds about it at the last second. I think them not going this way was the biggest surprise.

This was really the only disappointment in the entire movie. I otherwise loved it.
This makes a LOT of sense. Especially when you consider Dana was in a relationship with her professor, it could have definitely made her the fool. Marty could have been a virgin. He seemed disinterested in sex.

I've heard a whole lot of arguments about the ending of this movie, and basically every other ending this movie could have had would have been better than the actual ending.
 

HigherTomorrow

New member
Jan 24, 2010
649
0
0
ilovemyLunchbox said:
This makes a LOT of sense. Especially when you consider Dana was in a relationship with her professor, it could have definitely made her the fool. Marty could have been a virgin. He seemed disinterested in sex.

I've heard a whole lot of arguments about the ending of this movie, and basically every other ending this movie could have had would have been better than the actual ending.
Honestly, I was surprised it didn't turn out the way I said it would. I turned to the girl I was sitting next to and (breaking my "aloof & cool" attitude I was putting on in an effort to woo her) excitedly began to explain how it was going to end with 10 minutes left on the movie. She too got excited at the premise and we then excitedly told all our friends how it was going to end.

And then angry god hand. Movie over.

Oh well.
 

3quency

New member
Jun 12, 2009
446
0
0
ilovemyLunchbox said:
I didn't specifically state that gods did it. In recent memory, the movie Knowing ended with the world being swallowed by a solar flare (or something). It didn't need a cop-out, but it didn't need to fall into those two choices: die with them or die for them. It would have been PERFECT if he had announced, "Neither!" and done SOMETHING more actively defiant than NOTHING, even if it resulted in the world being destroyed. My issue is with the main character just sitting down and giving up. He didn't even try. What was the point?

There's a question. At the end of the movie, what was the fucking point?
This is getting kinda meta, but I think at the end Joss was parodying himself. We all know his infamous love of killing off sympathetic protagonists to the point that it's basically his calling card, and he hates that. I think it was sort of him going "oh you expect someone you like to die, huh? How about fucking EVERYONE!" Regardless I walked out the cinema with a smile on my face. I loved the shit out of that film.
 

MorganL4

Person
May 1, 2008
1,364
0
0
Axolotl said:
ilovemyLunchbox said:
Axolotl said:
ilovemyLunchbox said:
Axolotl said:
But the Director stated it at the end. They weren't doing it for fun. They weren't getting back at the Foundation for tormenting them. If that was the revenge, then Mission Accomplished the second they unleashed the monsters. By letting the Ancients destroy the world, they basically negated the whole premise of fighting for your life. What was the point of anything in the movie if it all culminated in giving up? I don't care if the Ancients destroy the world or not. Whatever ending is reached needs to be earned. You can't have something that dramatic happen just because your characters are assholes and don't want to sacrifice themselves, despite the fact that they'd die no matter what. Hell, that's not even true. They could have just killed the Fool and the Virgin would still live. She actively killed herself just because the guy who's been high the entire time said it would be a good idea. It's an anti-climax because there is no excitement. We've seen the world end in a ton of other movies, why does that still count as an exciting event in itself? It needs more meaning than that.

I'd give the movie a 9/10*

*The ending is shit, make up your own instead and you'll agree with 9/10.
Name 3 other films where evil gods of an bygone age wake up and wipe humanity from the face of the earth, because I have to say I haven't seen it happen before. Look it was set up that unless she killed her only living friend the world would end, she wasn't willing to do it and thus the world ended. There's no other way the film could have ended without it being the same sort of bullshit cop-out most films have.
I didn't specifically state that gods did it. In recent memory, the movie Knowing ended with the world being swallowed by a solar flare (or something). It didn't need a cop-out, but it didn't need to fall into those two choices: die with them or die for them. It would have been PERFECT if he had announced, "Neither!" and done SOMETHING more actively defiant than NOTHING, even if it resulted in the world being destroyed. My issue is with the main character just sitting down and giving up. He didn't even try. What was the point?

There's a question. At the end of the movie, what was the fucking point?
To be entertained? To see the cliches of the horror genre taken apart? To watch a the monsters from a dozen or so classic horror films get set loose on a bunker full of people? Take your pick really. For my money it was 95 minutes of pure awesome with the best ending I've seen for a film in a long time.
You say that now, as do I, but you and I are sitting comfortably in our office chairs typing on our computers. What I am saying is: If you had just seen all your friends tortured, and murdered, and then got mauled by a werewolf, would you make the same call? And if you are taking the view of the fool, then you have to factor in that you are also totally baked, so logical, clear decisions have a good shot at escaping you.
 

Bobic

New member
Nov 10, 2009
1,532
0
0
BreakfastMan said:
Yeah, I did not think it was very scary either. I also thought the actions of the characters at the end (in addition to some other stuff) made no sense with their characters. All in all, it was a fun movie, even if it was a bit pretentious.
Just out of curiosity, but what made this film 'pretentious'?
 

Redlin5_v1legacy

Better Red than Dead
Aug 5, 2009
48,836
0
0
Maybe I'm just not a seasoned horror fan because I was genuinely scared at points...

Anyway I thought it was quite clever and had a good blend of laughs and scares.
 

BreakfastMan

Scandinavian Jawbreaker
Jul 22, 2010
4,367
0
0
Bobic said:
BreakfastMan said:
Yeah, I did not think it was very scary either. I also thought the actions of the characters at the end (in addition to some other stuff) made no sense with their characters. All in all, it was a fun movie, even if it was a bit pretentious.
Just out of curiosity, but what made this film 'pretentious'?
It seemed like it was not as smart or deep as it thought it was. That is pretty much what I mean when I say "pretentious".
 

Mike Fang

New member
Mar 20, 2008
458
0
0
NameIsRobertPaulson said:
Uh, hate to break it to you, but Cube was a motion picture release, not a Sci-Fi original.
Oh that's right! I forgot, it was the sequel (I think) that was the direct-to-tv one. My mistake.