Building High-Performance Muscle™
Get a Life
 
Movie: Cabin in the Woods
 

WhiteFlash
Level 1

Join date: Apr 2004
Location: Texas, USA
Posts: 9307

kevinm1 wrote:
roybot wrote:
SSC wrote:

Good to hear that others liked it and enjoyed it. I don't know one person who hasn't enjoyed it yet, except for an idiot I know who has probably seen every Stathem movie in-theatre. So, 'nuff said.


Couple of annoying goons behind me made a point of chatting loudly and putting on a false nasal laugh when the gore started flying. That's usually a sign of fear or discomfort (horror noobs). Rest of the audience had a blast with a high interest level, lots of genuine laughs and plenty of people telling the idiots to STFU and stop ruining the movie for everyone else.


That's why I pay extra for the Luxury seats, better class of people and I don't have to sit near the humans who talk, play on their phones or whatever. I guess if one is paying an extra $5.00 a seat one is their to actually watch the movie



I've never heard of "luxury seats" in a theatre. That's gotta be an east coast thing. Are you in a separate room or something?

  Report
 

roybot
Level 1

Join date: Jul 2007
Location:
Posts: 6586

WhiteFlash wrote:
kevinm1 wrote:
roybot wrote:
SSC wrote:

Good to hear that others liked it and enjoyed it. I don't know one person who hasn't enjoyed it yet, except for an idiot I know who has probably seen every Stathem movie in-theatre. So, 'nuff said.


Couple of annoying goons behind me made a point of chatting loudly and putting on a false nasal laugh when the gore started flying. That's usually a sign of fear or discomfort (horror noobs). Rest of the audience had a blast with a high interest level, lots of genuine laughs and plenty of people telling the idiots to STFU and stop ruining the movie for everyone else.


That's why I pay extra for the Luxury seats, better class of people and I don't have to sit near the humans who talk, play on their phones or whatever. I guess if one is paying an extra $5.00 a seat one is their to actually watch the movie



I've never heard of "luxury seats" in a theatre. That's gotta be an east coast thing. Are you in a separate room or something?


Some places offer 'premier' seats which just means you'll pay extra to sit at the back and further away from the screen.

True luxury seats exist where you sit at the back on a closed-off balcony, with leather couches instead of conventional seating and you get unlimited drinks/ nachos. Costs upwards of $25 a pop (standard screening). The only perk I see from these is that you're so far back that nobody can fire popcorn at the back of your head.

  Report
 

kevinm1
Level 5

Join date: Mar 2007
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Posts: 2396

roybot wrote:
WhiteFlash wrote:
kevinm1 wrote:
roybot wrote:
SSC wrote:

Good to hear that others liked it and enjoyed it. I don't know one person who hasn't enjoyed it yet, except for an idiot I know who has probably seen every Stathem movie in-theatre. So, 'nuff said.


Couple of annoying goons behind me made a point of chatting loudly and putting on a false nasal laugh when the gore started flying. That's usually a sign of fear or discomfort (horror noobs). Rest of the audience had a blast with a high interest level, lots of genuine laughs and plenty of people telling the idiots to STFU and stop ruining the movie for everyone else.


That's why I pay extra for the Luxury seats, better class of people and I don't have to sit near the humans who talk, play on their phones or whatever. I guess if one is paying an extra $5.00 a seat one is their to actually watch the movie



I've never heard of "luxury seats" in a theatre. That's gotta be an east coast thing. Are you in a separate room or something?


Some places offer 'premier' seats which just means you'll pay extra to sit at the back and further away from the screen.

True luxury seats exist where you sit at the back on a closed-off balcony, with leather couches instead of conventional seating and you get unlimited drinks/ nachos. Costs upwards of $25 a pop (standard screening). The only perk I see from these is that you're so far back that nobody can fire popcorn at the back of your head.



That's what we have near me, also you can't see the riff raff playing with their phones, and a watier serves you food and beverages

  Report
 

four60
Level 1

Join date: May 2006
Location: Maryland, USA
Posts: 7330

roybot wrote:
WhiteFlash wrote:
kevinm1 wrote:
roybot wrote:
SSC wrote:

Good to hear that others liked it and enjoyed it. I don't know one person who hasn't enjoyed it yet, except for an idiot I know who has probably seen every Stathem movie in-theatre. So, 'nuff said.


Couple of annoying goons behind me made a point of chatting loudly and putting on a false nasal laugh when the gore started flying. That's usually a sign of fear or discomfort (horror noobs). Rest of the audience had a blast with a high interest level, lots of genuine laughs and plenty of people telling the idiots to STFU and stop ruining the movie for everyone else.


That's why I pay extra for the Luxury seats, better class of people and I don't have to sit near the humans who talk, play on their phones or whatever. I guess if one is paying an extra $5.00 a seat one is their to actually watch the movie



I've never heard of "luxury seats" in a theatre. That's gotta be an east coast thing. Are you in a separate room or something?


Some places offer 'premier' seats which just means you'll pay extra to sit at the back and further away from the screen.

True luxury seats exist where you sit at the back on a closed-off balcony, with leather couches instead of conventional seating and you get unlimited drinks/ nachos. Costs upwards of $25 a pop (standard screening). The only perk I see from these is that you're so far back that nobody can fire popcorn at the back of your head.


25 a pop. That is nothing.
These days that is regular price plus 2 medium drinks for 2 people. In NYC I use to go on the duece (42nd street) and see double feature films for 5 bucks. Seen 5 deadly Venoms and Dawn of the Dead that way. But it was always filled with teens yelling and stuff. But if something came out that you wanted to just get into and enjoy without the noise you went beyone 50th street and go during a time when most of the crowd are middle aged adults. That is how I seen Back to the future.

Sorry had a teenage NYC flash back.

  Report
 

WhiteFlash
Level 1

Join date: Apr 2004
Location: Texas, USA
Posts: 9307

^^^ Damn. I thought 10 bucks per ticket and $8 for a large popcorn [with free refills] was a ripoff. Chalk up another "W" for Texas.

  Report
 

jehovasfitness
Level 10

Join date: Jan 2006
Location: Maryland, USA
Posts: 12547

yeah, it's $13.50 per ticket here and you get plenty of rude people. it takes a great movie for me to want to drop $30 to go see it. Such a rip.

  Report
 

pgtips
Level

Join date: Aug 2011
Location:
Posts: 954

Just got back from watching it.

My opinion was "MEH" - it's worth a watch, but I wouldn't buy the DVD or even watch it again.

  Report
 

optheta
Level 1

Join date: Feb 2009
Location:
Posts: 3592

pgtips wrote:
Just got back from watching it.

My opinion was "MEH" - it's worth a watch, but I wouldn't buy the DVD or even watch it again.



What were your expectations when going in? Straight up Horror Movie or Evil Dead type movie?

  Report
 

pgtips
Level

Join date: Aug 2011
Location:
Posts: 954

optheta wrote:
pgtips wrote:
Just got back from watching it.

My opinion was "MEH" - it's worth a watch, but I wouldn't buy the DVD or even watch it again.



What were your expectations when going in? Straight up Horror Movie or Evil Dead type movie?


I might drop a little SPOILER so don't read if you haven't seen.





























I was expecting your average horror with a group of stereotype college kids who go to the woods (or any other potentially creepy place) and get messed up by monsters - There was plenty of that.

What made it bearable for me was trying to guess who the funny controller people were and wtf they were up to.

I read that it was supposed to turn the horror genre upside down, but to me it came accross as more of a darkly comic spoof rather than a serious attemp to change a stale genre.

  Report
 

roybot
Level 1

Join date: Jul 2007
Location:
Posts: 6586

I didn't view it as trying to change or reinvigorate the genre: the entire movie is about tearing it down and starting again.

  Report
 

pgtips
Level

Join date: Aug 2011
Location:
Posts: 954

roybot wrote:
I didn't view it as trying to change or reinvigorate the genre: the entire movie is about tearing it down and starting again.


Is that not the same thing though?
If they were looking to tear the genre down and start anew, they should have went for all out eerie psychological tension all the way through rather than keeping your average slasher and adding an interesting little twist.

The thing about horror films for me is that once the blood, gore and scares start coming, I'm not freaked out anymore... As soon as the cheap frights come in my fight or flight mode turns on and I'm no longer freaked out.

My imagination can scare me alot more than any CGI monster or shocking chopping people up scene can.

Seemingly innocent sounds, eerie locations a build up of tension - all has me scared to shit, then, when the scare comes, I'm just like meh, at least I know what it is and where it is, would I fight or run? - for me survival mode does not = freaked out mode.

I find myself far more disturbed when the tension drops, and things go back to normal. The unkown threat still there but not as strong, only to come back again, but never revealing itself. Always leaving it to the imagination.

  Report
 

spar4tee
Level

Join date: Sep 2010
Location: District of Columbia, USA
Posts: 9680

pgtips wrote:
roybot wrote:
I didn't view it as trying to change or reinvigorate the genre: the entire movie is about tearing it down and starting again.


Is that not the same thing though?
If they were looking to tear the genre down and start anew, they should have went for all out eerie psychological tension all the way through rather than keeping your average slasher and adding an interesting little twist.

The thing about horror films for me is that once the blood, gore and scares start coming, I'm not freaked out anymore... As soon as the cheap frights come in my fight or flight mode turns on and I'm no longer freaked out.

My imagination can scare me alot more than any CGI monster or shocking chopping people up scene can.

Seemingly innocent sounds, eerie locations a build up of tension - all has me scared to shit, then, when the scare comes, I'm just like meh, at least I know what it is and where it is, would I fight or run? - for me survival mode does not = freaked out mode.

I find myself far more disturbed when the tension drops, and things go back to normal. The unkown threat still there but not as strong, only to come back again, but never revealing itself. Always leaving it to the imagination.


This pretty much sums it up for me.

  Report
 

roybot
Level 1

Join date: Jul 2007
Location:
Posts: 6586

pgtips wrote:
roybot wrote:
I didn't view it as trying to change or reinvigorate the genre: the entire movie is about tearing it down and starting again.


Is that not the same thing though?



Not really, no.


If they were looking to tear the genre down and start anew, they should have went for all out eerie psychological tension all the way through rather than keeping your average slasher and adding an interesting little twist.

The thing about horror films for me is that once the blood, gore and scares start coming, I'm not freaked out anymore... As soon as the cheap frights come in my fight or flight mode turns on and I'm no longer freaked out.

My imagination can scare me alot more than any CGI monster or shocking chopping people up scene can.

Seemingly innocent sounds, eerie locations a build up of tension - all has me scared to shit, then, when the scare comes, I'm just like meh, at least I know what it is and where it is, would I fight or run? - for me survival mode does not = freaked out mode.

I find myself far more disturbed when the tension drops, and things go back to normal. The unkown threat still there but not as strong, only to come back again, but never revealing itself. Always leaving it to the imagination.


Whedon's intention was not to terrify us with a new breed of horror (which I'm sure he is capable of doing), but to put horror movie tropes under the microscope. There's no way of doing that without making those cliches an integral part of the story. There is no place for imagination in a movie that exists to expose the inner workings of generic horror. The whole point is to show you everything- it's comparable to learning how a magician performs an illusion.

Once you know how it's done, the illusion is gone. Likewise, the next time any of the stereotypes are seriously presented in a horror, the power will be gone. That's why Cabin has ruined the Evil Dead remake before it has even started filming, and why it has jinxed many long-held horror devices.

If movie makers don't avoid those devices altogether now, audiences will always refer back to this movie. It even makes you look on movies like the original Evil Dead(s) with a fresh pair of eyes.

  Report
 

roybot
Level 1

Join date: Jul 2007
Location:
Posts: 6586

Even though the comparisons with Scream are warranted, Cabin can't be lampooned like Scream was. It walks such a fine line between parody and sincerity that it's effectively 'spoof proof' - all of the self- parody is done because it becomes what it ridicules. It has to.

You'll know what I mean when you see it, just don't expect a Scary Movie-type franchise to emerge from this. It has in-built defenses against hack writers looking to cash in.

  Report
 

pgtips
Level

Join date: Aug 2011
Location:
Posts: 954

roybot wrote:
Even though the comparisons with Scream are warranted, Cabin can't be lampooned like Scream was. It walks such a fine line between parody and sincerity that it's effectively 'spoof proof' - all of the self- parody is done because it becones what it ridicules. It has to.

You'll know what I mean when you see it, just don't expect a Scary Movie-type franchise to emerge from this.



Scary movie.

Exactly what I thought at some parts, just more dark and subtle.

  Report
 

roybot
Level 1

Join date: Jul 2007
Location:
Posts: 6586

pgtips wrote:
roybot wrote:
Even though the comparisons with Scream are warranted, Cabin can't be lampooned like Scream was. It walks such a fine line between parody and sincerity that it's effectively 'spoof proof' - all of the self- parody is done because it becones what it ridicules. It has to.

You'll know what I mean when you see it, just don't expect a Scary Movie-type franchise to emerge from this.



Scary movie.

Exactly what I thought at some parts, just more dark and subtle.


A darker, subtler Scary Movie, you say?

  Report
 

pgtips
Level

Join date: Aug 2011
Location:
Posts: 954

[quote]roybot wrote:
[quote]pgtips wrote:
[quote]roybot wrote:
Even though the comparisons with Scream are warranted, Cabin can't be lampooned like Scream was. It walks such a fine line between parody and sincerity that it's effectively 'spoof proof' - all of the self- parody is done because it becones what it ridicules. It has to.

You'll know what I mean when you see it, just don't expect a Scary Movie-type franchise to emerge from this. [/quote]


Scary movie.

Exactly what I thought at some parts, just more dark and subtle.[/quote]

A darker, subtler Scary Movie, you say?



No Scary movie

  Report
 

roybot
Level 1

Join date: Jul 2007
Location:
Posts: 6586

Scary Movie isn't dark or subtle.

  Report
 

pgtips
Level

Join date: Aug 2011
Location:
Posts: 954

roybot wrote:
Scary Movie isn't dark or subtle.



I know - Thats why I made the comparisson between Cabin In The Woods and Scary Movie.

I thought cabin in the woods was funny. I thought scary movie was funny - but the humour in Cabin In the Woods was more dark and subtle.

** Edit. I should have made it clearer in my previous post. When you said about scary movie franchise, I automatically thought "scary movie" 1, 2 and 3

  Report
 

roybot
Level 1

Join date: Jul 2007
Location:
Posts: 6586

pgtips wrote:
roybot wrote:
Scary Movie isn't dark or subtle.



I know - Thats why I made the comparisson between Cabin In The Woods and Scary Movie.

I thought cabin in the woods was funny. I thought scary movie was funny - but the humour in Cabin In the Woods was more dark and subtle.


It was a joke - A darker, subtler Scary Movie is....Scream, and the comparisons to Scream have already been made. If you've watched all the Scary Movies but ignored the Scream franchise then we've reached an impasse.

  Report
 

pgtips
Level

Join date: Aug 2011
Location:
Posts: 954

roybot wrote:
pgtips wrote:
roybot wrote:
Scary Movie isn't dark or subtle.



I know - Thats why I made the comparisson between Cabin In The Woods and Scary Movie.

I thought cabin in the woods was funny. I thought scary movie was funny - but the humour in Cabin In the Woods was more dark and subtle.


It was a joke - A darker, subtler Scary Movie is....Scream.


LOL

  Report
 

roybot
Level 1

Join date: Jul 2007
Location:
Posts: 6586

pgtips wrote:
roybot wrote:
pgtips wrote:
roybot wrote:
Scary Movie isn't dark or subtle.



I know - Thats why I made the comparisson between Cabin In The Woods and Scary Movie.

I thought cabin in the woods was funny. I thought scary movie was funny - but the humour in Cabin In the Woods was more dark and subtle.


It was a joke - A darker, subtler Scary Movie is....Scream.


LOL


Have you followed the Scary Movie(s) closer than the Scream franchise?

  Report
 

pgtips
Level

Join date: Aug 2011
Location:
Posts: 954

I haven't followed either much to be honest, just watched them as a kid.

  Report
 

roybot
Level 1

Join date: Jul 2007
Location:
Posts: 6586

pgtips wrote:
I haven't followed either much to be honest, just watched them as a kid.


I get the impression that you're more versed in Scary Movie than Scream. How are your horror movie chops?

  Report
 

Gettnitdone
Level

Join date: Aug 2009
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 3421

Fuckin' unicorns.

  Report