Serving up this steaming pile of
Celebrity Gossip
Gay Politics
Gay News
and Pointless Bitchery
Since 1995

"The Cabin In The Woods"

WTF was this piece of shit??!

It's hailed as a brilliant horror film by 90% of critics rounded up on Rotten Tomatoes.

This was so boring, so corny, so fake, are Americans this easily entertained today? I truly don't understand this one. It's like "American Pie" with a few zombies thrown in.

I didn't even have high expectations. Please tell me that I'm not the only one who hated this tripe!

by Anonymousreply 6507/11/2013

Clearly you didn't get it.

by Anonymousreply 110/20/2012

I was unimpressed as well.

by Anonymousreply 210/20/2012

I didn't hate or love it. It's a parody of slasher movies, at least the first part of it, and I prefer supernatural horror movies, so that part didn't appeal to me much. The second part is interesting but it's not really horror.

The Evil Dead remake will probably be more to my liking, if they don't fuck it up.

by Anonymousreply 310/20/2012

It was very meta towards the end...

by Anonymousreply 410/20/2012

I bought it on Amazon streaming for $1.99. After 30 minutes I turned it off and demanded a refund. Now,normally I would not care,but it's not about the money. Just on principle I refused to waste one red cent on this turd of a movie.

by Anonymousreply 510/20/2012

R5, what the fuck were you expecting?

It's a really fun movie. I have to wonder about the mentality and the lack of sense of humor in people who are hating on this movie.

by Anonymousreply 610/20/2012

If I ever have an urge to see it I'll just wait until it shows up on DVD at the local library, or on netflix.

by Anonymousreply 710/20/2012

If you go in wanting a standard horror movie, then you'll be upset. If you go in open minded, it's fantastic.

It's not an actual horror movie, and it's not really a parody of them either. It's more commentary on horror in general, and that's why I loved it.

by Anonymousreply 810/20/2012

I agree, OP. Audiences are so easily amused now. Of course it was meta, when was the last time you saw anything aimed at Millenials that wasn't meta? The only surprise was how glaringly obvious the "twist" was in this film. Scream was a better comic "meta horror" than this, by a mile. And that Fran Kranz (ridiculous name) guy was fucking awful; I was cheering his death. Watch it for Jenkins and Whitford, and the beauty of Chris Hemsworth and Jesse Williams, but please don't try to tell people they "don't get it" when they tell the truth about this piece of shit.

by Anonymousreply 910/21/2012

Bizarre overreactions on this thread.

Compared to Prometheus, this movie was a work of genius.

by Anonymousreply 1010/21/2012

I feel sorry for some of you who couldn't enjoy this movie for what it was. I think you're the kind of people who go around looking to be disappointed in life.

by Anonymousreply 1110/21/2012

I feel sorry for some of you who enjoyed this piece of shit for what it was. I think you're the kind of people who go around settling for anything in life.

by Anonymousreply 1210/21/2012

AMEN OP. This film SUCKED donkeyballs.

Could not understand the excellent reviews.

Most critics and viewers seem to like comedy laden horror.

This movie was for sissies.

Excellent horror- The Hills Have Eyes remake, Inside, Wolf Creek...

This was fucking horrible.

by Anonymousreply 1310/21/2012

R12, I feel sorry for people like you who forgot how to have fun.

by Anonymousreply 1410/21/2012

As soon someone in the movie uttered the word 'Director' I groaned and knew what was coming. But it was all that 'free choice' talk that annoyed me most.

by Anonymousreply 1510/21/2012

It wasn't FUN R14, it was stupid, boring, and derivative. It wasn't even a good satire.

by Anonymousreply 1610/21/2012

OP, it was a piece of shit, but since Joss Whedon's fingerprints were all over it, the defenders of his other pieces of shit with cult followings will tear you to shreds. It's what they do.

by Anonymousreply 1710/21/2012

R13, your post is about as stupid as saying "I went to see Annie, and it was HORRIBLE! It wasn't scary at all!"

The movie was by Joss Whedon. It was a comedy, a meta-spoof on horror.

You're upset because it wasn't what you wanted it to be. That's not the film's problem, it's yours.

by Anonymousreply 1810/21/2012

I thought "Cabin in the Woods" was terrific, those who didn't get it should just live in a cave.

Luv Chris Hemsworth!

by Anonymousreply 1910/21/2012

R18, that movie was even less funny than it was scary. If it's to be judged as a comedy as opposed to a horror, it's an even bigger failure than posters in this thread have claimed. Comedy-horror? Um, still unsatisfying. It wasn't fulfilling as a revisit to an established genre, it wasn't fulfilling as something new and fresh.

by Anonymousreply 2010/21/2012

Parts of the film reminded me of Michael Jackson's Thriller. I thought it was a pretty cool movie. My major disappointment was the death scene of "you know who?" pretty much was a surprise.

by Anonymousreply 2110/21/2012

"Annie" is a TERRIFYING movie!

by Anonymousreply 2210/21/2012

Redheads have always terrified me. No joke.

by Anonymousreply 2310/21/2012

Troll-dar r18. That out of the way...

Foreign horror of the millennium is fucking terrific! America fucking sucks at making horror films. Even "Insidious," which wasn't bad, was made by Australians.

Don't get me started on the turd that is "Paranormal Activity." I sat through that thing almost falling asleep until the very end which was actually good.

I know good modern day horror. "The Cabin In The Woods" = "Scary Movie" franchise.

What blows my mind in relation to "The Cabin In The Woods" are the reviews. Those are fucking terrifying!

by Anonymousreply 2410/21/2012

Cabin in the Woods is a Joss Whedon movie.

Watch 7 seasons of Buffy, 5 seasons of Angel, 2 seasons of Dollhouse and Serenity and Firefly and then you'll get the movie.

by Anonymousreply 2510/21/2012

"The Cabin in the Woods" sucked. Hey morons, we fucking "got it." Anyone over the age of 12 could understand what it was going for. It was incredibly simple-minded and juvenile. Also, I (and the other haters, probably) know how to have fun. We just expect a little more intelligence in our comedy. "Scream" came out around 15 years ago, and their meta-horror is much more brilliant. This wasn't funny or scary, just dumb.

Chris was pretty beautiful, though.

by Anonymousreply 2610/21/2012

For me it was 'Look what Joss Whedon can do within a stand-alone movie made for horror fans'. I enjoyed it enough to buy it.

The set-up is a white-people slasher serial. It asks and addresses every problem within these B movies and then takes them to the ultimate conclusion.

Also, we get to see Sigourney Weaver fight like a ninja - one of the redeeming features of 'Paul', btw.

by Anonymousreply 2710/21/2012

I realize I'm late to the party, but I just watched it and, to my surprise, quite enjoyed it. I don't know why haters are going on about how there's some kind of twist, it lays it all out for you pretty much from the first scene.

It's more thrilling than scary, but it's quite clever. Moreso than Scream, really, because the irony is different, and deeper: the movie revels in the classic horror tropes, but it implicates the audience, as well -- we're the ancient gods, the bloodthirsty ones who demand bloody deaths for our satisfaction.

Incidentally, for all the haters out there, an aggregate of more than 400 critics top 10 lists places The Cabin in the Woods as the #22 best film of 2012. Above the likes of Rust and Bone, Anna Karenina and...wait for it...Les Miserables.

by Anonymousreply 2812/30/2012

I'm another one who didn't understand why the critics gushed over this. I had high hopes for it--I'm a fan of Joss Whedon's and I love the Scream movies (I was under the impression the tone would be similar)--but I was very disappointed. I didn't find it clever at all.

by Anonymousreply 2912/30/2012

These are the threads I love. Chimps who don't understand something and bitch about it. Entertaining movie--deal with it.

by Anonymousreply 3012/30/2012

I thought it was fun but nothing amazing. There hasn't been a good horror movie in years now though.

by Anonymousreply 3112/30/2012

I liked it but the most "shocking" moment came when I watched the special features and saw that Heather Langenkamp who played Nancy in the original A Nightmare on Elm Street was part of the special effects team.

by Anonymousreply 3212/30/2012

Here is a GAY movie that you people might enjoy, get you all tingly with fear n such!

"The House of Adam"

by Anonymousreply 3312/30/2012

Rotten Tomatoes is pure bullshit. You'll pick it up after reading especially critics' commentary. The only way to get to the truth is by cruising members comments. Look up a known stinker and review the reviews, see who is going easy. They're paid, that's why. I trust DL reviews because this place has a cynical edge and gets to the truth.

A true horror masterpiece is due us for decades now. It's not you.

by Anonymousreply 3412/30/2012

I saw CABIN twice in theaters, it may work better as a "film" than a "movie" meaning that for the general population who have certain expectations going into horror films, they'll be disappointed. Case in point: I didn't care for EYES WIDE SHUT the first time I saw it. Didn't "like" it. Eight viewings later, I agree it's a masterpiece. But it doesn't hit those familiar beats or notes that make us feel like we're watching a mass-audience friendly "movie". I may appreciate it now, but I'd never suggest it to a teenager. Many great films are like that. My dad doesn't know what the hell to make of a Tarantino movie--he just can't process it. And my mom thinks the Coen Bros movies are "weird".

Critics loved CABIN because it is challenging, fun, and a worthy deconstruction of the genre. Most audiences DID like it, thats why Lionsgate spent the $ to rescue it from MGM, so it's not something that only discerning or highbrow audiences would like. It's ok if you didn't enjoy, but to get all hyped up on how "bad" it is really says more about you than the film.

by Anonymousreply 3512/30/2012

It's way better than I thought it would be for a shelved film. Chris and Anna's American accents were flawless. Suppposedly the stoner dude had the hottest body of any male in the entire cast, so they deliberately kept him dressed in baggy, hipster wear.

by Anonymousreply 3612/30/2012

Omg this movie sucked massive donkey balls. I'm a huge Buffy / Angel / Firefly fan and am a big fan of Joss's work but this movie was just awful. Complete waste of time.

by Anonymousreply 3712/30/2012

The stoner dude -- Fran Kranz -- shirtless:

by Anonymousreply 3812/30/2012

Awful, awful movie, and I'm a bit partisan about Joss Whedon, since we both went to Wesleyan.

by Anonymousreply 3912/30/2012

Stop trying to make Fran Kranz happen.

by Anonymousreply 4012/30/2012

R37, you're an idiot. Sound like all those concern trolls from the election: "I'm a life-long Democrat, but Romney really makes sense!"

by Anonymousreply 4112/30/2012

[quote]Hey morons, we fucking "got it." Anyone over the age of 12 could understand what it was going for. It was incredibly simple-minded and juvenile.

I'm pretty sure you didn't get it.

The irony of these over-reactions is that the movie pretty much predicts them (after all, it's saying the audience are the ancient gods, and if they're not satisfied by the FORMULA they'll get pissed off and destroy you).

by Anonymousreply 4212/30/2012

Thank you, r42! Somebody else gets it!

by Anonymousreply 4312/30/2012

This was a comedy, right?

by Anonymousreply 4412/30/2012

R44, partly, yes.

by Anonymousreply 4512/30/2012

From the original thread:

"Am I alone in thinking that the "Ancient Gods" were the audience in the theater? To me, it explains everything--why the different countries were failing (their horror movies weren't living up to the American tropes), why the guys in the lab were "not the only ones watching," etc. The director is LITERALLY the director. But the most compelling piece of evidence was the "sunrise in 8 minutes." Eight minutes later, what happens? The lights of the theater come up, the world of the film is over.

To me, the film was so meta-horror that it actually implicated the audience. We wanted them to fit the stereotypical molds. We wanted to root for the heroes. We wanted to see a bloodbath. We wouldn't be happy unless we got exactly what we were asking for and expecting.

At least, that's how I understood it."

by Anonymousreply 4612/30/2012

I hate it when people say that when others don't like a well-reviewed film, it's because we're not smart enough to "get" it. That's so insulting. I "got" The Cabin in the Woods; I just didn't like it.

by Anonymousreply 4712/31/2012

I loved it, but I agree, saying someone didn't "get it" is silly.

by Anonymousreply 4812/31/2012

In this context, definitely.

by Anonymousreply 4912/31/2012

A lot of you are getting really angry over a movie.

Chill. Freaks.

by Anonymousreply 5012/31/2012

That ancient gods idea isn't smart or interesting. JW is good at dialogue and can get to good places given the time (which is why he's good at TV), but this sounds fairly unimaginative. These things aren't too hard to 'get' - they aren't practicing the art of subtlety!

by Anonymousreply 5112/31/2012

I loved the movie, I get why it wouldn't appeal to everyone but I thought the concept was intriguing and the execution was damn entertaining.

There were a lot of people that didn't "get it", that is fair to point out, that doesn't mean that everyone that didn't like it didn't get it however. Nor does that mean they are somehow inferior for not connecting with the creators intention. The two aren't mutually exclusive.

by Anonymousreply 5212/31/2012

There is no way Fran had a better body then Jesse Williams. I rewound him slowly taking off his shirt several times, and I so don't do stuff like that.

by Anonymousreply 5312/31/2012

Horrible movie, Chris Hemsworth made this film worth watching.

by Anonymousreply 5412/31/2012

While I do get the whole 'the gods are the audience' thing I wished JW would have given us a neat twist like the virgin being the male stoner or something like that. It was a nice movie (with the company guys getting attacked by the monsters they created, enslaved, inprisoned, or whatever).

by Anonymousreply 5512/31/2012

[quote]I hate it when people say that when others don't like a well-reviewed film, it's because we're not smart enough to "get" it. That's so insulting. I "got" The Cabin in the Woods; I just didn't like it.

Hate it all you want... it's usually true. Perhaps that's why you hate it? Having your own shallow ignorance shown to you in a mirror like that?

by Anonymousreply 5612/31/2012

I swear, Joss-stans/Brown Coats are even more obnoxious and ridiculous than the Madonnastans!

by Anonymousreply 5712/31/2012

I did enjoy the movie when I saw it in the theater and even watched it again when it came out on DVD. At least it tried to be different. It would be fun to see some of the other 'choices' on the board 'come to life'. Alas, that whole operation got DESTROYED. Maybe they could do it as 'prequels' to the 'final' TCITW'

by Anonymousreply 5812/31/2012

R56 thinks he's hip because he "understood" what the writers were *trying* to do!

Guess what? So did everybody else. And the movie still sucked!

Get over yourself!

by Anonymousreply 5912/31/2012

Is this movie any good or is it a waste of time? I borrowed it on DVD from the library.

by Anonymousreply 6006/28/2013

[all posts by tedious troll removed.]

by Anonymousreply 6106/28/2013

R33, you have to be kidding.

"House of Adam" was something I got off Netflix and it was one of the worst movies ever made.

by Anonymousreply 6206/28/2013

This thread is further proof that some DLers are intent on hating everything. The bitterness and need for superiority is so transparent it actually makes me uncomfortable sometimes.

by Anonymousreply 6306/28/2013

It's really good, r60. Definitely worth watching as long as you aren't a bitter DL troll who hates everything made after 1978.

by Anonymousreply 6406/28/2013

I wound up not watching it. I made the mistake of reading the back of the DVD box and the plot is pretty thin and transparent, and they revealed way too much in the summary on the DVD box.

I could see however how it would be a surprise to a theater audience who thinks it is your typical horror movie.

by Anonymousreply 6507/11/2013
Need more help? Click Here.

Follow theDL catch up on what you missed

recent threads by topic delivered to your email

follow popular threads on twitter

follow us on facebook

Become a contributor - post when you want with no ads!