A Review of Cabin in the Woods; Death of a Sub-Genre?

**I'll try to keep this spoiler-free, in the interest of those who haven't seen this movie, as I very much want people to go see it. If I can help that with this review, even better.**


This might be the year that Joss Whedon takes over the world.

Unless you have been living under a rock (in a basement, on the moon, of Earth 2), you are aware that the Avengers movie is coming out this year, in less than a month in fact. That movie alone will put Whedon's name on the map of not just the cult following he has, but the entire mainstream world. As a filmmaker, Whedon has yet to really make his mark on anyone other than Browncoats, the devoted fan base of his masterpiece Firefly who made Whedon's first film Serenity a reality in the first place. While that was a wide film release, and saw some successes in box office and DVD sales, it could be argued that he still hasn't made the transition from TV to film, even with Buffy, Angel, Firefly, and Dollhouse under his belt.

After this year, that argument is over. And it starts with Cabin in the Woods.

CITW has been finished and caught in post-developmental hell for about a year, and finally found its way to a wide release this April through Alliance and Lionsgate (I'm writing a Thank You letter as we speak). The trailers and marketing campaigns show this movie as a new way to approach the 'cabin in the woods' horror sub-genre, made famous by films like Friday the 13th. However, anyone following the development of the film, or anyone who knows Whedon's work for that matter, expected more of a tongue-in-cheek satire of sorts. So before I go on, let me say this: THIS IS NOT A HORROR MOVIE. The negative criticisms made by people who have seen this movie basically surround how they 'thought they were going to see a horror movie'. The fact that this movie is as good as it is and people can still hate it based on that drives me insane. It's the same attitude people brought to Drive, hating it for not being Fast and the Furious. There is a reason these expectations were not met, and it is because THESE MOVIES ALREADY FUCKING EXIST! Seriously, anyone going into CITW expecting a new Friday the 13th, don't go. Don't pay your money to be disappointed (or do, because I want this movie to make money). Just go to your closest movie rental store and rent a couple of the LITERALLY THOUSANDS of movies that belong to the 'cabin in the woods' sub-genre. It is entirely possible that the marketing of the film is at fault for this attitude, and that's fine. I could see that, and have been burned by similar misconceptions based on trailers and the like. So shame on whoever let the audience think this satirical masterpiece was just another manipulation of jump-scares and torture porn.

Now it might seem that I'm giving Joss Whedon all the credit for Cabin, and that's wrong. Total kudos goes to director Drew Goddard, who also co-wrote the film with Whedon. The film looks and flows greatly, and even the parts that look 'bad' do so for a reason, like a lot of the less-than-perfect elements of the film. Goddard has worked with Whedon in the past on his works, and is probably most famous for writing the (under appreciated, in my opinion) film Cloverfield. Considering that CITW is his directorial debut makes me all the more impressed with the film.

The plot synopsis, as stolen from Joblo.com, is as follows: Five friends head to a cabin in the woods for a weekend of fun, not realising that forces outside of their control have vastly different plans for them.In the interest of what I said earlier about expectations, I'll go on record saying that this is a pretty weak sum-up for this movie. Also, to be fair, I went into this movie just because I knew Whedon wrote it and I loved it, and pretty much everyone who has gone with me to this movie did so with the same motivation. I could have known absolutely nothing about this movie except for that and still would have gone in with every expectation of awesomeness, but I can accept that not all people have that faith. While the idea of turning a film sub-genre (ESPECIALLY a horror sub-genre) into a satire of itself is hardly original, this movie has done it better than most. I hesitate to use the word 'spoof' as a way to describe this movie because at times it comes off as such, but it's much more than just that. Besides, using 'spoof' to describe a good movie died with 'Scary Movie'. I'll use 'satire' because much of the humour in relation to the sub-genre it's referencing is much more subtle than a spoof like Scary Movie 'Young Frankenstein'. I would describe CITW as more of a 'Galaxy Quest' for horror movies, only R-rated and WAY darker, in that the humour and satire is strongly present but there's enough elements of the genre in the story that the film could and should be considered a part of it. Basically, at the end of the day, if I have to decide whether to put CITW in the 'Comedy' or the 'Horror' section of the movie store, it's going in 'Horror'. 

My question is this: What happens to the titular cabin?

The 'cabin in the woods' motif that this movie plays off of has been a part of scary movies since (at least) the 1970's, with classic films like The Texas Chainsaw Massacre and Friday the 13th. Granted, these two films alone have been sequeled, remade, and rebooted to True Death, never mind the constant reuse of the motif in MUCH lesser films. It could even be said that Evil Dead (the film I believe CITW emulates most) was satirical towards this sub-genre, and is now considered a classic horror film in it's own right. Despite this, there really hasn't been a significant 'cabin' movie in some time, probably since Eli Roth's 'Cabin Fever', a breath of fresh air into the genre that, while great in and of itself, didn't help anything in the big picture. The sad news is that the horror genre is dying, with the mainstays being 'Zombies', 'Remakes', 'Torture Porn', and 'Paranormal Activity'. Vampires have been slowly castrated over the last decade, and while I could make an argument about how Whedon might be a little responsible for that, I'd rather be a hypocrite and blame Twilight, because I believe that all the world's problems are either Twilight or World-of-Warcraft related. The need desire for major film companies to make money over quality horror films typically result in a lesser rating, maybe something in a PG-13. This results in:

1. less language, blood/gore, sex (don't kid yourself, it's necessary for horror films)
2. a hard and swift kick to the balls of the filmmakers, fans, and the films that preceded them.

Now, as I said before, making fun of horror happens all the time, and it's never hurt that much before. Evil Dead turned out to be a satire almost by accident, but picked it up and ran with it and made the genre stronger for it. 'Shaun of the Dead' breathed new life into the 'zombie' sub-genre, which as we can see today is all over the goddamn place. But I don't think that CITW is going to have the same effect. Why? It simply might be TOO good.

Think about it: back in the day, movies like TCM and Friday the 13th were unprecedented and state-of-the-art horror films. No one had seen anything like them, and the movies scared the ever loving shit out of just about everyone. Then the darkness came. Sequel after ripoff after reboot, the motif became less and less effective up to now, with the walls of Family Video lined with direct-to-DVD releases with ridiculous names like MURDERDEATHKILLEXTREMEBOO-AH-AH-AH-AH hanging out beside the newest Hellraiser sequel or whatever. This particular sub-genre may never see better days than people like myself watching these movies ironically amongst highly intoxicated friends laughing at nothing in particular. And while that sucks, what may be worse is to have two outsiders come in out of nowhere with a movie that is not only better than 99.999% of all 'cabin' movies, but picks apart and makes fun of every recognisable trope within said movies, and to have that movie be such a critical and financial success (again, as it deserves to be) that it executes the coup de gras on the legacies of Jason and Co. As a movie fan, I don't want that to happen.

So yes, go see 'Cabin in the Woods', knowing that it is not a straight-up horror film. Expect to laugh, if only at the absurdity of it all. Appreciate the talents of Joss Whedon and Drew Goddard behind the camera, as well as the performances of those in front of it, like Chris 'Thor' Hemsworth, Amy Acker, and Fran 'I steal ALL of the scenes' Kranz. Then go home and decide if this will be the 'Shaun of the Dead' of the 'cabin' motif, or does it make Friday the 13th look ridiculous.

Next week, I'm throwing my hat into the 'Hunger Games VS Battle Royale' debate. After that, expect a whole lot more Whedon ass kissing as I address the Earth's Mightiest Movie (May 4th!).

And for fuck's sake, don't split up.

Knight Owl

A Retroactive Review of the X-Men films.

So, barely an hour after I post my inaugural blog, I see that X-Men First Class has been added to Netflix. Upon seeing this, I have three prominent thoughts:

1. Man, dat Jennifer Lawrence.
2. I should watch this again (and then I did)
3. The X-Men movies are as good a place as any to start...

And here we are. The X-Men have become a huge part of pop culture since 2000, and have made impacts on almost every way I intend to address in this blog (fingers crossed for a Nightcrawler-led emo rock band, just so I can cover all the bases). The X-Men have been a prominent force in comics for decades, and had a good run in the 90's as a cartoon series as maybe the second best animated show on TV inspired by a comic (Batman TAS FTW!!!11!!); but their importance wasn't realized by the world until the first live-action movie came out to tremendous success...and, some say, the subsequent renovation of the 'Comic Book Movie' genre that many thought was killed by bat-nipples.

Now, as I've stated, I love me some comics. And movies. X-Men has long running franchises in both now, and yet I can't claim to know everything about them. My interest in the mutants growing up began and ended with Wolverine, and the movies didn't change that much. Not a good sign. I've come to define a great film adaptation by giving me the desire to go back and read the source material, leading to me reading the Harry Potter series, the Song of Ice and Fire books, and looking to start the Hunger Games books. The fact that I still haven't read more than a handful of X-story arcs doesn't say much for these movies, regardless of how important they are to the genre.

To date, there are three actual 'X-Men' movies, with one 'Origins' movie and 'First Class' being either a reboot or prequel...I'm not sure which. It would be an understatement to say that, out of the five movies, some are better than others. To avoid being TOO long winded, my opinions of the X-movies will be quick to the X-point to keep the X-interest of my X-readers. X-citing, isn't it? (See what I did there?) Also, fair warning: there are probably X-spoilers ahead, but if you haven't seen these movies you probably shouldn't be reading this in the first place. It's not your thing. Trust me.

And now, I will proceed to tear these movies a new adamantium-laced asshole.

X-Men (2000):

So, yeah...I've never liked this movie.

And not for no reason. And like Green Lantern other comic book movies, I'm willing to admit what movies I don't like do well. But as a comic book movie, there are certain aspects of the story that should, if not absolutely NEED to be true to the source material. This movie drops the ball on a couple of them.

"But Knight Owl, what ever do you mean?" Put on hard hats, I'm dropping some hard knowledge.

Example #1: Wolverine and Rogue, pre-X-Men.

So we have Rogue, a southern belle teenager who finds out that she literally sucks guys dry with a single touch. We also have Wolverine, a grungy, tough, Canadian badass who participates in cage fighting because that is what Americans believe Canadians do for kicks. What do these two sub-plots have in common?

Yep, nothing.

I get that there is a need to establish Rogue's exile from normal life, as well as Wolverine being Canadian and also a badass, and it does set up plot points for the movie down the road. But it seems like just such a random pairing to me (and not the first, or the most random pairing...I'm coming for you First Class).

Example #2: The Costumes.

Ok, the crack made by Cyclops about yellow spandex fit, and probably would have looked ridiculous. That doesn't mean the group of heroes that are already being subjugated to persecution by those people they are trying to save should show up looking like walking billboards for the Leather Factory or antagonists of the latest Clive Barker horror work. I've heard this decision was based upon the success of Batman's costume going from the tights in the comics to the rubber leather whatever the hell the batsuit was made of. Sounds like bullshit to me. Batman wearing black was essential to the practical uses of his suit and therefore his appearance in general (how Adam West struck fear into the hearts of criminals with those eyebrows is fucking beyond me). Having the X-Men show up looking like a cyberpunk biker gang is a bad move.

And my personal favourite:

Example #3: Wolverine and Sabertooth barely acknowledge each other.

ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME?

WolverTooth might be one of the best rivalries in any forum...probably just for the fact that it could go on for literally forever. I would have been less angry if the relationship between Professor X and Magneto was non-existent. It was bad enough that they gave Sabertooth the 'Batman-and-Robin Bane' treatment, but then to castrate their feud down to 'LOL I STOLE UR DOGTAGZ' damn near ruined an already good-but-not-great movie. 

Ok, I'm done being angry (with this particular movie), and I wouldn't be fair if I didn't say there was a lot with this movie that I like. The casting was very inspired when it wasn't obvious (who else was going to play Professor X?). Thank you for finding Hugh Jackman. The rumours surrounding Dougray 'evil Tom Cruise' Scott being Wolverine in pre-production gave teenage me panic attacks. Could have done without Halle Berry, especially after hearing that she threw a fit for not getting more screen time in later films, and Famke Janssen as nowhere near hot enough to play Jean Grey, but I can get past little nit picky things like that. The few action scenes in the movie were pretty great. Most importantly, for the most part the individual relationships and personalities of the main characters (minus Sabertooth) were pretty spot on. The relationship between Xavier and Magneto and the love triangle between Cyclops, Jean and Wolverine were key elements in making this work, and I'm happy they made a point of making it part of the film.

All in all, I can't deny the successes of this film, and am glad that it is at least partially responsible for the rise of the 'Comic Book Movie'. It will never be my favourite of the genre, much like the source material may never be my go-to read. It's important to the culture that is important to me. So there's that.

X2 (2003):


I've heard this movie called one of the greatest Comic Book movies ever made. It was certainly up there, especially at the time it came out, where the closest competition since 2000 was Spider Man (which featured Kirsten Dunst *shudder*). X2 was everything X1 was, turned up to 11...both a good and bad thing. While everything good about X1 was emphasised by a grander storyline, better visuals, and the benefit of watching Wolverine go Nucking Futs on a mansion full of soldiers. It also began the pattern of throwing more and more mutants into the movie. It was well done in this movie, but gets ridiculous later on. It also means that the problems that I had with X1 are still there, nagging at me. No lessons were learned from the WolverTooth debacle. This time around, Deathstrike is the anti-Logan, a hot Asian chick with five adamantium claws to Logan's three. Also side note, in canon Deathstrike, aka Yuriko, and Logan are ex-lovers. Seeing as how a great deal of the movie's plot has to do with Wolverine\s past, you would think that this tidbit of information could have found it's way into the film. NOPE. She's just there, barely says two words the whole affair.

Also, is anyone else bothered by the fact that, after maybe the best introduction of a character ever, Nightcrawler basically does nothing awesome the rest of the movie. Alan Cumming didn't return to X3 due to the hours upon hours of make-up it took to get into character, and I wouldn't blame him if he went through all that to sit on my ass in a plane, or chill out in church rafters.

While this is easily the best of the original X-trilogy, there is one staggering disappointment...but it's not this movie's fault. The foreshadowing that takes place in this movie promises that one of the best story arcs in Comic Book history will make it's way to film: the Dark Phoenix saga. Now, I was aware that it was impossible for this to be totally accurate to the source material, but the precedent was there so I wouldn't be too upset with moderate inaccuracies. So, with the quality of movie that X2 was, and the promise of Phoenix making an appearance in the third film, I was actually excited for X3. And then...

X3 (2006):

This poor, poor movie was fucked from the get-go.

The story starts with the need to follow up X2, which is considered a perfect Comic Book movie at the time. Living up to that expectation alone is a daunting task in and of itself (and we will see if Nolan can pull off a similar feat this summer with DKR. I have faith.). The script is complicated by a pending writer's strike within Hollywood, though not in full swing as of the script's completion.

Then the shit hits the fan. Bryan Singer, director of the preceding X-films, takes off mid-pre-production to make a new Superman movie (considered a failure in it's own right), and takes star James 'Cyclops' 'Guy who flies planes and is Lois Lane's random boyfriend' Marsden with him. So now the movie is short a main character and a FUCKING DIRECTOR. Dire straits, one might say.

So how does Fox fix this?

First, we bring in Brett Ratner, considered a poor man's Bryan Singer, with credits to his name such as Red Dragon, the Rush Hour series, and making Chris Tucker popular. Not the worst choice that could have been made at the last minute, but not the best fit for the series in my opinion.

Then, in response to the combined rediculous decision making of Singer and Marsden, the writers pull a full-on Whedon on the series. In one way or another, characters are taken out left, right, and fucking centre. Remember the thing about spoilers? Here we go:

Cyclops
Professor X
Jean Grey
Mystique
Magneto
Rogue

All of these names met some kind of end during this movie. Cyclops didn't even get the dignity of an on-screen death (mind you, in my experience there wasn't much dignity to Cyclops's life either). Now I know that neither Magneto, Rogue nor Mystique actually died, but their powers were taken away, and with that effectively killed off their characters. It was an interesting approach that I actually liked. It gave the story a sensible conclusion, and proved an effective distraction from all that was wrong with the film.

And holy tits, was there a whole lot wrong.

Remember the whole 'Dark Phoenix' story that they were playing up in X2? Consider the ball dropped. In the comics, the 'Phoenix' was an alien entity that merged with Jean Grey and, with her already extraordinarily strong powers, became an overpowered and COMPLETELY INSANE being of near-godlike ability. Here, in X3, the 'Phoenix' is a nickname for Jean's subconscious.

Lol wut.

Apparently, her so-called death and overuse of power during the conclusion of X2 caused a psychotic break that led to her: killing the shit out of a large amount of people, including her husband and her greatest mentor; joining forces with Magneto, for pretty much no reason whatsoever; and completely changing her wardrobe, including new black contact lens.

This was enough for me to not love this movie, but there were other problems as well. The 'more mutants makes it better' approach did not leave with Singer, and went from nerd-pleasing to re-goddam-diculous really fast. The X-Men add Colossus and Kitty Pryde to the roster, which would be nice if that was the end of it. Angel makes an appearance for MAYBE 5 minutes. Juggernaut is brought to the screen by a HORRIBLE casting decision and the ruining of an Internet meme (I love Bullet Tooth Tony as much as the next guy, but this didn't work). Multiple Man was in a scene. Leech was a plot point. The Morlocks Omegas(?) appear as Magneto's new goons. There was just too much going on in regard to the amount of new potentially significant characters to enjoy, especially considering there were two equally significant story lines going on at once: Dark Phoenix and the Mutant Cure. The greatest benefit however: Kelsey Grammar as Beast. That was pretty much perfect.

Nitpicking with accuracy to source material aside, this movie seems as though it was put together way too quickly. There didn't seem to be the effort put into it that the first two had. Also, while I'm glad this movie wasn't longer, it definitely could have been. There was a lot going on for a movie that was just over 100 minutes long.

I'm glad that this is the end of the series, creating a succinct beginning-to-end trilogy (and no, I do not consider First Class a prequel). As a stand alone movie, I still prefer this one to the first, for no reason in particular. I can accept and appreciate that they tried to do right by the fans while also trying to make a movie that will appeal to a general audience, and the box-office success of this movie proves that they were successful in that. But I'm not the only nerd who didn't love it.

What would I have done differently? Scrap the Phoenix storyline and bring on the Sentinels.

X-Men Origins: Wolverine (2009):

Snikt. Bub.

I'll keep this short, there's only so much I can say about a 100-minute cliche.

Is this movie a prequel? No, for the same reason Elektra isn't a sequel to Daredevil. The movie has nothing to do with the movies it is related to, other than having a character appear in the film, played by the same actor. I'm happy that Hugh Jackman got room to run as the best Canadian export since beer, but this could have been SO much better. Instead, they took the same 'more mutants' formula that damn near ruined the X-trilogy and threw in 'ACTION MOVIE'. Let's look at the people that make appearances:

Wolverine
Sabertooth Victor Creed
Stryker
John Wraith
The Blob
Silverfox
Gambit
Agent Zero
Bolt
Deadpool Ryan Reynolds avec swords
Ryan Reynolds sans mouth

AND MORE!

First off, they attempt to fix the WolverTooth shenanigans by throwing the two together in this, but go out of their way to only refer to him by his actual name. So either this is a prequel and there are TWO SABERTOOTHS (RAGE) or this is a stand alone movie and the writers did not approve of the monikers of legendary comic book villains. Either way, I mad bro.

And what in the Seven Hells is Gambit doing in this movie? Seriously, I know there was an outcry to see the Cajun card thrower on the big screen, but why this one? There is NO existing non-X-men relation between the two characters, but I guess that precedent went out the window in the first movie. How about ACTUALLY MAKING HIM CAJUN? No? How about not having him scale a building using only pieces of his staff because that makes no goddam sense? Fine, stop listening to me then, stupid movie I never liked you anyways.

And let's not talk about Deadpool. That way lies madness.

X-Men First Class (2011):

And we come to the reason for this particular review. XMFC is a re imagining of the origins of the X-Men, going back to the roots of Professor X and Magneto, both portrayed greatly by James McAvoy and Michael Fassbender respectably.

As I said before, I do not consider FC to be a prequel to the X-trilogy, although there are some subtle references to it. Everything is different. The look of the characters, the relationships between them, even the origins of elements of the story itself. It's established that Cerebro, stated in the trilogy to have been created by Xavier and Magneto, is created by Hank McCoy in FC. Speaking of which, we see the transformation of Hank into the blue furrball we know as beast in FC, while during the trilogy he appears on television as an adult, still looking human.

Maybe the most glaring difference is also the biggest thing that bugs me about this movie: the relationship between Professor X and Mystique. This was Wolverine/Rogue x incest + alignment change. We have an adoptive brother-sister relationship where the sister makes subtle (or not so much) advances towards the brother. Throughout the movie, her attitudes towards mutant pride become more and more like Magneto's and less like Xavier's, and in the end she leaves the X-Men to join up with the Brotherhood.

In what way is that history conveyed in the trilogy?

The first movie alone shows that she could give a fig's ass if Xavier lives or dies. She specifically targets him by sabotaging Cerebro to incapacitate him so the Brotherhood can something something. Estranged relationship notwithstanding, that's pretty hardcore.

Other than that, and me wanting more time spent on the relationship between Xavier and Magneto (there doesn't seem to be a whole lot there), I have pretty much no complaints. There were lots of new faces, but no old ones, so the 'more mutants' formula doesn't apply. The uniforms actually resemble the original X-Men outfits and not designed by The Gimp from Pulp Fiction. The casting and acting was fantastic, even January Jones (who I loath entirely) was good and I promise it has nothing to do with the ratio of clothing-to-flesh shown. The film's feel was like that of a 60's action film, fitting to around the time the story was set in. Looked great. Well paced action. Best cameo EVER. Not bad for a film that took less than a year to put together. I think a great deal of thanks should be given to director Matthew Vaughn for pulling this off well, and not let my last X-Men experience in film be an Amnesia-causing bullet.

So, in summary:

X-Men: Worst
X2: Best
X3: Worst
X-Men Origins Wolverine: Worst
X-Men First Class: Best

And so ends my inaugural review, long-winded and negative as it was. Feedback is always appreciated, and probably necessary. I understand that my opinions may not be yours, and I respect them even if I disagree with them. I have already begun work on my follow-up, hopefully out by this time next week (go see Cabin in the Woods as preparation). Thanks for your time and support.





Knight Owl

This is the way the world ends...

Welcome to the (hopefully) organised thoughts and opinions of me. This has been on my 'to-do' list for some time, and with any luck, my dependable routine, amount of free time and the upcoming summer movie season starting soon will be able to keep this going for a while still. However, with my luck, the very day that this blog becomes a regular and high-quality happenstance will be the day the world ends.

This blog will mainly take the form of reviews and opinions of movies, TV shows, and other forms of popular culture, peppered with personal experiences and my own...unique...sense of humour. As much as I would love this to go viral and have my blog read by everyone with eyes, my infinite realism leads me to believe that I will be writing this to no one and my lovely wife-to-be will only read it for the sake of proofreading so my grammatical oversights don't embarrass the family. Nevertheless, I am doing this for no more than my own well being, hoping to better organise my thoughts, express my opinions, and fully embrace my nerd-hood.

I'm hoping to post every week, but like I said that's pretty optimistic. At first it'll be pretty much when I have the time and enough material to conjure a sensible publication. I've already begun working on one that I hope to post soon. Until then, I appreciate the interest and hope all readers stick around.

The Knight Owl