Yay, I get to post this-

Last edited by Jimmy B (2012-11-05 11:16:32)

If only most of the classic movie monsters weren't copyrighted... they could have really gone to town in the last act.

See, I'm of the opposite school of thought. I feel like using known icons is a crutch and kind of lazy. I find it much more creative, difficult and rewarding to populate your universe with your own take on these classic creatures. I've done two, separate commentaries for this film now, and I've had discussions about this very topic. A co-host told me he watched the film with a friend and when Fornicus showed up, his friend scoffed and said, "Rip-off!" Both of us were confused (and a little saddened) by this reaction.

Early in the film, Truman and Lin are discussing the Buckners and Truman says, "They're like something from a nightmare." Lin corrects, "No, they're something that nightmares are from. Everything in our stable is a remnant of the old world, courtesy of...(pointing down)...You know who."

Based on that, I hypothesized that the dismissive friend got it backwards. Fornicus is not a rip off of Pinhead. Pinhead is actually a rip off of Fornicus. My co-host went a step further with it and suggested that Fornicus, like Pinhead, is just another example of a Cenobite in a sea of many.

I like that. I like the idea put forth in this movie that these creatures have always existed throughout time and our movies about them are merely our own approximations, from some collective unconscious. We don't have bad dreams in which these creatures are created and we then tell stories about them to conquer our fear. We have bad dreams about them because they already exist and we use those "fictional" stories as a way to distance ourselves from how the world actually is. Art is imitating life in this instance, not the other way around, which is the lie we tell ourselves so we don't go insane.

But would people care if Jamie Lee Curtis showed up? Sure, she probably fits better in terms of her history with the genre, but I don't think anybody loves her as much as most movie fans love Sigourney.

There's of course also the part where Sigourney actually still has a solid acting career 

So, you only say that because you, personally, would have preferred Jamie Lee Curtis? Sigourney was who Drew and Joss thought of when they wrote the part. Doesn't matter what you or I think, she was their only choice.

Also, I agree 100% with what Pav regarding the monsters in the movie.

Well, yeah, you'd expect 'The Director' to have been written as a man, really, wouldn't you? Silly me. My point still stands though, Joss is clearly a fan of Weaver and didn't want anyone else to play the role.

I don't think so. Maybe more a failing of Trey's, but not the film's. However, I wouldn't necessarily call it a failing anyway, as Trey is allowed to view the film however he likes. Joss has said it's a loving hate letter to the Horror genre. What he means by that is he was unhappy with the state of much Horror recently, particularly "Torture Porn". He felt a lot of the humanity had gone out of these stories, and it's that humanity which is so important to why these stories are told to begin with. Cabin is all about exploring that. Trying to understand how we got here and why we want/need to see this. Trying to find the humanity, which yes, ties back to what these movies used to be, while also examining those tropes as well, so it leaves no stone unturned and is an equal opportunity microscope.

Part of what gave Joss hope again for the genre was "The Descent", which is probably why David Julyan (Memento) is the composer on Cabin, as he scored both "The Descent" and the sequel.

I don't recall you whining about it...

Great episode, great movie.

Well, without Hadley and Sitterson there wouldn't be much of a book would there?

Teague, you'll be happy to know that I spent pretty nearly my entire sunday in a cough syrup and cold pill induced haze watching through the majority of the first season of The West Wing. And just yes. All the yes'.