Whedonesque : Comments on 18778 : New York Times (mis)coverage of ' The Cabin in The Woods'.

What an awesome cast this is becoming. But geez, what the hell is this movie going to be?

ETA: And yes, I read the plot summary, but still.

[ edited by pat32082 on 2009-01-24 13:51 ]

pat32082 | January 24, 13:49 CET

Omg, Jena Malone. Richard Jenkins. Jena Malone. This is going to be an awesome movie. I am excited.

Donnie | January 24, 13:54 CET

Brilliant if true. If it's about five college kids there must be a lot more casting news to come.

Leaf | January 24, 13:55 CET

Not reading the synopsis but Bill Nighy rules and plays the utter shit out of every single role he gets. That is all.

Saje | January 24, 13:56 CET

Bill is an amazing actor.

The synopsis is true, also. (Edit: except, despite being sourced from usually reliable pay-for-access websites, it's false).

[ edited by gossi on 2009-01-24 16:47 ]

gossi | January 24, 13:59 CET

Wow, two fantastic additions - what an incredible cast! Love Jena Malone in "Donnie Darko" and "Saved!" and Bill Nighy's great in everything. I guess there's four more college kids to cast then. Most whedonverse actors are maybe a little too old, but perhaps Michelle Trachtenberg? Little hard to figure out the tone of the film from the description, but it might explain the thing about being a horror film to end all horror films as the existence of the whole world appears to be at stake.

ETA: I've removed my invisible text (that I edited in) - see Simon's post below. Btw, Saje, you've already read the synopsis (link), so not much point avoiding it now ;).

[ edited by NotaViking on 2009-01-24 15:17 ]

NotaViking | January 24, 14:01 CET

I'm stunned. What a cast, and what a film this will doubtless become.

redders | January 24, 14:22 CET

I'm planning to se Bill Nighy today in the new Underworld movie.lol

Buffyfantic | January 24, 14:45 CET

I concur with Saje about Bill Nighy.

Sunfire | January 24, 14:48 CET

I think that synposis (it's only a sentence) is going to be very hard to avoid in the months to come so I've nixed the spoiler tag. Otherwise it's just going to get very silly.

Also how accurate is the info about the casting?

Simon | January 24, 14:49 CET

I don't usually watch horrors but the Whedon/Goddard team-up definitely peaks my interest. The synopsis sounds like an episode of Buffy in reverse. But either the kids are not the focus of the movie or they should star announcing some younger actors soon.

nyrk | January 24, 15:37 CET

Maybe the kids will be really annoying and we'll be pulling for the other guys. :)

redeem147 | January 24, 16:08 CET

Why is the word "gods" capitalized?

Jim in Buffalo | January 24, 16:21 CET

Might be a Lovecraft reference i.e. the Outer Gods or the Elder Gods.

Simon | January 24, 16:24 CET

Whitford, Jenkins, Nighy, Jena -- it's like something out of a strange, wonderful dream I had, only to wake up and say, Well, that would never happen.

If I didn't know better, I'd think that I was casting this movie.

rbt | January 24, 16:25 CET

This is misinformation. While we are fans of both those actors, neither is attached to the movie. Just FYI.

However, they ARE attached to the Serenity sequel.

joss | January 24, 16:34 CET

Hah. (Goes to post you've just announced a Serenity sequel). (Joking).

gossi | January 24, 16:35 CET

I still think it's Sarah Michelle Gellar.

Pointy | January 24, 16:36 CET

Damn. The Jena Malone bit got me excited. She's one of my favorites, and her working with Joss and Drew would be a dream come true. Happy to see a synopsis, though!

patxshand | January 24, 16:37 CET

I reworded the entry as to avoid any further misunderstanding.

Simon | January 24, 16:42 CET

Oh. Also, they got the plot wrong.

In order to protect the story from spoilerization, we've been sending out our OWN misinformation, including fake sides for the actors, fake summeries, different names... So there's gonna be a lot of 'information' leaked that will lead to excited speculation about things you will not see. Sorry. But here's some stuff you CAN look forward to, my word on it:

1) A prson will have an emotion.

2) two people speaking, or "dialogue", may occur.

3) A bunch of different people will play the part of Bob Dylan.

Hope that clears everything up. More updates soon!

joss | January 24, 16:43 CET

We might as well do our wish list stunt casting now, methinks.

1) Simon Pegg! Just put him in anything. And let him write, too. If Joss hasn't seen Spaced I think his life has 4% less meaning than it could have. Yes, four percent.
2) Fringe's Anna Torv. Give her an axe. She's fearsome and awesome in equal measures, which is a nice (and entirely scary) thing to achieve.

Edit - Mwhahaha. Joss is awesome. They got that information up to the proper Hollywood pay-for-information websites, which is awesome.

[ edited by gossi on 2009-01-24 16:45 ]

gossi | January 24, 16:44 CET

Oh. Also, they got the plot wrong.

Oh boy. More rewording.

Simon | January 24, 16:45 CET

Haha! This is funny :)

Garim | January 24, 16:47 CET

I'm making a sad face.

Sunfire | January 24, 16:48 CET

I just waitng for Joss to tell us that the New York Times is a made up paper.

Simon | January 24, 16:49 CET

Oh, Joss. Thanks for clearing everything up.

I'm excited that Joss likes Jena Malone. Because that means that even though she is not attached to it, she could become attached to the movie. So, I'm keeping my fingers crossed that she will be part of the movie. THOUGH maybe she can't be a part of the movie, because there is no character that has her age. But then again, as long as Joss likes her, she can appear in Dollhouse Season 5. So, yeah, still excited.

Donnie | January 24, 16:50 CET

I'm waiting for Alan to tell us there's a Serenity sequel again now. It's been, like, 4 minutes!

gossi | January 24, 16:51 CET

So Bill Nighy's the new sheppard and Jena Malone's a young hot-shot pilot, right? All the vacancies filled. ;) Shame they're not part of the cast, but good to get it sorted out before it's everywhere.

At least they got the title right.

[ edited by NotaViking on 2009-01-24 16:52 ]

NotaViking | January 24, 16:51 CET

At least they got the title right.

Well, do we know that for sure?

wiesengrund | January 24, 16:54 CET

I just waitng for Joss to tell us that the New York Times is a made up paper.

You need Joss to tell you this?

KingofCretins | January 24, 16:54 CET

Jena Malone will probably be the new River, as Summer Glau is a star now who will be practicing her Oscar speech at the time they will shoot Serenity 2.

Donnie | January 24, 16:55 CET

I love Richard Jenkins; what a great choice. But I was even more excited to see there will be multiples of Bob Dylan. I suggest Joan Baez and Arlo Guthrie for 2 of those parts; they both do great Bob Dylan impressions when coaxed and, of course, there's the history there...plus bringing the Whedonverse and Guthrie/Baezverse closer together would, like, put me in (figurative) heaven . . . maybe also Seth Green (for the looks) and then he and Arlo could re-enact their days from the band in "Byrds of Paradise".

If the NYT can fantasize, then I can, too...

Eileen | January 24, 17:05 CET

Did the misinformation campaign work for Cloverfield in the end? I seem to remember either apathy or just plain grouchiness coming from various sites by the time the movie got released.

Simon | January 24, 17:17 CET

Dialogue ! Yay, I adore dialogue, it's so very spoken !

Hee. I like it, Big Purp's yanking everybody's chain (including ours) hi-larious. And it's not all bad news since now we still have the potential for Bill Nighy to be cast, which is almost as good as his actual casting (cos it's something to - potentially - look forward too ;).

Saje | January 24, 17:20 CET

It had an $80 million opening weekend; it worked.

KingofCretins | January 24, 17:21 CET

Indeed, Cloverfield was a massive hit.

gossi | January 24, 17:25 CET

I'm making a sad face.
-Sunfire

Me too.

madmolly | January 24, 17:29 CET

I wonder what emotion the person will have in the movie? Exciting!

catherine | January 24, 17:33 CET

I think they've now doomed themselves to a whole lot of "ok that was good... but you know who would've rocked as the guy who foo? Bill fucking Nighy, man!"

Sunfire | January 24, 17:35 CET

So this means that if casting sides leak online, we can probably safely read them, right? Because they'll just be more Joss/Drew goodness, with none of the spoilers?

I hope some leak.

Jobo | January 24, 17:38 CET

True story: I had a dream last night where I was at some convention and Amy Acker was there and she said the words, "Serenity sequel" and everyone held their breath waiting for the frenzy that was to follow. Poor girl.

I think I'm just going to assume that in this movie there will be a cabin and it may be in the woods.

Edit: spelling.

[ edited by NYPinTA on 2009-01-24 17:40 ]

NYPinTA | January 24, 17:39 CET

Sunfire, how would we even know what part Bill was-not going to play? At the end of the day we (Whedonesquers) are only a small portion of the audience - I believe what Joss, Drew et all are trying to do is stop the entire plot, casting and everything else end up, like, everywhere. The iron curtain is, for once, not transparent. Which, believe it or not, I actually like. Cloverfield was a great experience for me because the only thing I knew about it was there was stuff going to get smashed up in it.

[ edited by gossi on 2009-01-24 17:44 ]

gossi | January 24, 17:43 CET

I dunno, gossi. Sunfire's got a point. Almost every movie I watch I say to myself, "you know who would've rocked as the guy who foo...?" And it's always Bill Nighy. ;)

I still haven't seen Cloverfield. It was the (spoilers! Just in case) giant flea like things that slough off the main monster. I mean, that's just gross.

Is there a spoiler code here?

[ edited by NYPinTA on 2009-01-24 17:50 ]

NYPinTA | January 24, 17:49 CET

I was joking. I meant there'd be (equally unserious) comments here. I realize this is a little fishbowl of intense nitpicking and the broader movie-viewing public will know nothing of fake leaks.

I question the use of disinformation to obscure real information, but my earlier comment was not meant as a serious criticism of that choice.

Sunfire | January 24, 17:49 CET

I did not have sexual relations with that movie. (But others, mebbe).

gossi | January 24, 17:52 CET

Heh. This is why half my posts on Its Own Sub- Genre have questions as their post titles rather than statements.

Also, Jobo, the sides are already out there. I blogged their existence, suggested they were not actual script pages. (I didn't howver actually post them because I don't intend to do so.)

[ edited by The One True b!X on 2009-01-24 17:56 ]

The One True b!X | January 24, 17:52 CET

It's nice that folks were waxing rhapsodic about Bill Nighy, but am I the only one who thinks having an actor like Bill in it, who has a persona which demands attention, would detract from the film itself? Jenkins and Whitford are extremely talented men who can be part of an ensemble, but not pull focus. Nighy, Buddha love him, is all I remember with any clarity from a number of films (Love Actually, The Underworld films among them).

Tonya J | January 24, 17:54 CET

I'm a little dubious of this "dialogue" spoiler. I think that may be more misinformation. An XK Red 27 technique perhaps?

Vague That Up | January 24, 18:01 CET

A group of five college kids are tricked into spending a weekend at a cabin where they will be sacrificed to appease the Gods and save the world.

The wording of this should have told us they were being facetious. I'm having a joint 'Buffy jumps off the tower to save the world' and a "We are as Gods!" flashback.

Emmie | January 24, 18:05 CET

*wags finger* You're a bad, bad man, Joss Whedon! ;-)

OzLady | January 24, 18:10 CET

Oh, cool. Thanks for the heads-up, bix.

Jobo | January 24, 18:15 CET

My only question is: The moment something juicy hits and Joss doesn't come here to say "misinformation", do we take it to be correct?

Doesn't a misinformation campaign stop working once you make sure to point out which pieces of information are incorrect?

The One True b!X | January 24, 18:23 CET

Yeah. Now I'm suspicious about the existence of dialog too. This spoiler is from the man who gave us 20+ minutes of no dialog in "Hush." I think maybe he's just telling us there's gonna be dialog and then there won't be. Unless, that's just what he WANTS us to think, and this means that there will be dialog.

Oooh! Or maybe he just wants us to get excited and care about the dialog because then he's going kill it off later...

And hey, which person do you think will get to have The Emotion? Maybe several people will have to fight over the possession of The Emotion and that's what drives the plot. Cabins do tend to be on the small side and having more than one emotion present could be plot overkill. Or maybe The Emotion will just get passed around like a disease taking over the peoples hearts and minds...

And Bob Dylan will totally be played by Loudon Wainwright III and Bruce Springsteen. They were crowned "New Bob Dylan"s years ago.

BreathesStory | January 24, 18:25 CET

Can I play The One True Bob Dylan?

The One True b!X | January 24, 18:29 CET

Doesn't a misinformation campaign stop working once you make sure to point out which pieces of information are incorrect?

Not necessarily, as long as from here on out we don't know what's real and what isn't. He's just let us know there will be false leads coming from reliable places.

This is disinformation, since it's deliberate.

Sunfire | January 24, 18:31 CET

I agree with Emmie, although I didn't look at the site until I knew about the misinformation. Then I read the synopsis and laughed.

VeryVeryCrowded | January 24, 18:31 CET

In other words, now we're going to treat even legitimate-looking leaks as potential false trails. I think that's more the point than that we believe the fake ones.

Sunfire | January 24, 18:34 CET

Bix, seems to me the end result of the misinformation was to keep the news from getting their hands on the truth and keeping the fans in the dark. Joss was just being merciful by stopping us from whipping up a speculation frenzy on info that wasn't true. So the intent was to misinform the media in order to hide the real info while keeping the audience uninformed. Much better than keeping the audience misinformed as well.

We were caught in the crossfire between the creators and the spoiler-hungry media, but thankfully Joss dropped by and clued us in.

In the end, it seems like the only info we should count as reliable will come from those officially affiliated with the movie.

Emmie | January 24, 18:37 CET

We were caught in the crossfire between the creators and the spoiler-hungry media, but thankfully Joss dropped by and clued us in.

Uh, no. Fandom is pretty spoiler hungry as a group. Individuals of course vary. Make no mistake, they are intentionally feeding disinformation to us through the usual legitimate channels. I do think they are aiming for a situation where no one knows what's going on rather than one where we're all getting excited about Morgan Freeman as a badass lead with a hatchet and a vengeful streak though.

Sunfire | January 24, 18:44 CET

Exactly. The media only care because we care ('we' being their readers/potential readers).

It actually raises a sort of interesting question i've been wondering about in the lead up to 'Dollhouse'. If you're spoiled but don't know you're spoiled are you actually spoiled ? I mean, our million monkey speculations on 'Dollhouse' must have stumbled on quite a few true spoilers but clearly we don't really know which are until we watch it.

Likewise, though knowing that Joss et al are using misinformation, we're not going to stop speculating about it (if he thinks that you have to wonder if he's, y'know, met us ;), we're just going to treat the speculations as even more speculative. So some of it might still lead to spoilers that we don't know are spoilers until we see it.

Saje | January 24, 18:47 CET

Saje, now you're spoiling how we're going to behave over the coming months!

The One True b!X | January 24, 18:49 CET

Speculation isn't a spoiler. Confirming speculation is. I was pretty sure Harry Potter wouldn't die but that didn't keep JoAnn Rowling from thoroughly messing with my mind. Because I didn't know. I just suspected.

Sunfire | January 24, 18:50 CET

Now I'm so confused...Is this Joss Whedon guy real?I once heard he's virtural...

Ningjing | January 24, 18:51 CET

He's a robot. Several in fact. There's only one Drew Goddard, but he's a robot-human hybrid. Hard to replicate.

Sunfire | January 24, 18:57 CET

including fake sides for the actors

Does that mean I can post the bit about the giant bat, because it has one line it that, for a fake casting side, made me snicker.

The One True b!X | January 24, 18:57 CET

Saje is making my head hurt.

NYPinTA | January 24, 18:58 CET

Well, they do say everyone has a talent ;).

There's only one Drew Goddard, but he's a robot-human hybrid.

Dammit, I always thought he was a human-robot hybrid but robot-human ? Talk about left field.

Speculation isn't a spoiler. Confirming speculation is.

I dunno, I think there's a "slightly spoilerish" middle ground. Seems like, by definition, if you've really considered a possibility, including the emotional effect on you etc. and it then comes to pass then you're less surprised by it, it's less novel.

Saje, now you're spoiling how we're going to behave over the coming months!

Nah, i'm just speculating. OK, maybe slightly spoiling-ish ;-).

Saje | January 24, 19:00 CET

Actually, the funniest part of this to me is having been watching several semi- to well-known horror or movie sites just get basic easily-checked facts about the movie wrong (like the number of places that posted that UA owns MGM). Watching them deal with overt misinformation on top of their own incompetence is going to be amusing.

The One True b!X | January 24, 19:00 CET

Indeed, Cloverfield was a massive hit.

Let me clarify. Did the misinformation campaign endear itself to movie critics, journalists and bloggers or did it just piss them off in the end? Cause that's who your primary target is.

Simon | January 24, 19:02 CET

Seems like, by definition, if you've really considered a possibility, including the emotional effect on you etc. and it then comes to pass then you're less surprised by it, it's less novel.

I don't think so. I've been very very surprised by some story developments I thought of but never expected to see happen. Visualizing and seeing it for real are very different experiences.

ETA: I think as long as you feel uncertainty and suspense for what's about to happen, because despite suspicions and inferences you don't know what is coming next, you haven't really been spoiled.

[ edited by Sunfire on 2009-01-24 19:06 ]

Sunfire | January 24, 19:04 CET

I think speculation is sort of semi-spoilery in a way, because although it doesn't fix things definitely in our heads and make us obsess over something that's going to happen but we don't know how - which is the worst part of a spoiler, since your brain inevitably fills the blanks in in a way which is not as good as the way it happens in the story - it's true for me at least that speculation leaves the potential storyline feeling... slightly used. Less exciting if it does happen the way I speculated. However, I enjoy the speculation itself so much that I am happy to accept that trade-off, and in some shows I even find it necessary because when plotline hits, it hits so hard that I'm left clinging to the vestiges of my in-depth analytical speculation to get the slightest grip on what might just have happened (BSG, I'm lookin' at you).

A happy medium is good. I'm incredibly glad, for example, that I was in no way spoiled for the end of Dr Horrible. However, I did watch it as it went live and that gave me the two days before Act 3 that were just enough for my brain to niggle at the lyrics and start to show a red flag that lines like 'I got no remorse' and 'my wish is your command' were not the sort of thing a character would usually be able to get away with saying in Jossland without consequences... which prepared me just a touch for the ending. So um... I'm not sure what my point is any more. Boo to spoilers, but yay to speculation of a moderate degree. I think.

*previews* oh look, Saje said it faster. Yup, novelty is lost. Well, I've spent time typing it now so I'm going to post anyway...

skittledog | January 24, 19:08 CET

Yeah, length of time may play a part too. It's that 'slightly used' idea that worries me Skittledog. Oh well, too bloody late now ;).

I've been very very surprised by some story developments I thought of but never expected to see happen. Visualizing and seeing it for real are very different experiences.

Hmm but you never expected to see them happen Sunfire, so (again by definition) they're going to be more surprising than something you consider and think might well happen. I also think there's a difference between considering it in your own mind and actually talking about it and debating the pros and cons on a weblog - writing stuff down tends to make it more real and discussing it with others tends to make you think about it more. I guess it's horses for courses, I might be like that too ('Dollhouse' is probably the first thing i've talked about this much without actually seeing it).

Basically, when, in the second season, Amy Acker pulls off her mask to reveal Morgan Freeman, FBI if i'm not as surprised as I might've been then i'll know.

Did the misinformation campaign endear itself to movie critics, journalists and bloggers or did it just piss them off in the end?

The thinking might be that it doesn't matter Simon. Who cares about reviews when you make your money back several times over ? Which may or may not be slightly short-sighted, depends how personally journalists take these things.

Saje | January 24, 19:13 CET

So, unclear on one thing: Were the actors names appearing in Baseline StudioSystems the result of deliberate misinformation on the part of the filmmakers, or a mistake on someone's part. If the former, is it actually kosher to use the names of actors in that way, presumably (or not?) without their knowledge?

The One True b!X | January 24, 19:14 CET

Which may or may not be slightly short-sighted, depends how personally journalists take these things.

Well are they going to play along? It might be fun the first time but the novelty may have worn off and this could be reflected in the reporting. And also if we know most of the information is going to be false, why should we get excited about it?

Simon | January 24, 19:16 CET

Because we're maniacs ? Yeah, I get what you mean, news outlets may just not bother reporting on the movie at all (even when Joss et al want them too).

And good point b!x, what happens when the actors see it and think "WTF ?" (or worse still "Oh fantastic, I get to work with Joss Whedon") only to be told "Haha, just joshing Bradley ! Joshing, geddit ? Hey come back ... jeez, some guys got no sense of humour".

Saje | January 24, 19:18 CET

What if the disinformation is that it's all wrong?

NYPinTA | January 24, 19:23 CET

Hmm but you never expected to see them happen Sunfire, so (again by definition) they're going to be more surprising than something you consider and think might well happen.

Maybe the difference here is that my default view of my ideas typically is to think they're wrong.

Sunfire | January 24, 19:27 CET

Maybe the difference here is that my default view of my ideas typically is to think they're wrong.

So your default view of the above idea is to think that it's wrong. Which means that you think that your ideas are right. But that makes the above idea right. Which means you think your ideas are wrong. Which makes the above idea wrong.

...

I think I saw James T. Kirk destroy a computer this way once. Maybe twice.

The One True b!X | January 24, 19:29 CET

So... maybe my head hurts because I too am a robot? Well now. Frak.

I'm going back to bed.

NYPinTA | January 24, 19:38 CET

Technically Joss said neither actor "is" attached. He didn't say they won't be....

Though I guess we'd find this out sooner or later. Not easy to keep the name of your stars secret.

zz9 | January 24, 19:41 CET

So your default view of the above idea is to think that it's wrong. Which means that you think that your ideas are right. But that makes the above idea right. Which means you think your ideas are wrong. Which makes the above idea wrong.

My complex internal self-doubting system is not easily grokked, I'm afraid.

Sunfire | January 24, 19:45 CET

Not easy to keep the name of your stars secret.

You could use encryption. If we start getting cast announcements that SDHJK ZHJYT has signed on I think some scepticism may be warranted. Then again, look at the Dollhouse actor's names ...

I'm going back to bed.

Typical robot behaviour.

Maybe the difference here is that my default view of my ideas typically is to think they're wrong.

Well, you were right about Mr H Potter esq. Sunfire ;). To me you generate the speculation (or someone else does) and then you try to tear it down, if you can't it's as likely to be right as anything else (i.e. not very, so in that sense I guess we all think we're probably wrong ;).

[ edited by Saje on 2009-01-24 19:46 ]

Saje | January 24, 19:46 CET

Uh, no. Fandom is pretty spoiler hungry as a group. Individuals of course vary. Make no mistake, they are intentionally feeding disinformation to us through the usual legitimate channels

Except like you said Joss undercuts that purpose by coming here to tell us that it's the wrong information. They're putting out enough false stories to confound the spoiler-hungry, whoever they may be. But then coming here and telling us that it's all smoke and mirrors to keep the real story a secret.

If Joss hadn't come on here to contradict it, I'd agree with you that their only intention was for us to be misinformed. But it's not that - the misinformation serves to lower the credibility of all the media that will be posting so that future reports will be met with skepticism or even disinterest. We're less able to take the rumors as credible now that we know they're being fed false rumors. Which I can see as being a bit counterproductive in the future when the desire to amp up interest about the 'real' story becomes genuine.

We're not solely meant to be kept misinformed. We're meant to be kept in the dark, to be kept uniformed. False leads to keep interested fans and media off the scent. Fuzzying the signal by which we fans get our information so that we can't make heads or tails of it.

Emmie | January 24, 20:05 CET

I took Joss' intervention here to mean that the incorrect actor names did not come from the CiTW people. Their disinformation campaign consists of "fake sides for the actors, fake summeries, different names..." Presumably "different names" means different names for the movie (Mordecai?) and/or characters. I don't think they'd give out the wrong actor names. Of course, if Joss comes back here and says it stars Morgan Freeman, I'll start to doubt myself.

jcs | January 24, 20:08 CET

Dialogue and emotion eh? Pffft. That's been done. I thought this guy was supposed to be "original." I'm so over this film.

snot monster from outer space | January 24, 20:22 CET

I bet it even uses a succession of still frames strung together and played quickly to generate the illusion of motion. Pfft indeed. Persistence of vision has been done to death IMO.

Saje | January 24, 20:43 CET

The NY times article does sound like a review for The Evil Dead movies. I wonder if they leaked an evil dead script?

The first track of the Evil Dead Musical was called Cabin In The Woods afterall.

Of course that would also explain why some people thought it sounded Lovecraftian since Evil Dead was sort of a Lovecraft spoof. Even the aforementioned Cloverfield was described by some as being Lovecraftian in origin

That being said, I would love to see joss write and direct a Lovecraftian film. So many bad writers and directors have tried to capture Lovecraft's stories. If would be awesome for a great director and writer like Joss to tackle the subject. I think he could do wonders with Call Of Cthulhu. The Lovecraftian Gods/aliens are just such a great basis for a story. Plus I think it is now in public domain except as a tabletop RPG. Although this is under some debate I hear.

[ edited by Jaynes Hat on 2009-01-24 21:24 ]

Jayne's Hat | January 24, 21:21 CET

Seems like there isn't any reliable source anymore other than the horse's mouth if the NYT will print unconfirmed media news. If they'd said that Carrot Top and Penn Jillette were the latest to be cast, I doubt I'd have believed it. But when it's legitimate actors, you have a tendency to say, Oh! okay, then.

No, I hope Joss keeps this movie as shrouded in mystery as absolutely possible and people on the Internet who want to print dialogue as gospel and try to spoil other viewers have my utter contempt. I'm content with the little I know so far and that's plenty.

Tonya J | January 24, 21:45 CET

In defense of the NYT, they didn't print this (just put it online), and they pull their information from a professional, members only Hollywood insider source which is usually spot on. I'm not sure how The Powers That Be Awesome are spreading their misinformation, but they're doing a really good job at it.

CABIN starts filming soon, also. And DOLLHOUSE wraps. Man, 2009 is already a weird Whedon year, and we're only 24 days in. (Wouldn't have it any other way).

gossi | January 24, 21:49 CET

Does anyone know the wrap date for Dollhouse? I thought they were filming episode 12 right now. But on the other hand, Joss said they were doing the last three episodes kinda weirdly.

wiesengrund | January 24, 21:52 CET

Also, for whatever it's worth, few people on the Internet are running around to "try to spoil other viewers". Most (please note I don't say "all") places with spoilers are places one has to seek out and deliberately choose to read. One can still, of course, have contempt for them, but it's not like there's an epidemic of unavoidable spoiler spam.

[ edited by The One True b!X on 2009-01-24 21:53 ]

The One True b!X | January 24, 21:53 CET

I'll find out re HOUSE OF DOLLS, as we should probably mark the occasion.

Regards the movie film, I think part of the problem they have is the lengthy period between shooting and release. They need to make sure it's not leaktastic. And it's a Joss Whedon thing, so that's always a possibility.

gossi | January 24, 21:55 CET

gossi, that's what I mean. They printed it "online." I don't want to get all semantical, but if it's on their website, they must think that it was something legitimate to put up in the first place. Of course, as you say, that could be part of the smokescreen and I'm glad of it (and I'm hoping I didn't jinx the film somehow with my Carrot Top reference ... yeesh).

[ edited by Tonya J on 2009-01-24 22:01 ]

Tonya J | January 24, 21:59 CET

Who cares about what the film is about? It's Joss so we're all gonna see it. We'll discuss it after seeing it.

Rikardo | January 24, 23:02 CET

They need to make sure it's not leaktastic.

Which would be a first. Mutant Enemy leaked like a sieve back in the good old days. Thinking about it, knowing the spoilers several months advance did have a settling effect on the hardcore Buffy and Angel fandom.

As for the NYT thing, they probably just thought it was a normal run of the mill film synopsis . The same for the other ten zillion films mentioned on their site.

Also Joss = Ozymandias.

He may have revealed his masterplan but it's too late to do anything about it.

Simon | January 24, 23:17 CET

Hey, did anyone else get the impression that Joss didn't type the above post himself?

Whilst I am in no way questioning that the info is correct, and the words came directly from the (bad?) horses mouth, it lacked Joss's usual panache. Plus punctuation. I mean, Joss would never write 'summeries', or fail to use at last ONE parentheses!

missb | January 25, 00:01 CET

"I dunno, I think there's a "slightly spoilerish" middle ground."

Yeah, saje, I think you're right. To use Sunfire's Harry Potter example, when the sixth book came out as soon as I read about horcruxes I knew that Harry was the final horcrux. I told some of my friends. One was excited to know, one thought I was obviously wrong, but one said 'oh I wish you hadn't told me that possibility'. The devastating effects of the 'speculation spoiler'

Let Down | January 25, 00:13 CET

This is misinformation. While we are fans of both those actors, neither is attached to the movie. Just FYI.

However, they ARE attached to the Serenity sequel.

And I just won the lottery and my dog just flew across New Jersey without a plane. Or wings.

I'm going to go get some zero-calorie ice cream.

Nebula1400 | January 25, 00:27 CET

Ok, here's a twisted thought:

Joss came on to say that what has been leaked is misinformation, intended to lead everyone (fans & critics alike) astray from what the movie's really about and who's really in it.

Except.

Couldn't that just be more misinformation, intended to lead everyone (fans & critics alike) astray, and what's been leaked as false will actually turn out to be true?

I mean, it's not like this site exists in its own 'verse - you can stumble across it doing a search, but you can only comment if you're a member. So the Big Guy who actually knows what's going on comes by and mentions that what we've read elsewhere isn't real, knowing full well that one of those misinformed media types just might be lurking here and will now pick that up and run with it. And meanwhile The Boss Dude leans back in his chair and has a good chuckle 'cause it really is real.

Although I do wonder just what a "prson" is and how it will have emotion. And...can you have emotion? Is it something that can be given to you, is it tangible, or is it something that exists within you, that you can express?

ShadowQuest | January 25, 01:48 CET

Actually Joss created this site several years ago simply for the purpose of spreading disinformation. There are no actual contributors. Joss has been writing all the comments here for years as a form of daily 24-hour metablogging, purely to create a plausible platform through which to disseminate disinformation.

He do the police in different voices man, and there's nothing you can do about it.

Well, I can, of course, but then I'm Joss. Or Spartacus. Or maybe T.S. Eliot--you can never be sure.

snot monster from outer space | January 25, 01:53 CET

So, when do we start the picnic about the speculation about the spoilers and misinformation? :-D

OzLady | January 25, 01:55 CET

I'll bring the chocolate meringue pie. I'm pretty sure Dan Regal will bring Key Lime.

Tonya J | January 25, 02:00 CET

Argh, invisotext this stuff! These are pie spoilers!!!

The One True b!X | January 25, 02:19 CET

Man, I am so late to the party. Having Jena Malone and Bill Nighy in this movie along with Jenkins and Whitford would've pretty much sealed the deal on this being one of the best things ever.

UnpluggedCrazy | January 25, 03:48 CET

Spoiled pie.

bleh.

11thHour | January 25, 03:49 CET

It's pie spoilers, with ritual sacrifice spoilers !

And bees !

Saje | January 25, 03:53 CET

...and eternal life?

Although I haven't used up my first one yet, so maybe that's just being greedy.

I'll just be happy if there's bees. And bee spoilers with pie.

QuoterGal | January 25, 04:54 CET

Now that I'm a robot, I have eternal life already. Well, at least until my batteries run out. Wonder if they're solar? Hmmm.

Did someone say pie?

NYPinTA | January 25, 05:22 CET

Hm the real stuff will leak when the movie starts shooting, its always that way. Wont stay secret nowadays cause people like to talk too much. What I would love to know is where they´ll shoot. And if they also shoot somewhere else than the US. Probably not, but one can always hope.

Also mhmmmm pie.

Kessie | January 25, 05:48 CET

Vancouver BC, supposedly.

The One True b!X | January 25, 06:00 CET

Hmm. Leaky, spoiled pie. I don't know.

GVH | January 25, 08:20 CET

Anyone able to compare the leaks for BSG with the leaks for any Whedon series ?
Since I'm not following any BSG sites I'm thinking BSG seems to be an airtight ship, is that really the case ?
And since all Whedon leaks wind up on Whedonesque from this perspective it looks like Whedon productions leaks like sieves, is it that simple ?
Anyway from the perspective of the great non-internet peeking majority leaks and misinformation makes little to no difference.
IMO though, it doesn't matter that I am spoiled I still enjoy watching Psycho, cause if a movie is good enough it's got a lot more going for it than that first time thrill.

jpr | January 25, 11:15 CET

And since all Whedon leaks wind up on Whedonesque from this perspective it looks like Whedon productions leaks like sieves, is it that simple ?

Back when Buffy and Angel were in their last seasons, fans were reading full summaries of the episodes weeks/months before they aired. I think it was Jane Espenson who said something about scripts were left in unlocked mail boxes on the writers' doors.

In regards to Dollhouse, it's a different story. We're nowhere near as spoiled for Joss'new show as we were for Buffy season 7 or Angel season 5. All we know about the episodes is from the casting sides which go out to actors who want to audition for certain roles in the show. Casting sides only contain 2/3 pages of the script so only a little bit about the episode is known.

Simon | January 25, 11:20 CET

Ok, so would you happen to know if BSG casting sides have been doing the rounds on BSG sites ?

jpr | January 25, 12:03 CET

Battlestar leaks happen. They send out episode screeners to critics, so in the past I've known what's going to happen much in the way of advance - but personally, I don't care as I don't watch the show.

Dollhouse has been a very tight ship, I have to say. Which is good. All there's been really is casting sides -- some of which, by the way, I suspect not actually from scripts. None of the big plot twists and such have got out.

gossi | January 25, 12:11 CET

Heresy :)

jpr | January 25, 12:56 CET

"All there's been really is casting sides -- some of which, by the way, I suspect not actually from scripts."

Some BSG crew members or people otherwise involved have been leaking information on the forums that has proved to have been correct. Also, Aaron Douglas let slip a whole lot of info months ago.

Caroline | January 25, 14:10 CET

Oh, I meant the casting sides thing in the context of Dollhouse. Unfortunately I am shit at writing, so didn't explain that right.

gossi | January 25, 14:33 CET

I'll go see the movie, and probably stuff will happen in it.

I don't really like Bill Nighy anyway. *ducks*

redeem147 | January 25, 16:43 CET

1) A prson will have an emotion.

How can a prison have an emotion?
ETA: Nevermind.

peacemonger | January 25, 20:00 CET

He meant a *prism* will have an emotion, in fact a whole rainbow of them! ;-)

OzLady | January 25, 20:36 CET

Vancouver BC, supposedly.

SQUEE raised to the WOOT power!

AlanD | January 25, 21:38 CET

Vancouver BC

Ooooh, X-Files country. That could augur well.

Tonya J | January 25, 21:41 CET

Or just be really really cold.

TamaraC | January 25, 22:43 CET

That could augur well.

Certainly for the budget it will.

Simon | January 25, 22:55 CET

BC (British Columbia) is usually quite mild weather-wize. Though they have been suffering through a rather nasty cold snap recently. I think it is mostly behind them. It's generally a much fairer weather zone than over here in so-freezing-cold-it's-making-my-nostrils-freeze-shut Ontario. I need a warm frakking vacation!

Sherrie | January 26, 02:51 CET

There's Canadian "mild" and real mild. It's like with money. I'm staying away from the BSG boards until after the finale. Their leakiness is worrying.

dreamlogic | January 26, 06:06 CET

Oh Joss, you sneaky minx you. I applaud the misinformation :)

Astonishing_Chaos | January 26, 07:11 CET

I grew up in the Pacific Northwest and there is nothing colder than 32 degrees F (0 degrees Celsius) and raining. It is a cold that cuts through you and seeps into your bones and your soul. March can be miserable in BC. I'm just saying.

TamaraC | January 26, 09:15 CET

0 degrees, raining and windy ? ;)

(agreed though, wet cold is worse than dry cold, any day)

Seen Canadians on a few outdoors forums talking about how -20 (Celsius) isn't really that bad and i'm not sure if that's just bravado or if the air being drier makes it feel warmer or if Canadians really are rock frikkin' hard cos i've felt about -10 real and -20 and below with wind-chill and have to say, it's pretty cold - in fact, if pressed, actually "that bad" is almost precisely how i'd describe it ;).

Vancouver, BC is a good choice I reckon since years of Stargate viewing have shown that it apparently looks a lot like several alien planets - this otherworldly vibe is exactly what 'Dollhouse' needs.

ETA: And it won't hurt 'The Cabin in the Woods' much either. D'oh ! ;)

[ edited by Saje on 2009-01-26 12:22 ]

Saje | January 26, 10:44 CET

Seen Canadians on a few outdoors forums talking about how -20 (Celsius) isn't really that bad and i'm not sure if that's just bravado or if the air being drier

That's why we wear coats.

redeem147 | January 26, 11:47 CET

Heh ;). There's actually a serious point in there though, in that you could also just be better prepared for cold weather - when you live in a fairly temperate climate you tend not to have arctic parkas and so on (the folks on the forums talked about wearing less than that though, if they'd said "I'm nice and warm in my expedition weight thermals, fleece top, down jacket, windproof shirt ..." etc. etc. then I wouldn't have thought twice about it).

Saje | January 26, 12:01 CET

That's why we wear coats.

Sure, but what's that gonna do about about the "freezing your nostrils shut" problem? I've been in that kind of cold, only because the Army sent me there, in the worst winter they'd had in decades in the American Midwest. What's macho or patriotic about getting frozen solid like an ancient mammoth?

dreamlogic | January 26, 12:07 CET

Yeah, we don't want Joss becoming a Purple Popsicle! ;-)

OzLady | January 26, 12:47 CET

The internet is always room temperature, all I'm saying.

Oh! Also meant to say. If it's filming up north, it will be the first one. JW is a filming in LA guy.

[ edited by dreamlogic on 2009-01-26 13:12 ]

dreamlogic | January 26, 13:01 CET

They should film it here in Australia.

Not only is our dollar MUCH better value than a Canuck one (The greenback currently buying $1.52 of our wacky plastic moolah, as opposed to only $1.22 in Canada money) but we also offer a variety of both cabins AND woods without having to resort to the whole 'poser-in-a-parka' look.

And I'm sure if they ask nicely, someone, somewhere, will throw in a couple of old 'House of Wax' and 'Scooby Doo' props. And I also hear that Baz is keen to offload a bunch of 'Australia' stuff on the cheap... ;-)

missb | January 26, 13:40 CET

I remain happily spoiler phobic. I've never read a single article or even the comments, on a Dollhouse thread with a 'Spoiler' tag, and I intend to keep it that way. Same will be true for 'Cabin', when the inevitable spoilers start to appear, even if they may or may not be real. So not all of fandom is spoiler hungry.

I'm with Joss, who famously said that if anyone gave him BSG spoilers, he'd have to kill them. ;)

As long as it's true that Richard Jenkins and Bradely Whitford are attached, I'm a happy cabin-r.

Shey | January 26, 14:09 CET

Saje, everytime I've seen shows about Canada, when I've been in the U.K., they tend to emphasize the snow, as thought it is very cold here year round.Whereas many of us live so far south we are at the same longitude as Northern California.- I say as I look out at 4 feet of snow.
BSG has also used BC as many other planets so I'm sure it can do a cabin and some woods rather easily. Although, come to think of it. with Stargate and BSG being out in BC so much, maybe we have all seen the BC outside a little too much. Maybe its time for different woods. Perhaps in Ontario?

Lioness | January 26, 17:31 CET

Now the question is whether there's a fake script out there, too.

The One True b!X | January 27, 00:51 CET

Yeah, The X-Files demonstrated that BC could not only be other-worldly, but spooky as well ;)

JossIzBoss | January 27, 01:07 CET

I say as I look out at 4 feet of snow.

Heh, way to dispel the myth Lioness ;).

(kind of like watching films for the international market of the UK, it's all rolling fields and stately homes OR deprived inner cities. And yep, I feel ready to experience everything Ontarion woods have to offer, share the wealth and all that)

Saje | January 27, 10:58 CET

I go out of town for just a few days and Joss posts! I've been hesitating to read any of the 'Cabin in the Woods' links because I want to be unspoiled, but now I know Joss has an elaborate plan of fake spoilers all over the place, so I guess I needn't worry.

embers | January 28, 19:54 CET

January 24 2009