Whedonesque : Comments on 21954 : "Cabin in the Woods" delayed until January 14, 2011.

If this article were a status update on Facebook, I'd click the "Like" button.

Yeah. Process takes 6 months to do, but there are such a limited number of screens that can do 3D, that's the first available slot. It's okay, as long as the movie rocks when it DOES come out. Which it will.

Brian Lynch | October 10, 00:58 CET

hmmm I don't know how I feel about this yet...

TOASTERslayer | October 10, 00:59 CET

I don't think it makes enough financial sense. Yes, it'll make more in 3D, but this will certainly cost a few million to convert. Does it really stand to make enough extra money on 3D screens to warrant the cost? Final Destination 4 made more than the other three, but not considerably more.

The Dark Shape | October 10, 00:59 CET

Holy crappy crap!

Not happy about this. At all.

Unfortunately it probably makes sense. 10-1 there is a checkbox on the test screener survey that says "I would be more likely to watch this movie if it were offered in 3D." I mean, if you can get all the "My Bloody Valentine 3D" movie-goers to see it in addition to all the Joss Whedon and "Cloverfield" fans? Makes me wonder what 6 months worth of a dozen people's time is worth in comparison to the expected return.

Sigh, 3D made from 2D isn't nearly as good looking as 3D (see G-force, though they did a good job) and we have to wait longer! Lame!

bobw1o | October 10, 01:01 CET

Dumb decision - cost/benefit ratio is poor, and 3D will certainly be "soo 15 minutes ago" by opening day.

baxter | October 10, 01:01 CET

In general, audiences aren't tired of 3D yet. How often is the fourth film in a series the highest grossing (to use the Final Destination example)? Almost never. 3D was the key. UP and Cloudy With A Chance Of Meatballs also exceeded expectations and were in 3D (although, of course, correlation does not equal causation). Plus, My Bloody Valentine 3D did pretty good business in January of this year. They are probably hoping Cabin can do the same.

bonzob | October 10, 01:02 CET

In general, audiences aren't tired of 3D yet. How often is the fourth film in a series the highest grossing (to use the Final Destination example)? Almost never. 3D was the key.

Final Destination 3 was the highest grossing of the franchise, too. There was never any doubt that the fourth would take that title, with or without 3D.

The Dark Shape | October 10, 01:04 CET

It's a very weird feeling. Huge disappointment in having to wait until 2011 vs the elation of having it in 3D. Should be awesome when it finally comes out.

LaneMeyer | October 10, 01:04 CET

WHAT. Are. you. kidding. me? Dislike.

dark-hearted rose | October 10, 01:05 CET

DRAG ME TO HELL: not 3D, but awesome. Flopped.
FINAL DESTINATION 3D, BLOODY VALENTINE, 3D, terrible. Hits.

That's how the studio thinks. If it gets more people in, and I think 3D absolutely does, I'm for it. Plus it'll be fun.

Brian Lynch | October 10, 01:05 CET

My Bloody Valentine wasn't terrible - and even the studio thinks of that as a fluke success.

Drag Me to Hell flopped 'cause it opened at the end of May.

The Dark Shape | October 10, 01:06 CET

...they're spending six months to covert the movie to 3D due to the phenomenal early response to the movie from test screenings,

And it's not enough to just. leave things. the hell. alone? Sigh.

missb | October 10, 01:07 CET

So Brian, when's the first Angel3D comic? ;-)

bobw1o | October 10, 01:07 CET

Mmm on the one hand I was happy to hear it tested so positively with the audience, I also find 3D a lot of fun. On the other hand waiting a whole extra year for the movie kinda sucks. Especially when I've been telling everyone at my video store to go see it.

vampmogs | October 10, 01:08 CET

Oh good, we have nothing to talk about in 2010.

Simon | October 10, 01:09 CET

Video... Store?

You lost me.

bobw1o | October 10, 01:09 CET

I don't like this AT ALL.

UnpluggedCrazy | October 10, 01:10 CET

While I was hoping to see the movie next February, waiting until 2011 may work out. Toy Story in 3D is doing great, and more 3D movies will follow...and a 3D TV. So, this may work.
One question...can the 3D glasses I got from Toy Story work on "Cabin in the Woods"?

[ edited by impalergeneral on 2009-10-10 01:12 ]

impalergeneral | October 10, 01:11 CET

What, Simon, is Dollhouse Season 3, Dr Horrible 2, the Buffy movie and Joss's Nobel Peace Prize not going to be enough for you?

missb | October 10, 01:12 CET

I#m not holding my breath for any of those actually happening.

Simon | October 10, 01:14 CET

I just had my first 3-D experience last night with the Toy Story Movies. I didn't really mind it, but I don't think it added anything to the movies either.

Animal Mother | October 10, 01:15 CET

Oh ye of little Faith... ;-)

missb | October 10, 01:15 CET

Fail. Do not want.

And 2011? That is so far away! *cries*

ShanshuBugaboo | October 10, 01:16 CET

I could actually see Dr. Horrible 2 happening, for what it's worth.

UnpluggedCrazy | October 10, 01:16 CET

Oh, and there'll be the exciting conclusion of Buffy S8 for us to talk about!

UnpluggedCrazy | October 10, 01:17 CET

I'm with the 'not sure what to make of this'-crowd. But then, I've only ever seen a movie with 3D scenes once (there's not that many theaters here that can show a movie in 3D), and it always seemed like nothing more than a gimmick to me. Still: if this makes the movie more succesfull, then why the hell not, right? :). The year extra wait remains sucky, though.

But: the great test screenings are wonderfull news. If a general movie going audience picks it up after the movie is released and adds to the worth-of-mouth already going in geekier circles, CitW could become a big success, I'd say.

GVH | October 10, 01:18 CET

Dr Horrible 2 will probably happen

Let Down | October 10, 01:19 CET

Oh ye of little Faith... ;-)

True but then I remember getting all worked up for the Buffyverse DVD movies and the Buffy animated series and those amounted to nothing. On the other hand it's great to hear about how the movie is testing. Franchise?

Simon | October 10, 01:19 CET

By the way, to anyone who thinks 3D is just a passing fad, it's just getting started. Off the top of my head, Toy Story 3 is June of 2010, Tron 2 is Christmas 2010 and Transformers 3 July of 2011, all in 3D. And the industry is just revving up technological advancements for it. They're developing single lens technology, which is pretty insane when you think about it. And the amount of partial mirror rigs that have come out in recent years is impressive. All that not to mention turning 2D movies into 3D like G-Force, Nightmare Before Christmas, and now Cabin. They can continue to do that till the cows come home. It's here for a while.

bobw1o | October 10, 01:19 CET

Pushing it back practically a whole year, just to put it in 3D! Oh my word, not a happy bunny. Surely the movie has been designed to be a normal 2D movie. Suddenly deciding to stick in 3D just feels like a completely cynical $$$ grab by the studio.

NotaViking | October 10, 01:20 CET

On the plus side, converting a movie made for 2D into 3D means it won't be full of those cheesy "poke your eye out" moments.

bonzob | October 10, 01:23 CET

I don't see how this is the whole story. MGM has so many challenges right now. There has to be more to this than just the 3D conversion.

TamaraC | October 10, 01:25 CET

Holy crap! The movie "tested phenomenally", so instead of releasing it now, they're going to screw with it and not release it 'til 2011??
WT-entire-F?!
I was looking forward to 'Cabin', but I'm not happy to say that I'm going to skip the 3D. Don't like it. Never have.
I'll wait and hope the DVD has 3D and regular Widescreen.

:(

AmazonGirl | October 10, 01:26 CET

I think its great!

I bet the movie is clever and scary and funny as hell. I say triple my dimensions!!!

alexreager | October 10, 01:26 CET

Also, what Tamara said. They may not have the money to market it for February. On the other hand, is MGM even going to exist in 2011?

bonzob | October 10, 01:28 CET

Cue inevitable Joss post (TM) to calm down the fandom to say this is a good thing.

As for me, I don't know what to think.

crazygolfa | October 10, 01:28 CET

Uggh. This is so lame. I cbf waiting another year just to have my viewing experience interrupted by those stupid red and blue glasses.

robfearon | October 10, 01:29 CET

I think this might be the end of days. Admittedly I skimmed Revelation but i'm pretty sure there was stuff about numbers in there and 3[D] is a number. QED.

Oh good, we have nothing to talk about in 2010.

Oh sure, cos Jupiter being turned into a sun isn't news ...

Saje | October 10, 01:30 CET

I don't think 3D glasses have been red and blue for a while.

Brian Lynch | October 10, 01:31 CET

I cbf waiting another year just to have my viewing experience interrupted by those stupid red and blue glasses.

This ain't your daddy's 3D (i.e. the stupid glasses aren't red and blue anymore, they're off and on).

Saje | October 10, 01:31 CET

I don't think 3D glasses have been red and blue for a while.

But they are so fashionable! 3D glasses dress.

Succatash | October 10, 01:40 CET

Ugh...I hope they will be offering it in "flat" viewings as well. NOT pleased about it being pushed back a year either. If Dollhouse gets canceled and I have a Whedonless 2010, I'm going to be very depressed.

marvelknight616 | October 10, 01:40 CET

Ok, this might just be due to me not having seen a 3D movie since those red/blue days but I really couldn't care less about it being 3D and honestly it just ticks me off that I'll have to wait another year for it. Almost wish the test screenings would have gone more so-so...

Djungelurban | October 10, 01:42 CET

That is disappointing. Honestly, I don't like 3d. I'll see it of course, but I'd rather see it 2d now than 3d later. Still, I'm glad it is going to be released, and I can't wait!

SteppeMerc | October 10, 01:44 CET

I'm nothing but disappointed. If this ends up bringing in massive revenue for Cabin, I'll eat this post (I'll print it out on rice paper first). But for the moment... nothing but disappointed. I was gonna have my girlfriend fly out to LA for opening day and all this stuff. I mean, that's not the only reason this is unfortunate news. I've just really been looking forward to this too, and to find out that my wait time has gone from 4.5 months to 15.5 months? Sigh, sigh, and sigh.

Jobo | October 10, 01:49 CET

For people who wear glasses already...how are we supposed to put them on over our glasses?

ShanshuBugaboo | October 10, 01:50 CET

Just as long as it comes out I really don't care. Honestly, the idea of anything Joss has worked on, still on the horizon is enough to make me smile.

Hostile 17 | October 10, 01:50 CET

Ugggghhhh. I'm so tired of all this 3D nonsense. Let me just see the movie already! By 2011 the movie will be so over-saturated in my mind that there's almost no chance I'll come away impressed. At first I thought this news was a sick joke. Now I wish it was. :(

mikejer | October 10, 01:51 CET

Oooh, but are my teaser posters that have the release date as February 5th gonna be worth tons on eBay someday?

Jobo | October 10, 01:55 CET

I'm soooo tired of 3D...
It adds nothing to me. Well, at least it wasn't filmed as a 3D movie (studio gimmicks included)

Angel TheVampire | October 10, 01:56 CET

No 3-D near me. And now the movie is further away, too.

I would really, really doubt that they wouldn't release it in 2-D as well.

If it is successful and helps the careers of Joss and Drew, then I'm on board though--they deserve any break they can get.

As far as less to discuss in 2010: well, there's always more Buffy season eight....

I'm still going to avoid hearing anything about it as long as I can.

WilliamTheB | October 10, 01:56 CET

I couldn't care less about 3D, but if the script that was going around is at all the movie they made, there's a sequence in there that should be kind of batshit insane in 3D (all the moreso since, as pointed out above, it wouldn't have been intended to be 3D and therefore won't be stuffed full of annoying "hey look we're in 3D!" moments).

The One True b!X | October 10, 01:59 CET

all the moreso since, as pointed out above, it wouldn't have been intended to be 3D and therefore won't be stuffed full of annoying "hey look we're in 3D!" moments

And see, despite the inevitable ping-pong balls, I still think 3D is more effective when things were originally intended for 3D. Nightmare Before Christmas in 3D? Not esp. effective.

I'm sad about the delay, relieved I didn't pin my Joss is a Hottie/JossWhedon.net relaunch plans on that release date (we're going with the 13th anniversary of WttH/The Harvest airing instead), but kind of excited because my brother LOVES 3D and is very interested in horror send-ups, and it's always nice to have things he and I can enjoy together.

Kiba | October 10, 02:10 CET

Would anyone here care to explain how 3d movies are viewed these days, or provide a good link? The last 3D movie I saw was 15 years ago in an IMAX theatre, it must have changed since then.

I'm also wondering how you can make 3d from 2d? Once it is shot you can't look from two different angles anymore, can you?

And yeah, not happy about the longer waiting period, but hey, it'll be cool to see a 3d movie once.

Celebithil | October 10, 02:19 CET

Wouldn't it make more sense, if it's testing so well, to release it now and then do a 3D version for 2011 or a 3D sequel?

And knowing what Joss thought of the UK DVDs being in widescreen when he'd framed them for 4:3 what does he think of the studio taking his film, albeit directed by someone else, and tampering with it?

zz9 | October 10, 02:21 CET

At least it'll be out before the end of the world in 2012. That's a plus.

shpedoinkel | October 10, 02:38 CET

Gah. Awful idea.

dispatch | October 10, 02:39 CET

I'm pretty sanguine about this. They're converting more and more screens to 3D every month. They're already over 3000 for North America, not counting true IMAX, and while CitW probaby wouldn't get all of them, they would probably get close to that by 2011, which is a normal wide release these days. Add in the 3D surcharge...

cabri | October 10, 02:43 CET

I don't see how this is the whole story. MGM has so many challenges right now. There has to be more to this than just the 3D conversion.

Although one would think that challenges would make them unable to spend the money on a 3D conversion. But also remember (unless this changed again) that Cabin technically was made under the auspices of United Artists and its separate pool of cash, not MGM's directly.

The One True b!X | October 10, 02:45 CET

I suppose I don't mind it going 3D if it brings in larger audiences.

However, has anyone seen a movie in 3D that was actually better than the 2D version? To me it is still a gimmick which only serves to take me out of the movie. I will most likely watch the 2D version when it comes out unless I hear overwhelming raves about the added dimension.

I might have been a little more supportive if it had been filmed with the intention of being 3D cuz that almost certainly would have affected how Joss and Drew approached some of the scenes. It might even have become another way of twisting on the horror genre.

Still, I am just happy to see Joss on the big screen once again.

lottalettuce | October 10, 02:51 CET

I wonder what the Joss and Drew think of this. I have long thought 3D is underused, but it calls for a different kind of cinematography than 2D. (Alfred Hitchcock used 3D well in Dial M for Murder, so there is a 3D cinematography that is not just cheesy the train's coming right at us gimmickry.) If they're reshooting, it could be fantastic. If they're just doing some process to the existing footage, it would dilute the impact of what they've already created (as motion comics, IMO, do to stories and art created for . . . motionless comics).

I may seek out the director's D.

Pointy | October 10, 02:58 CET

Terrible news.

Waiting another whole year, AND the crappiness of 3D added to it? Awful, awful, awful. What is up with this rebirth of 3D film? It, pretty much as a whole, completely sucks. Financial sense or not, 3D has never enhanced a movie for me... it always brings it down. Damn.

patxshand | October 10, 02:59 CET

I'd rather have it sooner rather than later... and I'd probably still see it in 2D anyway (all films available in 3D are available in 2D, no?). Speaking of My Bloody Valentine 3D, the unexpectedly good b/o results may be due to the Jensen factor (ok, I've confessed).

[ edited by Effulgent on 2009-10-10 03:03 ]

Effulgent | October 10, 03:00 CET

Come to think of it, Hitchcock used 3D in Dial M for Murder to make viewers feel enclosed in a room. Might be perfect for making people feel enclosed in a cabin in the woods (if the shots are set up to create that effect).

Pointy | October 10, 03:03 CET

Horrible idea. Not so much because of the 3d thing as much as because they have been trying so hard to keep spoilers and such from sneaking out on this one, and delaying it a year is basically kicking that effort full on in the face, nuts, and anywhere else the marketing trolls can get their sharp little booties.

doubtful guest | October 10, 03:08 CET

If they're reshooting, I'm fer it; if they're taking shots that were designed for 2D and processing another D into them, I'm leaning agin it. There. I knew you were all wondering.

Pointy | October 10, 03:12 CET

you've got to be kidding me

Litwal | October 10, 03:12 CET

Poor Zander won't be able to watch it...

GimpyD | October 10, 03:19 CET

Not happy about this at all. 3-D is BS, and makes me NOT want to see it. Also, the delay of a year is very disturbing. Now there is nothing to look forward to after the holidays.

Nebula1400 | October 10, 03:38 CET

There's no reason to reshoot just for 3D. There's a post process to do it. Maybe they'll reshoot for some other reason though. I dunno how the process works exactly, but I'm sure it involves a whole lot of Rotoscoping (cutting things out manually to separate the layers).

I agree with the whole gimmick thing, especially in this case. However, I like the potential of 3D to enhance the story when intentionally being used to do so.

I'mma side with Brian Lynch (and others). If it brings in more viewers for Joss and Drew, it's a good thing. Damn gimmick wins this time!

bobw1o | October 10, 03:45 CET

The next Friday The 13th might be in 3D(the second time for that series).The next Halloween will be in 3D.The next Texas Chainsaw Massacre is going to be in 3D.There is talk of converting Iron Man 2 into 3D or filming Iron Man 3 that way.J.J. Abrams just recently talked about the next Star Trek film going that way too.3D is the new fad like it was in the early 80s.

Avatar is going to be the real benchmark probably in the modern 3D film.

[ edited by Buffyfantic on 2009-10-10 03:57 ]

Buffyfantic | October 10, 03:58 CET

What a pain in my arse. I'm sorry if my opinion isn't popular but I think this just plain sucks. I don't particularly like 3D movies and now I have to wait longer. Great. I'll still see it, of course... I'm just annoyed.

zuzuspetals11 | October 10, 04:11 CET

I'm quite ready to jump on the "What's-the-point?" train, but let us look at the silver in this cloud...

... Let us combat the laws the universe has placed upon Joss' work (the better it is, the less it is watched), by using this extra year to display our amazing Browncoat approach to promoting yet another work of the Great One.

Archduke Sebassis | October 10, 04:35 CET

January through May (except for Memorial Day Weekend) is the graveyard season for films. It's a dumping ground and, with very few exceptions, the films are crap.

If MGM really believes in the film's ability to make money, they would release it in the summer. Since they aren't, the only possible "good" reason to premiere in the dead-zone is that they think it's much better than the other films that are coming out around it and THAT will make it stand out and be a hit. The "bad" reason to release it in January is because they don't feel it will make any money unless its surrounded by crappy films. I hope it is the former, rather than the latter.

TartFuel | October 10, 04:36 CET

It was already going to be released in February, though, TartFuel. So I'm not seeing that as a reason to move it, since it was already in the "graveyard season."

Jobo | October 10, 04:39 CET

Everyone should check out this article from Chud which basically raves about the film and explains why this 3D news is very good.

The article also explains some of the ins and outs over the 3D booking of theaters and why that also plays into the full year push back.

http://chud.com/articles/articles/21090/1/CABIN-IN-THE-WOODS-PUSHED-BACK-A-YEAR-HERE039S-WHY-THAT039S-NOT-BAD-NEWS/Page1.html

[ edited by Buffyfantic on 2009-10-10 05:00 ]

Buffyfantic | October 10, 04:57 CET

This is disappointing. This was the first movie I planned on seeing in theaters since... Spider-Man 3. Now, I will probably just wait until the "regular" version comes out on Blu-Ray. I am not a fan of 3D, at all.

goodridd | October 10, 04:59 CET

Grr.

I have a slight vision problem that makes 3D unworkable for me: it looks like a blurry mess and gives me headaches. Just this week I drove an extra 10 miles to a theater that was showing "Cloudy..." in 2D. Waiting an extra year for something that actively excludes me is not my idea of fun.

jclemens | October 10, 04:59 CET

The dead zone of January through May is not as dead as it used to be, especially for horror. Just this year, My Bloody Valentine and Friday the 13th did really well in the Jan-Feb area, whereas Drag Me To Hell bombed in the summer (with far better reviews).

I would argue that, for a horror film, a winter release makes a lot more sense than a summer one.

Also, the dead zone doesn't last through the end of May, the first weekend of May is the official kick off of the summer movie season, and some of the biggest movies of the year come out in May.

bonzob | October 10, 04:59 CET

Thanks for the link Buffyfantic. I added it to the post.

Sunfire | October 10, 05:04 CET

No problem,Sunfire.I thought the Chud article was fascinating because I didn't know about the booking factor for 3D theater screens.Only a certain amount of digital 3D screens are out there and those slots have already been promised to other films first.

Buffyfantic | October 10, 05:13 CET

Well, I'm glad I kept reading more than the headline, or I would've been mad!

Riker | October 10, 06:18 CET

Horror films do better in the spring than in summer because there is little to no real competition for the fans. Horror films are niche films. They do not appeal to the masses, nor are they Oscar bait. Horror film fans are rabid and loyal however, so by putting the film out when there is a dearth of quality releases in other genres, you get your best chance to make a profit. And yes, making it 3D will likely bring in more than enough money to cover the costs.

Friday the 13th cost only about $19M to produce and cost very little to promote compared to summer or fall films. It never would have been released in the summer because, A) too much competition and B) there are only 3 Friday 13th's (Feb., March and Nov. - and no way would it have be released in the fall). My bloody Valentine was released in January so it would not go head to head with it's only competition for that audience - Friday the 13th, so both films turned a profit, however modest the returns.

TartFuel | October 10, 07:21 CET

Well, Joss did say that CiTW was going to be the horror film to end all horror films. So maybe the studio had a few more films they wanted to squeeze in before Joss brought an end to the genre? ;)

But yeah, 3D detracts from movies imo and I find it hard to believe that people shell out extra money for the experience. And moving the release back an extra year seems a bit excessive.

JossIzBoss | October 10, 07:44 CET

DRAG ME TO HELL: not 3D, but awesome. Flopped.

This happens way too often. Drag Me To Hell did not make Matrix money, but it is by no means a flop. Case in point:

Production Budget: $30,000,000
Domestic Gross: $42,100,625
Foreign Gross: $40,746,513 (still active)
Current Worldwide Gross: $82,847,138

This does not factor in DVD purchases and rental sales. I have faith that will add a decent profit as well. I agree with your point about 3D though. It's a risk, but only slightly. The studio wouldn't push the date that far back and spend more time and money for the conversion if they weren't almost certain it was worth it, financially. Right now, given the track record, it's very worth it, which is why more and more films are being converted/released in 3D lately. Horror movies especially benefit from this kind of treatment. We're experiencing a kind of resurgence of interest in retro B-movie horror.

So, while I'm not happy I have to wait so much longer for Cabin In The Woods, I completely understand the business strategy here and find it to be a good idea overall, so I can't really complain.

This makes me think that had Slither come out now, it would probably make a killing at the box office as a 3D midnight movie. :)

kungfubear | October 10, 08:09 CET

Suck.

If it gets them more exposure, fine, whatever.

Do I care for 3D and seek out 3D films? Nope. Seen a few, found the experience detracted from the film each time.

*sigh*

As an avid Whedon fan, I'm just flat-out used to this kind of news. Guessing many others here feel the same.

WhoIsOmega? | October 10, 08:25 CET

Human society will have collapsed by the time the movie comes out. They need to bring it out NOW.

archon | October 10, 08:36 CET

TartFuel, are you agreeing with me, then? I don't see what point you are making. Horror films traditionally do better in early fall or late winter, and do worse in the summer or Oscar season.

Quality has nothing to do with it, at least from a studio perspective. Again, Drag Me To Hell had some of the best reviews of the year and bombed in the summer. 28 Weeks Later was also very well reviewed two years back, and also bombed in the summer.

January used to be a dump month, but for the last several years, there have been tons of big horror hits released in January (White Noise, My Bloody Valentine, Cloverfield, Underworld 2 and 3, Hide And Seek, The Unborn, and Hostel to name a few). That's the audience MGM is (wisely) trying to tap into.

I would say with the right marketing and the 3D hook, January is the perfect month to release Cabin. I could easily see it grossing 60-80 million, maybe more, depending on word of mouth.

bonzob | October 10, 08:40 CET

I'm disappointed we won't get the movie as quickly, but I'm actually excited the studio thought the film good enough to be released in 3D. I mean, Joss's work rarely gets that kind of consideration, and if it adds any cachet to the movie, I'm all for it.

Can you guys tell I'm more than a little tired of Whedon being an extremely niche writer/creator? I want more than anything for this movie to be a hit, and if I have to wait 11 months longer, I'm OK.

I like 3D movies; I was disappointed I didn't get to see Coraline in 3D 'cos it's so far my vote for best movie of the year.

dottikin | October 10, 08:43 CET

One question...can the 3D glasses I got from Toy Story work on "Cabin in the Woods"?

Possibly not as those glasses may only be suitable for G rated films.

Simon | October 10, 10:01 CET

For people who wear glasses already...how are we supposed to put them on over our glasses?

Yeah, they're designed so that us four-eyed, super intelligent, astoundingly cool people can wear them with our normal glasses. I saw Coraline in 3D with the extra glasses over my regular glasses and didn't have any problems.

jamesthegill | October 10, 10:17 CET

I should be saying that i'm shocked and surprised by the idea, but i'm not because they're making a lot of films 3D at the moment. They've got mad on the idea and think it must make the film better but i think it makes even the best of films worse.
Personally i can't get the hang of 3D glasses, i think the quality of the "3D" is dissapointing when you're watching a film you really wanna watch.
I don't understand why it has to be pushed back nearly a whole year if the process only takes 6 months. Can't they get started on it now so it can still be released in 2010? Or can they just not do it? cos it's not like many people will get to watch the 3Dness of the film cos it's only in selected cinemas. What's the point wasting money on it?

gingyfromshrek | October 10, 11:03 CET

I actually think that when done right, 3D can be a very interesting artistic tool in movie making, and I trust Joss & co not to go just for the cheap gimmick shots.

I wonder, though, how the new release date relates to the release of Scream 4, which I would assume would be Cabin's biggest competitor. because if Scream 4 comes out first and is a success, there is a risk that people will see any ironic horror movie that follows as nothing but a Scream rip-off.

ruuger | October 10, 11:09 CET

This is terrible. I just read the script last night and I was SO PUMPED for the movie. This wait is gonna be painful.

Racoon Boy | October 10, 11:15 CET

(all films available in 3D are available in 2D, no?)

Someone please tell me this is true, since the world actually will end before we get a 3D screen in Hilo.
I'm seriously ignorant about this stuff, since I'm unlikely to ever have a chance to see a 3D film (traveling days are over, short of a financial miracle).

I have to think it will be released in conventional format as well, since it was filmed that way.
And I agree that if it got such pre-release raves (Yay for that!), doesn't it make more sense to release the regular version first (wide release, not limited to 3D screens), then release the 3D version?

Shey | October 10, 11:18 CET

All the 3D films I've seen, or have been interested in but not seen, have had 2D options as well.

Hmm, 2010 still seems like a long time away for me, yet alone 2011!

Ashley | October 10, 11:32 CET

I saw Coraline in 3D and came away with the knowledge that a) it gives me a headache and b) it can be very good, but I thought the animated film was significantly more convincing than the live-action 3D trailers that ran before it. Animation has that edge of surrealness anyway.

I don't think it adds much, I suppose I'm happy they think it's worth the effort but also I don't really want to wait another year if it's testing well now. Fmeh.

skittledog | October 10, 11:34 CET

I was just about to say - DRAG ME TO HELL was a flop? It took twice as much as Serenity did. And people objected to that being called a flop, seem to recall.

gossi | October 10, 11:41 CET

Well, since its not a 3D specific movie I'm all for it. I don't mind 3D when its secondary to everything else. This delay, though... Not happy about that.

I hope trailers start up soon, though!

Jayme | October 10, 11:41 CET

Drag Me To Hell may not be an out and out flop, but it definitely underperformed. It was Sam Raimi's much-vaunted return to horror, it had an audience-friendly PG-13 rating, and it received some of the best ever reviews for a horror film.

And yet, despite all that, its opening weekend numbers were something like half of what the Friday the 13th or Halloween remakes did. Even The Unborn did slightly better. That makes it a disappointment, at the very least.

[ edited by bonzob on 2009-10-10 11:57 ]

[ edited by bonzob on 2009-10-10 11:57 ]

bonzob | October 10, 11:58 CET

So sick of 3D. Bad move.

mutt999 | October 10, 13:18 CET

In short: "People liked this movie as it was, so we're going to change it and delay it."

beergood | October 10, 13:20 CET

I stopped liking video games when they went 3D. I've seen exactly one 3D movie and thought it was a load of wank.

Caroline | October 10, 13:43 CET

It seems like just another excuse to make money off the punters.

Simon | October 10, 13:50 CET

There'd better be a 2d version for the simple fact that lovely little Wiltshire does not have a 3d cinema. Suppose I could go to London to see the film, heck, what's a 200mile round trip to a Whedonite?

Whilst I'd support anything that would expose Joss to the masses (erm), I want to see the film asap! Gak.

bubblecat | October 10, 14:08 CET

Given that Cabin was shot in 2D, it will absolutely be released without 3D at - I'd imagine - most theatres. Personally it wouldn't surprise me if there's more to this one than meets the eye, it's no secret the studio is fighting, you know, bankruptcy.

gossi | October 10, 14:24 CET

Yeah it'll be released in 2D as well as 3D. Waiting a year is smart and will be great for its 3D box office numbers. There'll easily be twice as many 3D screens by then.

Katiger | October 10, 15:03 CET

I absolutely cannot stand horror movies. I cannot stomach the blood and guts, and avoid them at all costs. But I am definitely going to see Cabin in the Woods, because it's Joss', and therefore will be incredibly awesome in spite of the blood and guts.

But 3D?? Having to watch the blood and guts come FLYING AT ME?? Oh, dear. :p

mouse | October 10, 16:18 CET

Well, darn... :( This means my sister won't be joining us, as 3D gives her migraines, so her husband probably won't be attending either. So much for a fun-filled Whedon weekend with the whole family. Hopefully, as people are speculating, the studio will in fact release the regular 2D film as well.

And the delay is sad news. Maybe Joss will have more time to work on the Firefly spinoff comics and A Shepherd's Tale will materialize...? One can hope! :)

CellarDoor | October 10, 16:23 CET

I won't be seeing it in 3D given it wasn't specifically designed to be seen in that format!!! We have to wait another year for this nonsense? God!

daylight | October 10, 16:51 CET

I don't know why people are thinking it might not be released in it's original form as well. I mean, has that ever even happened once?

Racoon Boy | October 10, 16:53 CET

Having followed other movies that were in 3D, like Coraline it will definitely be in 2D as well, as there are not enough theatres for it to be just in 3D. Also the January date it got was likely because that's the time they could book the 3D theatres. As there's still a very limited number of theatres playing 3D movies and chances are Cabin In The Woods will only be playing in 3D for 3 to 4 weeks before losing those theatres to another 3D movie. There's a small chance if that other 3D movie is doing very poorly that Cabin might regain some of it's 3D screens back if Cabin is doing really good. The way that Coraline got back some 3D screens from the Jonas Brothers 3D movie which flopped. However, that was once again a short window before another 3D movie came along that had booked those screens.

3D is a bit of a gimmick, but movies that use it sell much better in their 3D screens than their 2D counterparts. Since it makes good business sense studios are going to push for it more, despite the fact there is a minority who don't like it. Especially when it comes to horror movies, which seem to be converted more often to 3D than other movies.

Matt_Fabb | October 10, 17:21 CET

Is it 1950? I thought time was linear. Why is 3D so damn important again?? I just joined a anti 3d Facebook group, perfect karma the following day, sigh....

My only hope is this gets more asses in the seats to appreciate Joss and Drew, if i can't see it in a 2D format theater guess i'll be waiting six more months after January 2011 for the dvd.

Also zz9 hit it perfectly on the head, if 3D is so damn important why not run it by Joss and Drew before hand so can they create a sequel to their already well testing movie with that format in mind, or is it to fiscally insane to release proven things without some gimmick factor.

silent knight | October 11, 00:31 CET

I've just realised, the people I was looking forward to attending with won't be around in 2011. Damn future and it's needing of further education.

Jayme | October 11, 01:23 CET

We only have one digital projector at our theatre (I think most do at the moment) and so we also get our 3D releases in 3D and 2D, so when the next new 3D movie comes out a week or two later, we can still show the movie in 2D. We also have the option for those that can't view 3D or don't want to pay the surcharge for it. So for those of you who don't want to view in 3D, I am pretty sure that your closest theatre will have a non-3D (sounds better and confuses less people..heh) version for you to watch instead.

If I had a dollar for every person that asked about the difference between 3D and 2D...

almost cookies | October 11, 23:18 CET

I hate 3D! Gives me migranes. :(

almost cookies, I never saw a theater offer both 3D and 2D, but I hope it happens for this!

wilder | October 13, 00:42 CET

I think the only movies that we've gotten in 3D this year that we didn't get a regular 35mm print for were X-Games (small audience anyway) and Toy Story 1 & 2 Double Feature, but it was re-released solely for 3D I believe. Everything else has been. My Bloody Valentine, Monsters vs. Aliens, Up, Ice Age, Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs, G-Force, Final Destination 4.. all in 3D and with a regular print for non-3D.

almost cookies | October 13, 01:11 CET

I think 3D will bring in a lot of people who wouldn't give it a second glance otherwise. I've seen several movies in the last couple years just because they were in 3D.

However, speaking as someone who was planning to watch it either way, it's not really a good tradeoff. The 3D effect probably won't even be that noticeable since the movie wasn't made with that in mind.

[ edited by RaisedByMongrels on 2009-10-13 01:11 ]

RaisedByMongrels | October 13, 01:13 CET

It seems like just another excuse to make money off the punters.

Late to the party, but: the suits do not do ANYTHING for ANY REASON other than to make money of the punters.

A Joss Whedon fansite should be the last place in the world where that reiteration is necessary. Oh well.

waxbanks | October 19, 00:19 CET

October 10 2009