This site will work and look better in a browser that supports web standards, but it is accessible to any browser or Internet device.

Whedonesque - a community weblog about Joss Whedon
11979 members | you are not logged in | 21 November 2018


December 31 2012

The Cabin in the Woods named 10th Best Movie of 2012 by CNN. Tied with Tim Burton's "Frankenweenie."

That's quite a shame considering the "quality" of Frankenweenie ...
CiTW's great though !
Could not agree more, Stelian. Great for CitW but you almost have to assume they put "Frankenweenie" on there because it's Burton and for no other actual reason. That guy's talent ran out sometime in the mid to late 90's and doesn't deserve to be tied with anything that has Whedon on it.
I loved Frankenweenie.
I just watched Cabin again on Saturday. Soooo good!
Great honor for CiTW, although I do wonder about the rest of the list. Frankenweenie was OK, although I liked Wreck-It Ralph a lot more.
Well, you go CNN!
I can't remember if Drew has ever posted here but Drew, we know you directed the movie and co-wrote it. This recognition is wonderful and we are very proud of you and the work you've done.
I will never understand the critical adoration of Skyfall. I'm generally not a fan of the Bond franchise, but I did like Casino Royale and I had expectations of this one due to the great reviews. But the story is such a mess that it makes The Dark Knight Rises look like a consistent, well-written story with no contradictions or confused messages.

What I get from this story is that Bond doesn’t care about saving people other than his boss, MI6 is endangering the world more than it’s actually protecting it, and M would be completely unlikeable if she weren’t played by Judi Dench: she puts MI6 above everything and is ready to sacrifice anyone’s life, except her own.

Skyfall could work as a really dark story about an antihero spy, an orphan who doesn’t really have anyone or love anyone except his Mother Country, who kills without remorse, doesn’t care about saving people, uses women and treats them like shit and is ready to let them die, while the only person he’ll go out of his way to protect and that he’s willing to risk his life for is his mother-figure boss, the embodiment of MI5 and Mother England, who’s using him and treating him like shit and doesn’t care if he lives or die. And even when he has an out to be free and live a different life, he comes back to the fold to work for them again, like someone who keeps coming back to an abusive relationship.

The problem is that the film can’t commit to this dark interpretation despite offering so much in favor of it, but tries to make Bond, M and MI5 into heroes and the ending into Bond’s triumphant return to his life in her majesty’s service.

The best part of the film, by far, is the amazing opening title sequence and Adele’s theme song, and I can’t help thinking it would work much better for some other, better story.

What exactly are the critics going crazy for? Is it just the tendency to adore stories about adult male "heroes" who use violence as their primary weapon, especially when they have the added "gritty, dark" overtone, regardless of the quality of the actual story?
I had no time for any of the Bonds after Connery until the remake of Casino Royale. Fleming's Bond is supposed to be cruel-looking and his sex appeal contains at least a touch of S/M. Both Sean Connery and Daniel Craig managed to combine that quality with likeability, Connery through humor and self-irony, Craig through a touch of kindliness. They really need to find a good scriptwriter for Craig's fourth; otherwise the franchise will fade out and he'll be blamed, unfairly.

This thread has been closed for new comments.

You need to log in to be able to post comments.
About membership.

joss speaks back home back home back home back home back home