Cabin in the Woods - Joss Whedon tells us things about it but the things may not be true.

There's a cool article by Todd Brown over on AMC that talks about Joss Whedon's latest film project, Cabin in the Woods. It is a great example of how to use rumours and the internet to spread the word on a film...and by writing this I am helping it go further.

It's co-written and produced by Whedon, with writer and director Drew Goddard (Cloverfield, Lost).

Word of their project first surfaced in July with little more than an
announcement that it was happening and that Whedon and Goddard were both
involved. The duo wouldn't even reveal the plot -- Goddard teased in an
interview with MTV, "It's got a harder and darker edge, but it's
also got classic Whedon qualities. It'll rip your heart out and be heartfelt at
the same time." MGM exec Mary Parent who greenlit the movie told
The Hollywood Reporter, "I'll be shot [if I say anything] ... It's
an intense visceral thrill ride and I'll leave it at that." Whedon's only
comment was "it's the horror movie to end all horror movies... literally," a
quote that still has fans buzzing over at fan site Whedonesque: "I'm curious
about what is implied by the description ... Many people misuse 'literally' so
that it means nothing in particular. But Joss uses language carefully. That
'literally' suggests some sort of interesting deconstruction of the genre."

So who would be the face of the film? Would you believe the dead father
from Six Feet Under (Richard Jenkins) and cabinet member from The West Wing
(Bradley Whitford)? "It's really just your basic typecasting," said
Goddard, "when you need two actors to run through the woods in
low-cut nighties, you immediately think of Richard Jenkins and Bradley
Whitford."

On January 24, based on information culled from inside-the-industry
casting calls and databases, the NewYork Times announced the addition of Bill Nighy and Jena Malone to the cast while also giving the following synopsis: "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."

In retrospect, a cast of middle-aged men in a film supposedly about
'five college kids' should have tipped people off that something weird was going
on, but it didn't. Instead, fans fixated on what was meant by "Gods"? Could this
be some sort of Lovecraft reference? But then along came Whedon himself to
happily mess with people's heads. Over on fan board Whedonesque, the
man himself turned up a few hours after this "news" broke to say, "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." No,
there isn't going to be a sequel to Serenity. But what's up with the fake info?
Whedon elaborated a little later: "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 summaries, 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 person 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!"

And here is the genius of Joss: Rather than fight the flow of information, he has corrupted the sources, throwing anything anybody says about this film from now until release into question. And everybody who ran the fake Times casting announcement and synopsis is now going to have to run a retraction: Whedon just got two headlines for the price of one.

Sounds rather interesting doesn't it, even though everything we have currently heard about it may not be true and it may end up being something totally different. Therefore, anything else I write about it may or may not be true...my head hurts.

Home / Forum / Guestbook

Odette Yustman to star in Rogue's Gallery - a comedy about Assassins

Odette Yustman (Cloverfield, The Unborn) talked to ComingSoon about her next film, "a small, dry-wit, dark comedy about a group of assassins, they're all based on Tarot card names." It is called Rogue's Gallery and also stars Adam Scott, Ving Rhames, Ellen Barkin, Maggie Q, and comedians Jeffrey Tambor, Zach Galifianakis and Rob Corddry. "It's funny in that way that it's kind've gory, but hilarious in the way the situations come about because I get to work with great comedic actors," Yustman explains. Which, to me, sounds like it could be very embarrasing to watch.

Yustman's character in the film is named Temperence, "and each of us have different functions and things we have to do," she explains. "We're hired by the government, we're this underground society, and we're basically sent to kill whoever we have to kill. And one day this new hire comes in and we wind up having to kill each other. I got to do some fight training and some of my own stunts. That was my dream role. I get to kick ass, be funny, kill people with a paper cutter blade."

The script was written by two newcomers, Brian Watanabe and Abe Levy, and it's being directed by another first-timer, Fouad Mikati.

Comedy film about assassins with a supernatural tint to it - good or bad?

Home / Forum / Guestbook

South Park does Cloverfield

HOME / FORUM.

Cloverfield, 2008 - Movie Review

Director: Matt Reeves
Starring: Lizzy Caplan, Jessica Lucas, T.J. Miller, Michael Stahl-David
Running Time: 85 minutes

Score: 7.5 /10

This review by Andy D

I'm writing this literally as the closing credits roll up the screen. I'm mainly doing this because my laptop was right to hand, but also because I wanted to catch all my thoughts as fresh as possible. The thought I have at this very second is... bravo Hollywood for not having a soundtrack to sell! The only music we get is during these closing credits! That's very 'off-script' for Hollywood. They usually have a full package of crap to sell us including the themed dinners at McDonalds and the video game. Is there a video game for Cloverfield? Maybe I missed that one. Also 'off-script' I would say is the refreshing lack of product placement not to mention big-name movie stars to distract us, lack of obvious happy ending and lack of rubbish lame narrative. Bravo indeed Hollywood. You have done well.

Ok, the credits have just finished... does anybody know what exactly is said over the radio at the end? I've just rewound it 3 times to try and understand it. I can't quite fathom what's being said. Now its bugging me. I need some answers. I might open a forum thread if no-one can answer me this immediately! Or I might just google it.

Oh, yes. I'm reviewing Cloverfield. That's right. Ok... why am I reviewing Cloverfield in August '08? Why am I reviewing Cloverfield seven months after it was released? In short its because I hate movie hype. The more a movie is hyped the less I want to go to the pictures to see it. I consciously avoided all Batman TDK trailers in order to savour as much as possible on the screen at the cinema when film was released. As for the Crystal Skulls... I actually sat at the pictures, plugged my ears, closed my eyes and shouted “nah-nah-nah-nah-nah” during the lego advert which was played just before the movie came on... I DONT WANT TO SEE THE LEGO VERSION OF THE MOVIE BEFORE I ACTUALLY SEE THE REAL MOVIE!! yes, sorry. I have issues with hype and advertising. Cloverfield was being hyped something rotten when it came out so quite simply I refused to go and see it. Yeah... up yours Paramount.

This film would have been astoundingly good if it wasn't for two major hang ups. One: We all knew it was a monster movie done in a Blair Witch style before it even came out. Two: It was shot in 24 frames per second so it never felt like a home movie. These two points aside I thought it was excellent. It would have been mind blowingly excellent if all the surprises were intact and for it to be shot and presented in 60 FPS. Did I mention there were no surprises? Hell, I even saw the plastic toy of the monster in Forbidden Planet the week the film was released. How soul destroying is that? The film was wrecked simply by walking into a shop the week it was released. I sense the same has happened with Outlander: Vikings Vs Aliens. We all know what the monster is and the film hasn't even been released yet. Oh, and if you don't know what the monster looks like have a look at the trailer: http://liveforfilm.blogspot.com/2008_07_01_archive.html ...oops, sorry did I spoil it for you? Damn. Wasn't my fault, sorry.

That's my main bitch in a nut shell. These days Hollywood wrecks most of its films during the hype period. Take the new Hulk movie. I'm a huge comic book to movie fan, but I haven't gone to see the new Hulk movie because er... I've seen it. I've seen it in the commercials for the movie. I know exactly what's in store. There are are no surprises!

Enough of this whining I hear you call. Ok ok, I'm sorry. My review of Cloverfield viewed in HD over cable is very positive. I really enjoyed it for the romp it was. I actually got drawn into the social issues in the 15 minutes before the shit hit the fan. And that's why I enjoyed it overall: I cared about the characters. I was worried about them. I found myself wondering if I would have gone back for my loved ones... well yes I reckon I would actually but another question would be: would I have followed my best bro to go back for his girl? Ya see that's a toughy... because that was a big fuckin scary monster and it was kicking the shit out of New York. Yep and everybody was dying. The film made me think of stuff like this whilst also providing the eye candy of a block buster. And, ok yes, the realism worked. It just should have been at 60 frames a second dammit!
7.5/10 Cloverfield crushes Godzilla

Discuss in the forum.

Groverfield

This is a rather funny parody of Cloverfield.

Discuss in the forum.