CABIN IN THE WOODS Pushed Back a Year! Here's Why That's Not Bad News...

Interesting, especially the early word from you about the film.

For what it's worth, I really enjoyed the approach you took with this article -- using the news to discuss a bit of inside baseball or trends in the industry. I didn't know any of the stuff about 3D that you brought up here, and it made for a fun read. You've done this before in your articles, and it's always enjoyable and enlightening.

I think it's a silly decision. Final Destination opened well because people liked the first three. 3D certainly had an impact, but enough to drop millions after the fact? It doesn't make enough financial sense to me.

I liked the script and I trust Devin's word on footage. At least it'll be a good flick.

Yeah, I understand that, but I appreciate that you took the time to explain it, whereas some (but not all) film sites would just run the story out of context, including some of the MSM ones like Yahoo or whatever.

Final Destination doesn't have a real fanbase, but it's certainly liked enough that word from a previous film doesn't hurt the sequel. All three of the previous films adjusted opened in the same range as FD4. It got a bump, but not a massive one.

I didn't even realize it was opening in IMAX, and 3D will, I think, help legs more than anything. I just don't know if it stands to make enough extra cash to cover the conversion costs, which is why I question the financial decision-making.

Glad to hear this is going along well. Ever since it was announced I've been looking forward to something special from Goddard and Whedon. The 3D news just means it has a better shot at doing well financially which is a good thing for the talent involved and the genre.

When the third film did the same thing?

The second film was every bit as anomalous as the third. People like the films and they're spaced out enough not to tire the audience. Yes, I expected Final Destination 4 to outgross 3, and I would have without 3D. The franchise was on an upward trend and there was no reason for that not to continue.

Again, I'm not saying 3D had no effect, just that it wasn't a major bump - at least domestically. Its overseas numbers are admittedly stellar.

EDIT:

Overseas is even more stellar than I thought. Between FD4 and My Bloody Valentine's $100m, I retract my argument!

It's just a bummer that another Halloween's gonna pass by without a personally-anticipated horror flick up on the big screen.

See also TRICK R TREAT and THE WOLF MAN.

Hope it makes money though, if it is what it appears to be.

It's nice that a movie gets delayed because everybody is enthused about it and wants to pump some more money into it instead of because it sucks.

But because I'm blind in one eye, I can't see this as anything but bad news.

Sad face.

As much as I loved Drag Me To Hell as is, I think 3-D would have given it an edge at the box office. You just know a lot of the gags and gotcha effects woulda been a lot of fun in 3-D (hanky, pots 'n pans, puked-up cat, screaming Ghost House skull, etc).

Evil Dead II would also gain quite a bit of spook-a-blast-iosity converted to 3-D. Raimi's horror rides are almost 3-D movies already through the camerawork and sheer intensity, but I'd love to see him tackle the gimmick with another monster mash.

So what's next?

That Darren Aronofsky's upcoming ROBOCOP movie by MGM studios will be shoot in complete real IMAX and pushed back to may 2012, so that the movie can compete with Christophers Nolan's Batman 3 in Imax July 2012?

I can't get that strongly behind this movie... it's weird, to me this read like the most impressively executed script for the most ridiculous high concept idea ever. I suppose that should be commended, but I finished the script and didn't care.

Devin's report on the footage is intriguing, but if the plot remains the same as what I read on the page then I think I might end up underwhelmed. But I'm not a horror nut like a lot on these boards, maybe that's the disconnect.

The characters and dialogue are hilariously funny for the first 1 1/2 acts, that's enough to get me in the door to see how they are directed. After that, I feel it's a pretty weak script.

I infer from the article that they're post-converting 'flat' footage into faux-3D, hence the delay and expense. Sounds like it would almost be faster and cheaper to re-shoot in genuine 3D. Any word on whether they'll be doing a bit of both?

Don't be silly. Neither of those movies is going to happen.

Fuck "it's not bad news". I fully expect the 3-D experience would only have augmented my enjoyment of the movie 5% at most (and I already expected to enjoy the shit out of it, what with the creative team behind it). A whole fucking year??? Christ! I was goddamn giddy waiting for this thing.

I'm really disappointed.

I knew nothing about this movie other than Goddard and Whedon's involvement, so the news that there are cool creature designs has me really excited.

At the risk of spoiling the movie for myself, what's the "high concept"?

Devin mentioned Drag Me to Hell in the article, now I can't stop thinking about how awesome a Sam Raimi 3-D flick would probably be.

Warcraft won't need to be in 3D in order to make serious coin, but if it is.....

I will say nothing...

Well, the whole notion of Raimi making Warcraft seems like a gimmick to begin with. A giant, potentially awseome, monsterously lucrative gimmick.

Can we not talk about World of Warcraft in this thread please? It's not even tangentially related to the subject.

Is the "high concept" that this is all done Cloverfield cinema verite style?

Send me a PM if you really want to know... it's not a very big spoiler, what I was referring to by saying 'high concept', in fact you'll probably know whats going on or suspect what the reveal is within the first 15-20 minutes of the film. You'll definitely know what's going on, aside from knowing the actual specifics or how it'll play out, not long into the second act.

Most of the movie in terms of the basic plot and what is happening moment to moment is a fairly straightforward horror flick, in my estimation.

Hard for me to imagine a director better suited to that material...

Have you guys seen The Final Destination or My Bloody Valentine in it's theatrical 2D version? I had the misfortune of doing so and boy, was it a letdown. I saw TFD again a bit later in a 3D theatre, and the 3D effect was really well done.

Point is, I think it's something only a theatre experience can be improved with. Both MBV and TFD highly used it and looked weak without the effect. Shit, even G-FORCE is somewhat watchable in a 3D theatre, but what becomes afterwards of concept flicks like that? Piranha 3D, Texas Chainsaw 3D, Halloween 3D etc.? I'm really looking forward to seeing Ajas Piranha, it's gonna be a blast in theatres with 3D killer fish, 3D diving spears and 3D tits, but won't it suffer on home video?

As long as they craft good movies first and then think about what can be done with the format, I'm okay with it, but I get sick of announcements stating "well shit, we don't know what it'll be about or what style we'll choose but DAMN it'll be in 3D!!".

I support any worthwhile horror movie that goes theatrical and I'm quite certain CABIN will be a good movie, trusting Devin on this, but all this 3D talk is beginning to annoy. Yes, I do like it as an element of enhanced theatrical experience and I see it's better business in terms of ticket prices, but I'm starting to fear they'll develop flicks with cool 3D scenes in mind first, then adding a border story to implement said gimmick moments.

Pused back 2 and a half years.  Trailer is out.  Looks great.  Won't post it, wait till the main page gets it.

Looks good and way more high concept than I thought it was. Of course, now I don't want to be spoiled at all.