New at BOP: Review: Matrix Resurrections Movie Review: Moonfall Movie Reviews: Scream The #1 Movie in America November Forecast The Many Saints of Newark October Forecast New Trivia Question All site updates Share & Save   Tweet Print this column

Shalimar Sahota: Well, given the tough sell, because there's only so much you can show without ruining it, I'd say it's okay. Though I will mention that I've seen a couple of TV ads that have managed to give the whole film away! Despite the positive reviews and that amazing poster, the other factor behind the low opening might be the bland title itself, which I understand is there to conceal the surprise. Edwin kinda got there before me, but similarly I imagine that by trying to disguise itself as generic it may have put people off into thinking that it actually is generic. This reminds me a bit of Drag Me to Hell; a decent horror film with overwhelmingly positive reviews, yet hardly anyone went to go see it. Personally I thought The Cabin in the Woods was great, but the reasoning behind “why” it's all happening just doesn't gel with me.

Felix Quinonez: I have to echo Edwin's argument. I totally believe that by trying to be secretive, it made the movie look generic and turned off people who might like it and the people who did see it are disappointed that it's not what the trailer made it look like.

But I find it hard to believe that the only way hide the movie's twists is by making it look like a generic horror film. There has to be a way to be secretive without being deceptive. I thought the trailers looked like any other generic horror film with a generic title. Even after finding out that it's something completely different and reading some great reviews I still don't think I'm going to see it in theaters. I think they dropped the ball and they could have had a bigger hit.

Tim Briody: I haven't seen this yet, but from the word-of-mouth I'm pretty sure I'm going to as well. I've avoided everything I possibly can about it, but I think more than a few may have gone in expecting Generic Horror Movie of the Week and got the Joss Whedon Experience, and that's something you kind of have to be ready for. The opening isn't bad at all considering it cost $30 million and sat on the shelf for three years, but this is probably going to be a huge cult fave on DVD and Netflix.

Reagen Sulewski: I think it's possible to be a little too inside baseball on this. Most people don't care or have no idea that the film sat for three years, don't care about "John Sweden", barely recognize Thor. They just see that there's another horror film out there that looks kinda scary, and they think it looks spooky. Those people probably left the film a bit disappointed, since as just about everyone's noted, this is not the typical horror slasher film that those people are looking for. I think it's a good lesson for filmmakers who are looking to be subversive - sneak your message in through a horror film! - but in a larger cultural context it probably doesn't mean a lot.

David Mumpower: What amuses me about our box office analysis in this thread is that it mirrors the movie itself. We are all over the place with our expectations. We also have no idea what will happen next. Edwin is projecting solid legs while Matthew believes the wheels will come off. Both scenarios are equally likely. The Cabin in the Woods is a triumph of creativity that may prove too unconventional for normal movie goers. Alternately, the impeccable quality of the movie may lead to passionate word-of-mouth that carries The Cabin in the Woods to much better legs than usual for horror films. While we all agree that the movie is an instant cult classic, looking into the box office crystal ball reveals little about its short term popularity. Even the quality of its $1.2 million Monday take is in the eye of the beholder. All aspects of Cabin in the Woods are a mystery, which is indescribably refreshing to me as a box office evaluator. I love these wild card films.

Continued:       1       2       3       4