View Single Post
Old September 10 2012, 02:01 AM   #85
Sci's Avatar
Location: Montgomery County, State of Maryland
Re: Cabin in the Woods - Grading, Discussion, Spoilers

Mister Fandango wrote: View Post
Sci wrote:
Oh hogwash. The success of Angel, for instance... [blah blah blah]
Yes, yes. As I said, Whedon gets all the credit for his success unless some rabid fanboy needs to rationalize why something he does is horribly nonsensical, stupid, and mistake-ridden.
This is a ridiculous assertion, and I have no idea why you're so invested in this issue of "praise/blame only Whedon."

Were you just not around when it became the fad to hate Buffy Seasons Six and Seven? When the Connor arc on Angel fizzled out? Are you unaware how unpopular Dollhouse was?

Joss gets praise and so do his collaborators. And Joss gets criticism, and so do his collaborators. Get over this ridiculous "cult of Whedon" nonsense.

Case in point: It's funny how you don't jump on all the other people throughout the thread who ''mistakingly'' gave Whedon all the credit when they enjoyed the movie.
I haven't looked at this thread in months, saw it the other day, noticed your erroneous attribution of everything you didn't like to Whedon alone, and corrected it. That is all.

And I didn't "jump all over you." I said, in total: "1. Whedon co-wrote this with David Goddard, and Goddard directed it. They shared the credit, so you should spread out the blame." That's all. You are the one who chose to try to make that conversation thread into a much bigger deal than it had been.

Now, I know you're just going to assume that I'm a Whedon fan who's pretending to be a fan of Goddard's for the sake of an argument with someone on the Internet, but I can tell you that I've been a fan of Drew Goddard's since I saw his brilliant, brilliant Buffy episode "Selfless." I also enjoyed his contributions to the episode "Conversations With Dead People," and his work on the fifth season of Angel, including "Lineage" and "Origin."

Am I as big of a fan of Goddard's as I am of Whedon? No. Does this mean I am not also a fan of his? No.

I really don't know how to engage you in a conversation about this film if you assume that anything someone else says to you about their enjoyment of a given writer is not said in good faith and is just a lie to score points.

And The Cabin in the Woods is as much Goddard's baby as Whedon's, if not more so.
So I guess Whedon had zero input in the movie, then.
No, and I neither said nor implied that.

However, the fact remains that Goddard was the co-writer, and was the director. And in the world of film, the director bears greater responsibility for the film than anyone else.

Of course it's a goddamn system. You think society isn't a system? It is. The world is a system.
Your use of the term implied it was something that didn't have to exist, but existed because a bunch of people wanted to do it like this.
Because that's what it is.

This organization had to exist in order to keep the world turning.
So its agents and leaders claim.

Not a single person we saw actually wanted to be there. They were just jaded by years and years of having to endure these duties and found levity where they could.
These people were professional murderers who profited and found levity from their victims' suffering according to arbitrary standards that even the Director herself admitted were determined by culture, not by the monster being appeased.

Whatever rules are used in this world -- and we only have what Whedon presented us as facts, so yay, he still gets the blame for everything
We don't have anything presented to us by Whedon and Goddard. We have allegations presented by the Organization and its agents. Because there is a such thing as an unreliable source of information, we have no way of knowing how accurate those characters' assertions are.

(And, yes, Whedon has a history of featuring large organizations that claim one thing and turn out to have been lying. The Watchers Council's claims about the nature of Vampires and of the Slayer were later shown to be false, but vis a vis the evolution of Spike and by the revelation of the Shadow Men in "Get It Done.")

Or the possibility that if the monsters were defeated once, they could be so again. Perhaps more permanently, in an era of atomic weaponry.
Who said they were ever defeated?
I seem to remember one of the Organization's people claiming that the monsters were subdued and then afterwards appeased by annual human murder victims. I can't find a transcript; if I'm remembering erroneously and you can prove so, I'll thank you for the correction.

who's to say there isn't a global government that's researching this?
... because a global government would be a government, and therefore able to compel legal obedience and levy taxes. It would be impossible for a global government to exist without the knowledge of humanity; otherwise, it's not a government, it's just a conspiracy that encompasses officials from different national governments.

And even if there were -- so what? It's still nothing more than an example of institutional corruption. The word "government" does not inherently make an organization's actions legitimate.

And, finally, who's to say it's not a democratic system?
This is a joke, right? A conspiracy to abduct innocent people and murder them in order to appease the bloodlust of a hostile monster living beneath the surface, without informing society of this issue and formulating a response based upon the will of the people.... this is democratic? It's not a democratic system if an existential threat to a nation -- or the world -- is kept secret from the public at large.

Meanwhile, you have yet to answer my question:

Does a system that depends upon victimization and oppression have a right to exist?
Democratic socialism is the hope of human freedom.
Sci is offline   Reply With Quote