Finally got the chance to see it when the DVD came out. I loved it. Of course, it doesn't bear scrutiny if you look at it through realistic lens, but it was never meant to be realistic. It's one huge meta commentary that's clever, fun, funny, scary (the procession of the monsters in the elevator was just fun, but the scenes in the cabin in the first part of the movie were quite chilling; they really got me with the wolf scene, I was expecting it to come to life any moment, and the diary of the redneck torture family girl was really creepy. The torture family were a great choice and creepy not because they were zombies, but because they were humans who enjoyed torturing and mutilating people and made a religion out of it, which is very fitting for the theme of the movie), and with a daring twist which I loved.
I saw the many Whedonesque connections - I was reminded not just of the Initiative, but also Wolfram & Hart,, and about AtS Not Fade Away
with making a stand for the sake of it without much hope, and about BtVS The Gift
: "I don't want to live in the world where these are the options".
I did love it, but one minor criticism I had of it was...
Also I wonder what other peoples theories were as the movie was winding down to the end. I thought at the end when the Virgin turned on the Fool (I just want to call him Topher Brink), but then got attacked by the werewolf, I was thinking Toper was gonna let her die, something like "that was a pretty foolish thing to do... and by the way, I've never had sex either."
Just thought that would have been a fun twist role reversal. Then the world could have been saved
No, it wouldn't, and it wouldn't have made sense, since Dana was not a virgin and her friends knew about her affair with her professor. But a man was never going to be given the role of the Virgin, whether he actually was or not, just like a man was never going to be given the role of the Whore, even if he were an actual hustler or gigolo[. And a woman was never going to be given the role of the Scholar or Athlete/Jock, even if she were the most intellectual and educate or the most athletic. The whole point is that these roles are very specifically gender-defined. Notice that none of the male stereotypes are related to sexuality, but the two female stereotypes are all about sexuality. Women must be classified either as Virgins or Whores, with all the value judgments and fetishization that goes with it. The movie's criticism of these damaging stereotypes wouldn't work if it ignored their inherent sexism.
Much better than Hunger Games.
Mainly because CitW had an extremely satisfying payoff, which was totally MIA on THG.
The "extremely satisfying payoff" in The Hunger Games
isn't there because it's not supposed to be, since it's only the first book in the trilogy and sets up the tensions of the rest of the story. The payoff only comes in the other two books (which will in this case be the three sequels). And it is indeed extremely satisfying, IMO at least.