MovieChat Forums > The Cabin in the Woods (2012) Discussion > I didn't like the ending either

I didn't like the ending either


I know this isn't Star Trek but if I learned anything from that series it's "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the one."

I hate that people must be sacrificed to protect others but if it must be done so be it. Apparently, these surviving junkies had to play the selfish card and cause more death and chaos because Whendon thought that would be a better ending.

Go Figure!!

reply

It was a better ending. The whole point of the movie is subverting and playing with classic horror movie tropes.

Plus, it didn't really happen so it's not really worth getting upset over.

Can't stop the signal.

reply

Ya, I liked that it wasn't the typical ending where they save the day.

That being said, what kind of human garbage decides, "If I'm gonna die either way, then I'm taking everyone of you with me."
Stoner Boy was the worst monster in the movie.

reply

Star Trek just stole that from utilitarianism.


Anyway, the philosophy of law teaches us that it's better for ten guilty men to go free than one innocent one to be imprisoned. So it's quite valid to argue that deliberately murdering innocent people is never excusable, no matter how laudable your ultimate goal is.

It's all in how you look at it.

reply

So it's better for the last two surviving junkies to cause global chaos because they felt wronged, regardless of the other death. Screw them.

reply

It's better for the story and tone of the movie, yes. For real life, obviously not. But this movie is not a documentary, so don't worry about it.

Can't stop the signal.

reply

I wasn't making an argument one way or the other. I was pointing out that the argument exists, and using the fallacy of appeal to authority (Star Trek) is inherently flawed because someone else can take the exact same fallacious approach (legal maxim) as a counterargument. You'll need to take a more methodical approach to make your point than that.

Just as a starting point, the last two "surviving junkies" (neither of which seemed to actually be one, since one didn't demonstrate on-going drug use period, the other used only marijuana, which isn't the typical "junkie" drug, which makes your used of incendiary labeling rather silly) didn't "cause" global chaos. They just let it happen by not allowing themselves to be murdered. Of all the people in the movie, those two are the ones least culpable for the entire set-up. They were the victims, not the perpetrators. They did nothing that wasn't in self-defense, an entirely natural instinct. For that matter, they had no proof that anything anyone was telling them was even true. Maybe it was just an organization dedicated to torturing people with all manner of monsters that they'd managed to capture. Would you commit suicide or murder on an unsubstantiated claim?

Your turn. Rebuttal?

reply

To be fair- if I had seen all the stuff they had seen (brutal monsters contained underground) and knew that they might rise and take over the world... I might just do the sacrifice (hypothetical) at that point - it's more than just self defense. It's more like whoa this is hell on earth. Not only are you possibly saving the world - but you are kindof saving yourself from a brutal death. Taking a leap of faith I guess - but as to what the characters were presented - it seemed pretty real. I guess the final scene was the confirmation it wasn't a hoax

reply

Jesus you are dense.

reply

It's a lottery that everyone lost, don't forget every country had the chance to end it. I blame the Japanese kids!

reply

It would have been better for Dana to have died by werewolf as the fool and have the director wonder why the world didn't end when only Marty was left, afyerall the virgin can live or die.

reply

Except Marty wasn't playing the role of the virgin.

Can't stop the signal.

reply

Most of the movie is a commentary on the horror genre. The ultimate conclusion is that horror is filled with stereotypes and is just the same thing every year. The only way to change that is to let everything crash and start over.

reply

I think it will be a better plot, if the doctor just shoot them both and after that the ritual won't work either and the ancients will return anyway, it will be a smack about those lame plots of cults.

If you can, I can too...

reply

If there is anything I didn't like about the ending, it would be the opposite of what the IMDB bubble boys didn't like. That they should have been like the Japanese, and cherished liberty long before, and not played the game to continue being slaves to Hell.

I think that was the point. The visions of the Japanese school girls, in particular, reflect, I think, THE BRIDGE ON THE RIVER KWAI, where although the hateful Japanese commander is no good, his line of "better to die like a soldier than like a coolie", well, I think that was the entire theme.

To continue being slaves wouldn't be "saving the human race", and all the other cultures knew that. Ironically, it's the American bubble boys who are least like Patrick Henry and Thomas Payne.



Now go away or I shall taunt you a second time!

reply

No, they took the best option. If for our global survival we have to torture and kill innocents kids, hell, we simply don't deserve to survive. These two "junkies" (and principally Dana, who could've survived) had a moral integrity and bravery which most of us can't even smell, and the film itself (as Snowpiercer, other great film) shows how the one way to defeat a corrupt society based on violence and opression is total destruction, which allows starting again from zero.

reply