Has anyone ever seen Evil Dead?

Horror and comedy are a tenuous blend on the best of days.  While most attempts result in painful failure, a few films have absolutely knocked it out of the park: American Werewolf in London, Motel Hell, Return of the Living Dead, Tremors, House, Slither (and arguably) Scream.  So, when heading out to see Cabin in the Woods (Joss Whedon and Drew Goddard’s horror/com that’d been sitting on the shelves of the now-defunct MGM for two years), I was filled with a sense of dread.  Movies that “sit on shelves” tend to be near-unwatchable train wrecks…but, in this case, Lionsgate was able to purchase the rights to the movie and let it enjoy a wide release so we could all judge for ourselves.  I was also nervous about the casting – the biggest name (aside from a key cameo) is Chris Hemsworth who, despite being solid in Thor, remains an unproven Hollywood commodity.  And then there was the self-referential “wink wink” tone that the trailer took – as if it was overly impressed by its own cleverness.  In my view, that’s what killed the Scream franchise: it isn’t enough to say “look how smart we are because we’re stating what the cliche is right before employing it”; you have to invoke the films that came before – and then explain why the cliches should be funny (or, at minimum, why they exist).  Scream merely called out the cliches to get a few cheap laughs.  Cabin in the Woods goes further….much, much further.  And does the surprising and unthinkable – it explains why the cliches exist in the first place.  And the discovery of why these cliched caricatures and scenarios are pervasive throughout horror is an absolute riot to discover.

*Minor Spoilers from here on out*

Unless you’re one of 11 people in the world he who hasn’t seen the trailer, let me break it down for you:  five young 20-somethings are going to a “cabin in the woods”.  Along the way, they’ll meet a creepy threatening guy who should serve as a warning sign not to tread further; but of course, they do.  And once they’re at the cabin which is obviously not a safe place to be, they find a secret basement filled with all sorts of odd items…and the choice of which item they take interest in truly determines the direction of the next hour of the movie.

But those first moments of the film sit counter to this plot (and the trailer gave away this conceit as well…unfortunate but the film wouldn’t have any sense of novelty if it didn’t).  Rather than dropping you in on the kids’ lives or the ill-fated trip to the forest, the movie opens at a tech center (with a couple douchebag IT managers chatting about nothing important…it feels like any other day on the job – but these balding hapless chumps are possibly the most important guys on earth).  What does a tech center have to do with a remote cursed cabin?  Good question…but it drives the entire plot – and connects every scary movie cliche (and, amazingly, every horror icon ever conceived) to a larger ritual with worldwide implications.

Is this a horror movie or Office Space?

The movie succeeds fully because it knows what it is (and what it isn’t).  Joss Whedon wrote this film as a comedy rather than a horror movie.  And that was a stroke of genius because, despite being VERY gory at times, it never tries to be scary (which would’ve felt cheap).  Every harrowing moment of the film is viewed through the eyes of an omniscient network operations center (which wind up being the film’s finest moments).  You also can’t really compare Cabin in the Woods to the horror films it invokes.  It nods toward many of them…but on its own, is much more a combination of Office Space and Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory.  I know – it seems odd to compare a horror film to Willy Wonka but honestly, there are numerous parallels. Throughout Willy Wonka’s running time (the original with Gene Wilder – not that Tim Burton abortion), there is a bizarre, perverse cruelty.  Rather than rooting for Charlie, the viewer is invited to root against other children (and laugh at their grim demises). Cabin in the Woods has that as well – you are provided a cross section of people to root for (and against); and when the second act begins and all hell breaks loose (moving from the cabin to the IT center), the best parts of the film finally roll and the movie goes from “silly horror” to all out gross-out comedy.

Pray you don’t piss off these douchebags.

And yes, there are really no big twists after the first half an hour.  The director (and writer) invite you into the film’s big secret early on.  Normally, this would prove a catastrophic mistake – but, in doing so, it changes the tone of the film…and allows the viewer to watch the events unfold at an all-knowing level.  As the filmgoer, you know what’s going on, even when the poor bastards on screen don’t which proves to be terrific (albeit mean-spirited) fun.  And you know, all too well, why the machinations of their terror are so important  on a global scale.

Cabin in the Woods isn’t a perfect film…but it’s well intentioned, viciously funny and a visual treat – the second half of the film is worth the price of admission.  And, best of all, there is absolutely no chance whatsoever of a sequel.

They fight for their right to party.

Perhaps the oddest thing that can be said about the recent debate over birth control (and the expectation that it be covered by medical insurance) is that it’s being discussed in 2012.  No, not 1692, nor even 1962.  We’re re-debating birth control…and somehow, as a society, getting the entire discussion completely wrong.  And here are the reasons why this topic is 2012′s greatest political fail.

~ Birth control isn’t merely a “sexual aid”: This might be the greatest intellectual failure by Congress (especially the more Conservative contingent).  Congress actually held hearings to debate this issue; and then didn’t invite a single woman to serve as a member of the panel.  That’s like a group of Mormons debating the merits of Caffeine.  You can’t possibly have a rounded discussion on birth control without one of the two primary sexes represented.  It not only looked foolish, it came across as sexist and misogynistic (as if Conservatives somehow felt male political leaders had enough insight to make decisions for the other half of the population without consideration for their opinions).  Then, to compound matters, challenges rang out about “using condoms” as an alternative; which, yet again, ignored birth control as a medical need and instead relegated it to realm of a sexual “party favor”.

It’s Reigning Men. Hallelujah.

So, for all of you guys (like myself) who are married and live with an enlightened woman, here are a few fun facts about birth control: not all women can take orthotricyclen.  In fact, a pretty decent portion of womanhood is actually allergic to it and need to take more expensive pills like Yaz.  Also, birth control pills are commonly prescribed for women who experience severe cramping and bleeding during their periods.  And then there’s the sticky (no pun intended) issue of cysts – these, if let unresolved, can lead to cancer.  And “the pill” is one of the most commonly prescribed medications for dealing with them.  Here’s a tip for my fellow Conservatives – if you want to win the women’s vote (who are more than half the population, after all), don’t try and brazenly associate the birth control pill exclusively with the physical act of intercourse.  It looks ignorant and primitive.

It’s spelled “Orthotricyclen” not “Oxycontin”.

~ Radio talk show hosts shouldn’t go off-script: And yes, Rush Limbaugh, I’m talking about you.  You attempted to be funny when bringing this topic up.  Your show is about ratings…I get that.  And any topic dealing with sex (even in a limited way) will help create listeners.  It makes perfect sense – people dig sex!  And listening to political meanderings on it can be entertaining.  But you went off script – fancying yourself as a Conservative alternative to John Stewart or Stephen Colbert. And you failed.  It came off as crass and offensive.  Then, after embarrassing yourself, you spent the next day making things worse.  You started by calling a Georgetown Law grad student a “slut” and a “prostitute” and finished the next day by saying that she should post videos of herself having sex online if any portion of your taxes go to her medical costs.  Smooth.  Nothing tacky about that at all.  Basically, you played right into the stereotype many women have of Conservative males – that they’re socially oppressive and uneducated louts who want women to cook, screw and be silent.  Because of your grievous stupidity, your advertisers abandoned you in droves.  At this rate, you’ll have to run ads for erectile dysfunction to stay on the air…oh, oops, you’re already doing that.  Also, Senators shouldn’t go off script, either.  Please…no more jokes about clenching aspirin between your knees.

~ There’s a real debate here…but it’s not about sex: My fellow Republicans, you had the White House on the ropes.  You backed ‘em into a corner over the separation of church and state.  After all, how can a government, in good faith, cleanly enforce a policy of insurable birth prevention when dealing with a religious institution opposed to it (most notably, the Catholic church who disavows birth control altogether, in any form)?  But you let the debate go from there….that was, at least, a debate worth having.  Whether it’s the right of gay couples to marry, or birth control as an insurable practice, the government’s recourse with churches is hindered by our Constitution.  But, rather than focusing on that most salient point, you let the whole topic devolve into a punchline.  And you may well have given President Obama the female vote this Fall as a result.

But beyond all that, let’s keep in mind it’s 2012.  As a modern society, why are we even bothering with a discussion on birth control?  It seems like this debate ended with Margaret Sanger (and Planned Parenthood) sometime in the 50′s.  How it got recycled this year is a true mystery.

Practice safe balloon animal coupling.

And this is why you don’t give up guns.

A weird disease (called ‘The Nodding Disease”) is afflicting children in Northern Uganda – leading them to stumble, sit, nod and commit wanton acts of pyromania while suffering from amnesia.  And no, this isn’t a joke.  Additional cases have been seen in Sudan, Liberia and Tanzania (with unconfirmed reports stretching into Ethiopia).  And this is why we have the right to bear arms….because it was only a matter of time until creeping brain-eaters started banging down our doors.  Prepare!

__________________________________________

Source: http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/19/world/africa/uganda-nodding-disease/index.html