***MERGED - Official CABIN FEVER discussion (was 'Rhett on Cabin Fever')

[indiephantom]

As always, Rhett's review is a kick-ass piece of work. But I was a little surprised he didn't enjoy the film as much as I thought he would. Recently, I've been talking to more and more people who seemed to be dissapointed with it.

I'll never forget seeing it at the TO fest, and the buzz in that theatre at midnight.

I thought it was funny, sexy, and while not that scary, there were some appropriately disturbing and sick scenes.

Personally, I loved the "nigger" joke. It is politically incorrect, but I thought it work quite nicely.

[Deus Ex Machina]

I can't wait to see it in chick-vision

[Revoltor]

This movie was pretty fresh. I wish there were more out there like it.

[_pi_]

I completely agreed with Rhett's review. It started off well, but the end was all over the place. There was just some kind of quality missing. But I did like the "nigger"-joke. It caught me by surprise :)

[IGotsNewShoes]

I actually agree with rhett on the "nigger" joke. It was completely out of place and had no context within the story that was being told. It seemed like something they just stuck in the film to shock people and it was dumb anyway.

[BloodMan]

Can't wait till Tuesday. I wanna see this! It didn't make the theatre here when it opened. Grrr!!

Nick

[taxidriver6]

Great review. It echoed most of my sentiments. THe film got off to a great start and just lost focus. And come on, that "nigger" joke was stupid as hell. It wasn't funny at all. The payoff was WEAK!!!

[onebyone]

I loved the movie from beginning to end; it was easily my favorite horror movie of last year. I didn't see a lot of what rhett said bad about it, but that could be because I was having too much fun to look for problems. I especially enjoyed the ending which was supposedly such a mess. That was my favorite part, watching him just lose it like that. I have no comment on the "tasteless" joke because that amused me as well. I absolutely refuse to be serious about fun horror movies.

The review did serve to make me VERY excited to get the dvd, as it sounds sweet. Is it Tuesday yet?

[indiephantom]

I have no comment on the "tasteless" joke because that amused me as well. I absolutely refuse to be serious about fun horror movies.


:fire: Amen to that!

[Demon]

I hated the film personally, I thought the whole movie was pointless.

[rhett]

Thanks for the kind words guys. I actually liked the movie more the second (and third and fourth and...) time. This movie had been heavily hyped in theatres, and when I saw it I was quite disappointed. Time has been kind to this film, and I suspect it will be even kinder in 10 years, but it still just doesn't entirely work for me. It is a great disc though, and definitely worth a rental.

[rxfiend]

Rhett, have you found any easter eggs on the disc? creature-corner.com had a story on CF, that the director went back and created a new scene for the disc (something involving the oddball cop having a threesome).

[rhett]

RX, I searched every single menu and looked at every supplement in its entirety, and never did I find any easter eggs. Maybe someone else has a keener eye than I do, but I just don't see any there...

[dmeister]

But I did like the "nigger"-joke

I actually agree with rhett on the "nigger" joke. It was completely out of place and had no context within the story that was being told.

I didn't think the joke was out of place at all... I suspect that Roth was simply setting you up to believe that the hillbillies were all hate-mongering, Deliverance-style zenophobes, which we all kind of expected in the first place. Then, at the end of the movie, he tries to subvert and overturn your preconceived notions about them by showing you that some of them really are "good people" -- conveying a sense of humanity among them that our own prejudices would have kept us from seeing. However, the way in which the joke was executed felt very contrived, and lost some effect in my opinion. Even if the ole' man had said, "That's for the niggers" or "That's for my niggers," instead of just "That's for niggers," it would have come across a little more effectively.

dmeister

[IGotsNewShoes]

Yes, the hillbillys were shown as deep down good people when they set out to kill the college kids...

[Demon]

Yes, the hillbillys were shown as deep down good people when they set out to kill the college kids...

no doubt, cause most college kids are annoying little bitches that like Good Charlotte and Eminem!

[H0MOSareGAY]

Yes, the hillbillys were shown as deep down good people when they set out to kill the college kids...
That's probably the best argument I've heard on the matter. I think the "nigger" joke ruined the feel of the movie. They spent a decent amount of time telling you what these people were like, and for the sake of the plot these people should be hateful and violent. Some people said that the joke broke down stereotypes, but there are two factors here

A. Every character was a stereotype until that point, which is part of the parody. I don't hear anyone complaining about the stereotypical college students because everyone realized that it wasn't meant to be taken seriously.
B. Breaking down the "Sothern White Male" stereotype just created a scene in which they set up yet another stereotype, the "Black Hip Hop Stereotype"

Anyway, other than that I liked the movie (other than the face with no skin after the dog attack, that was a bad effect)

[dmeister]

Yes, the hillbillys were shown as deep down good people when they set out to kill the college kids...

Are you suggesting that the entire town went out to kill the kids?

dmeister

[IGotsNewShoes]

Are you suggesting that the entire town went out to kill the kids?

dmeister

No but that would have been cool.

[rhett]

I didn't think the joke was out of place at all... I suspect that Roth was simply setting you up to believe that the hillbillies were all hate-mongering, Deliverance-style zenophobes, which we all kind of expected in the first place. Then, at the end of the movie, he tries to subvert and overturn your preconceived notions about them by showing you that some of them really are "good people" -- conveying a sense of humanity among them that our own prejudices would have kept us from seeing.Bullocks! :D The simple inclusion of one joke does not get Roth off the hook for stereotyping the hicks as weird and shallow people. Every hick is seen as mentally insuperior to the youth, with their drawl accents, slow speech and contorted voices. There is the fat hick who never says a word, one that says only "pancakes", another that whipes diseased hog blood all over herself another still wears a ridiculous aviator cap and finally there is one who is an incompetant loser, appointed the deputy(!) of the town. Then to further that, the hicks' death is implied in the closing credits, as the cops drink the water and as it gets shipped around the area. Sorry if I don't believe for a minute that this film was trying to be progressive in the way it presents the backwoodsman.

The fact that the old man calls the black people "niggers" to their face as a friend still does not make it right for him to say it to the campers. I have black friends, who I have sometimes called "niggas" in-jest when I've hung around with them, but never have I said to other white friends "oh yeah, I am just haning out with my nigger friends today." It is all about context, and when the old man says the big N at the start, it is still tasteless and mean spirited. Roth may be playing off the "hillbilly as the decay of society" stereotype to choreograph his "nigger" joke, but nowhere in the film does he try and present them in a progressive light. It is all about paying off that routine little joke, a joke that does not fit within the film in the first place.

[TobalRox]

How come now that Rhett puts it in a review it's OK to say it, but any other time someone has posted the word, it's been edited by a mod?

[dmeister]

The simple inclusion of one joke does not get Roth off the hook for stereotyping the hicks as weird and shallow people.

Backwoods killer hillbillies were stereotyped long before Roth ever made a movie, particularly in our genre. As a matter of fact, you can't really make this kind of movie unless you do exploit that stereotype. After all, friendly, helpful hillbillies aren't nearly as scary. Some hillbillies will exemplify these stereotypes, some will not. (After all, they became stereotypes for a reason.) Roth, quite understandably, challenged our expectations for at least one of them -- the ole' man. If anything, you could say it was a nod to the fact that not all country folk are out to rape and murder city slickers.

The fact that the old man calls the black people "niggers" to their face as a friend still does not make it right for him to say it to the campers... it is still tasteless and mean spirited.

The ole' man wasn't being mean spirited when he used the term "nigger," although this is exactly what Roth wanted us to at first believe. He was simply trying to be somewhat progressive, like your dad using the word "crib" or something. It was only tasteless because he used it in a context that wasn't really appropriate, but -- at the same time -- it was made obvious (as he tried to fit in with his black visitors later) that he wouldn't have understood when it was and was not appropriate to use it, anyway. At least until he understood the culture better.

dmeister

[shift]

The movie was ok. I mean turn off your brain and what a fine movie it really is.

-But if you ask yourself "Where did this virus come from" It never tells you in this movie. That it made me hanging. I am still gonna go on ahead and get it,,, but not all by means was it a BAD movie. Just wish it could of been a little clearer.

Cheers

[Revoltor]

How come now that Rhett puts it in a review it's OK to say it, but any other time someone has posted the word, it's been edited by a mod?

Don't be a bad sport now :)

[Lyle Horowitz]

I thought Rhett's review was excellent, and it convinced me to go rent the disc from my local Hollywood Video (I have a friend that works there, so he checked it out under his account) and I will be watching it later on. So far i've only watched the 3 short cartoons on the disc, The Rotten Fruit, and I thought they were very funny, aside from the last one, Room Service. I'll let you know what I think.

[Dr_Acula]

I thought CABIN FEVER was okay...liked the gore scenes and even liked some of the humor but a lot of it was out of place and made the movie uneven.

Still, it wasn't dull. And I think at one point someone walked out of the theater in disgust after one of the gory parts, something I've never seen happen before while watching a movie.

[rhett]

Backwoods killer hillbillies were stereotyped long before Roth ever made a movie, particularly in our genre. As a matter of fact, you can't really make this kind of movie unless you do exploit that stereotype. After all, friendly, helpful hillbillies aren't nearly as scary.See, Roth could have been progressive by axing the Winston character, who had no place in the film anyway, and having the hillbillies in the general store for the first occurance and the "pancakes" encounter. Having them go out on a vicious manhunt did nothing for the film, it only made it go off in further directions it could not handle. It would have been great to have these two scenes with the hillbillies, but leave them alone, and let the characters just exist without forcing them to turn out cruel in the end.

This was (at the start anyway) a movie about a virus and how people react when it enters their proximity. The movie loses its focus by reverting to the hillbilly stereotype by bringing them in on a manhunt. Focusing on how this group of teens dealt with each other and the virus itself would have provided enough content for the film, without the need to bring external things into the plot.

[dmeister]

The movie loses its focus by reverting to the hillbilly stereotype by bringing them in on a manhunt.

Strangely enough, I didn't really see the manhunt as a stereotype of hillbillies, but rather an example of behavior typical of people in general. Basically, the hillbilly knew his son had just been sentenced to death, and pointed the accusing finger at the "outsider," rather than take any accountability for it, himself. Then it becomes a vendetta no different from what you'd find under similar circumstances in Gangland, USA. ;)

dmeister

[TobalRox]

Don't be a bad sport now :)

I'm not, I just find it a little strange... everyone got up in arms about the usage of it in other threads... but now it's in almost every post here.

[SaviniFan]

I'm not, I just find it a little strange... everyone got up in arms about the usage of it in other threads... but now it's in almost every post here.

I think you are missing the point that the usually offensive word is being used in a proper context here since it played out in this film in such a bold manner. It's an entirely different matter if someone is using it just to be "with it" or as a mean and derogitory term. People here are merely discussing something from the film that stood out. So far I've not seen anyone in this thread take it out of that context.

[rhett]

Strangely enough, I didn't really see the manhunt as a stereotype of hillbillies, but rather an example of behavior typical of people in general. Basically, the hillbilly knew his son had just been sentenced to death, and pointed the accusing finger at the "outsider," rather than take any accountability for it, himself. Then it becomes a vendetta no different from what you'd find under similar circumstances in Gangland, USA. ;)

dmeisterBut the hillbillies are going out to kill these people because THEIR son bit them. That is like going after somebody because they were bit by your dog.

[dmeister]

But the hillbillies are going out to kill these people because THEIR son bit them. That is like going after somebody because they were bit by your dog.

But, like I said, that makes them assholes, not hillbillies. And not even particularly extraordinary assholes. We live in a society where parents recently insisted that a five-year-old boy be expelled from school for kissing a little girl on the cheek, where a woman recently drowned (quite slowly) her two sons because her ex-boyfriend didn't want children, where a man on a subway attacked another man for looking over at him, and where everyone likes to blame somebody else for their problems.

dmeister

[marioscido]

I have to disagree with alot of Rhett's review. I think 'Cabin Fever' is a wondeful film - certainly far from perfect - with good energy, and very strong political consciousness. This is a film about the fear of contamination, and in these times, this fear, whether from SARS or Mad Cow, is very real. So, for one thing, I really don't understand his comment about the film being timeless. I haven't seen a horror film that nails contemporary anxieties so precisely on the head (not unlike the 50s space invader films and the anxieties they represented). Moreover, the comparison to 'Scream' is problematic, because 'Scream' pretends to be quite superior in its portrayal of the 'slasher' - making it out to be mindless. Roth loves the 70s and early-80s. His filmic references come out of reverence, not arrogance. There is a huge difference here. Horror has been self-referential all its life! Roth is doing what horror has always done; it's the most self-referential of all filmic genres! Self-referentiality didn't begin with 'Scream'!

And lastly, AIDS is a global pandemic and should not be reduced to its impact on gay male communities in the 80s. In other words, it's a very contemporary crisis. Millions of people are dying of AIDS yearly in Africa. Most people in Africa cannot afford to buy the meds that many 'First World' people have access to. It's a tragedy of crisis proportions and the pharmaceuticals are to blame. Anyway, what's interesting about 'Cabin Fever' is that Roth is playing on contemporary fears of AIDS as the 'virus of the poor' by trying to reverse the racist rural/city dualism that horror inherited from the Western (the 'redskin' became the 'redneck'). Except here, rural is made to stand-in for 'Third World' and city for 'First World.' Roth's so-called 'nigger' joke attempts to bring race-issues to support this connection - even if it is very awkward. In these times of globalization, the fear of contamination is only one airplane away! In our post-9/11 times, this fear translates into fears of having 'leaky borders,' fears of terrorist threats, fears of so-called 'Third World' diseases (remember how quickly Canadians scapegoated Asians during the SARS outbreak!) , fears of the so-called 'other,' especially the poor 'other' from the 'Third World' coming into our space and contaminating it. This is what makes 'Cabin Fever' so timely and paces ahead of most horror this year.

If some of you think I'm reading way too much into the film, as many tend to think when it comes to such an 'adolescent' genre like the horror genre - "cause horror is there to scare, not to be political" - then I have three words for you: open your eyes. I can't think of any genre that has been more consistently political than horror. One of the reasons it is consistently popular is simply that it reaches into contemporary fears, usually obliquely, and challenges folks to deal with them, without being overtly preachy. 'Cabin Fever' attempts to do this.

[Latency]

Sweet! I haven't seen this flick yet. Tomorrow is 3 for $7 rentals at the local video store!

If onebyone enjoyed this, I'm sure I will too :).

[rhett]

I have to disagree with alot of Rhett's review. I think 'Cabin Fever' is a wondeful film - certainly far from perfect - with good energy, and very strong political consciousness. This is a film about the fear of contamination, and in these times, this fear, whether from SARS or Mad Cow, is very real. So, for one thing, I really don't understand his comment about the film being timeless. I haven't seen a horror film that nails contemporary anxieties so precisely on the head (not unlike the 50s space invader films and the anxieties they represented). Moreover, the comparison to 'Scream' is problematic, because 'Scream' pretends to be quite superior in its portrayal of the 'slasher' - making it out to be mindless. Roth loves the 70s and early-80s. His filmic references come out of reverence, not arrogance. There is a huge difference here. Horror has been self-referential all its life! Roth is doing what horror has always done; it's the most self-referential of all filmic genres! Self-referentiality didn't begin with 'Scream'!

And lastly, AIDS is a global pandemic and should not be reduced to its impact on gay male communities in the 80s. In other words, it's a very contemporary crisis.How is this film any more contemporary than THE THING back in 1982? It throws back to it with the large number of gay references (I counted 11), certainly all these references were not just thrown in for good fun. There is nothing in the film to suggest that it is occuring in the present, so I think your connections to SARS and Mad Cow are problematic. All the vehicles are 70's models, the general store looks ancient and everybody acts as if they were in a 70's horror film. Roth mentions this often on his commentaries, how he wanted it to be very 70's, and lacking any music or such things that would date it in the present. It is so easy to look at any horror film and immediately project whatever epidemic is hot on the press onto it. People did that with 28 DAYS LATER and they are doing it with this film. Sorry, but mad cow (for the most part) and SARS were both events that happened after these films finished production, and therefore have no large influence on the ideas behind the film.

Roth said he watched THE THING over and over again for motivation, so that is why I believe he is commenting on the representation of blood and connotations of gay male behaviour as it appears in that film, not on a political, worldly level. There is nothing to suggest that he wishes for his film to be taken in that context, so I think you are reading something into it that is not there. Roth is commenting on the 70's horror film, not today's current political context. In case it wasn't clear from the film itself (which I thought it was) the commentaries on the film definitely confirm it.


As for your comments on SCREAM, I agree completely. That is why I was calling CABIN FEVER far more progressive in its use of self-referentiality. Although Kevin Williamson did have a great fondness for horror, SCREAM presents it in such a way where the characters feel they are above those cliches. Roth embraces them. I do not see the comparison between SCREAM and CABIN FEVER as problematic, because I point out exactly what you've said, one shallowly parodies, the other takes the material seriously and constructively.

Self-referentiality certainly didn't begin with SCREAM, but never has it been such a conscious choice as it is today. Roth constructed his film with an almost constant consideration of acknowledging horror films past, certainly different than most filmmakers' approaches before it. And I even recognize that self-referentiality is not a new concept, pointing out in my review that Roth builds on Carpenter just like Carpenter built on Hawks with THE THING. Except Roth does it in an exaggerated state, making a collage of "which movie is this from?" almost to the extent of Tarantino's KILL BILL.

You seem to have misread my review Mario, but I appreciate your feedback nonetheless!

[Lyle Horowitz]

***1/2 (of *****)

Watched it last night, and I enjoyed it. Although not completley original (but far from a rip-off), I thought that it kept my interest for 90-minutes and it was a good horror film. I hope Roth keeps directing horror films because I will keep watching them. For a directorial debut, I have to say I was impressed, and Roth shows a real love for the genre. Decent cast, especially those two gorgeous girls. Jordan Ladd, the girl who played Karen especially.

As far as the ending goes, I loved it. I thought the whole film was a dark comedy, and the ending worked perfectly. I don't know if Roth has ever seen Mario Bava's Twitch of the Death Nerve, but the ending of Twitch is somewhat similar to the ending of Cabin Fever. Both were unexpected and darkly comedic. The one thing I DIDN'T like was how they cued up this rap music over the score for when the 3 blacks came into the film. There's also a spring water truck pulling into the town as the credits roll, which will eventually spred the disease. I hope they don't make a sequel.

A major gripe I had with the film was that they didn't explain where the virus came from. I would have liked to know more about the origins, what it was, etc.

[marioscido]

When I disagree with someone, I have enough courtesy to say why - rather than parrot the often repeated and simplistic mantra: "I have my tastes and you have yours." I don't think I "misread" your review, Rhett. I simply disagree with the way you have framed the film's key elements. And to disagree with you doesn't mean I don't appreciate the hard work you put into reviewing films. Please don't take my comments as an attack.

A few quick things: I never said that SARS and Mad Cow influenced the making of 'Cabin Fever.' But these issues do not occur in a vacuum of history. The script was written in the mid-nineties! That's how long it takes to complete and get an indie film distributed in Hollywood. Anyway, what I was saying was simply that the coincidence between the distribution of the film and SARS/Mad Cow is not a weird fluke. Hysteria around contamination is not a new anxiety, but at the turn of the millennium, it has been redeployed around different themes, such as borders: rural/city divides, 'ghettos'/gated communities, and 'First/Third' worlds. In the 80s, the anxiety was much more associated to bodily touch and proximity, and this translated into homophobia. And yes, 'The Thing' captures this very well. But it doesn't take a genius to figure out that security and borders are a top priority in the US right now - both internally and globally. These are the themes which predominate in the structure of the film: city kids go into the country (not kids question their sexuality!) The characters cross frontiers, they go into an unknown place, outside their zone of familiarity (uncanny), into a liminal space where supposed 'inbred' families live. This is the trope that Roth takes from the films he loves in the 70s and 80s. But he turns this on its head, the so-called 'hick' is actually friends with the ghetto 'nigger.' I asked Roth myself (at Fantasia) if he had the AIDS pandemic in mind when he wrote the script. He said, of course, yes. And pandemic means a disease that spans large geographical areas (like the African continent); it's not simply an epidemic, which is limited to smaller areas (like gay male communities). A product of the 80s, 'The Thing' can at least be contained within ice, but in 'Cabin Fever' the virus spreads out through flowing water. It crosses borders. In The 'Thing,' the virus does not - or at least not until the next person steps into the infected area and thaws it out - flow out. The whole of 'The Thing' happens in a confined and isolated area - and its about the paranoia that happens there. There is a big difference here! Both films are products of the contexts in which they were made.

As for the timelessness of dress and fashions. Roth is simply following the advice of Sam Raimi when he dressed Bruce Campbell in nondescript clothes: he wanted the film to age well, so that it could not be easily identifiable as an 80s film. While Roth may attempt to do this with the surface of the film, his emphasis on certain themes betray a definite 'sign of the times.'

[Ash28M]

I saw the film for the first time at the Toronto Film fest "where it got it's big break" and it really didn't do it for me then. The stars of the film where in the crowd and it seemed like they where the only people laughing at the jokes. I thought the Humour was lame and out of place. The film seemed forced to me and i couldn't really figure out where the film was going. It seemed like he just stole a bunch of ideas from 70's horror films and tried to gel it together into a movie. Before the film started Roth was almost begging the audience to cheer for this film because it was "a back to 70's, hard core horror film." that and he told us there were buyers in the crowed and he wanted a horror film to be chosen for the audience award. He told us about his life long love of horror films, and i can imagin that most of the crowd including myself wanted to cheer on this new up and comming Director .

I'm going to give the film another try though in case i may have missed someone that other people saw, but upon first viewing i really can't recommend it

[X-human]

The thing about referencing other horror movies is that you have to up the ante when you do it. I don't feel that Cabin Fever really did that. I am one of the film's supporters, but I have to be honest when I say that I felt the 70's references were handled sub-par to the originals. Almost like a token to horror fans, "See I've watched Night of the Living Dead too!" I feel that there was enough original content in that movie for it to lighten up on the obvious references.

But the virus plot itself was handled very well and the aspect of the kids not being able to approach and deal with adults/authority I found to be the most well done and consistent parts of the movie.

[onebyone]

I had the best time going through this dvd last night. I liked the movie even better than I did the first time, which is really saying something. Also, even though I was sad we didn't get the deleted clips I heard so much about, the extras were really good too. I was especially impressed with the "Beneath the Skin" documentary which managed to be both interesting and entertaining, something a lot of behind the scene looks fail to do. Also, that little "Pancakes!" bit was seriously cracking my shit up.

[IGotsNewShoes]

Just got home from buying the DVD, I'm gonna check out the features tonight.

[betterdan]

Just watched this and I loved it. The nigger joke was hilarious as was the pancakes bit. I do believe some people seem to be reading way too much into the film. It was a dark comedy just watch it and have fun with it.

[BloodMan]

I bought this, watched it, loved every minute of it! So much fun!! I'm gonna watch it late tonight before I go to bed and risk being a sleepy ass all day tomorrow. Wow! One of the best in recent memory!
:)

Nick

[rhett]

Here are a couple of the easter eggs for those that have the disc:

The first egg can be found by letting the Chapter Selections 1-3 menu run for about 3 minutes, and then deputy Winston will walk by on the menu with his bike.

The second egg can be seen by hitting enter on your remote while the hospital scene plays in the film. Hitting enter will lead to an easter egg introduction with Eli Roth, and then the scene where Cerina Vincent gets attacked is shown, except the original dog, "Jake", replaces the one in the film, and he does stuff like fetch a stick and piss on a tree.

Now those are some tricky easter eggs...

[onebyone]

Thank you rhett. I couldn't find a damn thing last night and I looked and looked and looked. I SO want to see the scene with the dog. I am off to look at these now.

[BloodMan]

same here :)

[marioscido]

I saw the film for the first time at the Toronto Film fest "where it got it's big break" and it really didn't do it for me then. The stars of the film where in the crowd and it seemed like they where the only people laughing at the jokes. I thought the Humour was lame and out of place. The film seemed forced to me and i couldn't really figure out where the film was going. It seemed like he just stole a bunch of ideas from 70's horror films and tried to gel it together into a movie. Before the film started Roth was almost begging the audience to cheer for this film because it was "a back to 70's, hard core horror film." that and he told us there were buyers in the crowed and he wanted a horror film to be chosen for the audience award. He told us about his life long love of horror films, and i can imagin that most of the crowd including myself wanted to cheer on this new up and comming Director .

I'm going to give the film another try though in case i may have missed someone that other people saw, but upon first viewing i really can't recommend it

You saw the original director's cut, before Lion's Gate got its little fingers on it. Roth has said that he was ok with the trims in the end, but some significant scenes were deleted and/or changed. No meat was cut though. I think the LG cut got a better response at test screenings than Roth's cut. Also, LG would not give Roth his cut back for the dvd. I would like to compare? Ash28M: let us know when you watch the dvd how you feel about the LG cut.

I agree with those who describe 'Cabin Fever' as a dark comedy. It's very Grand Guignol actually. The most Grand Guignol feeling comedy/horror film I've seen in years.

But who wants to listen to 5 commentary tracks? However, I'm sure Roth is fun to listen to; he oozes a love for the genre.

[JW77]

Well, I just wasted sixteen bucks on this piece of shit.

I have to agree with Rhett's review, for the most part.

This was a pretty decent movie up until the second half, when it felt like everyone involved just said "Fuck it." The actors, the screenwriter, the director, everyone just collectively shrugged their shoulders and gave up.

The characters started acting in odd ways (to say least) that really don't have any context within the film, lame plot threads are dwelled upon, and nothing is really brought to a logical conclusion. That whole "nigger" joke at the end was just so fucking awful and out of place that it, quite literally, drug the film down to a level that I didn't think it drop down to -- it was like something out of a horrid DTV "Night of the Demons VII" or something.

I also got sick of all of the rip-offs -- excuse me -- "homages" to other films. It's like playing "Where's Waldo." Oh, this is from "Evil Dead," this was from "Night of the Living Dead," that was from "Texas Chainsaw Massacre." Here's a suggestion to film-makers: Stop being cute with this shit and just make your own fucking movie.

Maybe the filmmakers were trying to make some kind of post-modern ironic statement on the nature of horror films, but it's a fucking statement that didn't need to be made. WE FUCKING GET IT. WE'VE ALREADY SEEN DOZENS, IF NOT HUNDREDS, OF SHITTY HORROR MOVIES. YOU'RE BEATING A DEAD HORSE. NO, YOU'RE JUST MAKING ANOTHER SHITTY HORROR MOVIE AND PRETENDING YOU'RE NOT. FUCK YOU. AND THE DEAD HORSE YOU RODE IN ON.

[onebyone]

You know, although he seemed to go on about why he didn't like it, in the end rhett gave the Cabin Fever movie a B. I am kind of thinking you don't agree with him too much JW77.

And the commentaries are very good marioscido. Eli Roth is really great in them and just seems like the funnest guy to know ever. I don't usually even love commentaries but I was very into these. I definitely suggest listening to one or two, at least. I may relisten to one of them tonight myself. Much thanks to the reviewers, because their good reviews of the commentaries are the only reasons I listened to them at all.

[JW77]

You know, although he seemed to go on about why he didn't like it, in the end rhett gave the Cabin Fever movie a B. I am kind of thinking you don't agree with him too much JW77.

Hence the "for the most part" qualification.

The bad parts, at any rate.

[onebyone]

Hence the "for the most part" qualification.

The bad parts, at any rate.

I wasn't really trying to be snarky there. From his review, I thought he hated it because the stuff on the movie was just so negative. I just surprised myself by looking at his review and seeing the B grade.

On another note, I was just reading about what got cut at Creature Corner (http://www.creature-corner.com/interviews/eliroth2.php3) and, although I am very happy with the final product, I wish the director's version was available too. Eli doesn't seem too troubled by the cuts Lion's Gate made, but damn it, I want to see it.

[Mok]

***SPOILERS***




Rhett, I agree with you on most of your review.

However, I think the ending wasn't that bad. It was obvious that things weren't going to shape up or be resolved, and I think they had got that point across in a playfull manner. Also, I think as far as horror movies go this one deserves an "A" rating rather than a "B", the characters were entertaining and the story played out pretty solid - good SE and soundtrack.

Other than that, good review.

[Latency]

hrrrrm, i recall a thread exactly like this 2 weeks ago ...... maybe not though.

I saw this over the weekend and I agree with everything Rhett said. I tried really hard to enjoy the ending but the more it progressed the more it angered me. The movie had so much going for it. I really enjoyed the first hour of the film, I was actually starting to doubt Rhetts opinion on the movie ... untill the horrible editing and bad humor started happening ...... this basically happened when we see more of the young cop ... and then it went straight downhill. I hated how the ending became more of a comedy than a horror film. It was so overdone I just kept saying "what the fuck" out loud (my friend as well). Oh well, maybe I'll give it a few more viewings just to give it another chance .

Oh, the "nigger" joke was great. I wish it were the only joke in the film though ...

[Mok]

I hated how the ending became more of a comedy than a horror film. It was so overdone I just kept saying "what the fuck" out loud (my friend as well). .

Its funny you had a problem with the mix of humor and horror considering your avatar is of Bruce Campbell. By the way, there was humor throughout - the 'Burt' character provided most of it.

[onebyone]

Its funny you had a problem with the mix of humor and horror considering your avatar is of Bruce Campbell. By the way, there was humor throughout - the 'Burt' character provided most of it.

Yeah, I kind of thought Latency would like it too. I guess I was wrong. **Shrugs** I hate when that happens.

[17thJuggalo]

I really don't see whats so wrong with this movie. I think this movie was aimed towards kids like me: really fucked up weird kids with a dark, twisted sense of humor. I personally found this movie hilarious and gruesome at the same time. While I do agree that lot of shit was out of plaace (such as the pancakes thing) but overall it was a very enjoyable experience.

It all depends on what kind of stuff you're into. This movie seemed like they wrote the whole thing for me. I'm really surprised how this movie became popular in the first place.

[Latency]

well, AOD was fun in a totally different way. You can't compare the two at all. It knew what it was right from start to finish (an insanley over the top comedy/adventure/horror). I am all for having humor in horror. I guess I was expecting a totally different movie after watching the first hour. Cabin Fever started off with some great pacing and atmosphere and also had some great character dev.. I guess the ending was my biggest beef, I felt like I was watching a totally different movie in the last 20 minutes. It's just my opinion and it might change with more viewings. I guess we can't agree on everything all of the time, onebyone :P.

EDIT: I'm also aware there was comedy throughout, but it was mild and well implimented .... unlike the last 20 minutes. The young immature cop was funny the first time we see him, but then when we see him more it just really felt like they were beating a dead horse.

[Mok]

**Spoilers**


EDIT: I'm also aware there was comedy throughout, but it was mild and well implimented .... unlike the last 20 minutes. The young immature cop was funny the first time we see him, but then when we see him more it just really felt like they were beating a dead horse.

I didn't find the ending THAT humorous save the *N* word/harmonica parts. The young cop guy was kinda funny, but kinda disturbing at the same time in the sense that he's such an anomaly(spelling?). I think I more or less accepted things as they happened with this film.

Rhett - Plain question, nothing attached here - I often wonder about people who write reviews. Does the fact that they sit down and watch a film knowing they have to review it, makes them more critical(step away from what is going on to contomplate the film making)?

[Latency]

fuck, I'm watching this film again tonight. if I'm gonna be critical I think I need to view it once more just to make sure i got my facts straight. i gotta a feeling it's still gonna suck tho :), but we'll see.

[thrashard76]

I watched this last nite and loved it! Great gore FX and the movie moved right along to the point that I didn't realize the movie was nearly over by the time the Lemonade stand had appeared. Cerina's last sex act was a little weird what with her mate's girl the way she was and her boyfriend getting drunk elsewhere. The humor was refreshing and added to the plot because without it the movie could have dragged along in spots. The "nigger" joke at the beginning and end was not as odd at first but by the end of the movie the realization that the country hicks were "tight" with the black people added an extra twist in that maybe the white kids were more of an asshole and attitude driven than the black people were. A respect issue has been shown by movie's end.

[onebyone]

I guess we can't agree on everything all of the time, onebyone :P.



Pfft. I am so disheartened. :cry:

I guess I figured you would like it, since most of my Evil Dead loving friends really thought it was a hoot. How dare you buck the trend!

I have watched this movie several times since getting the dvd, and I just keep liking it more and more. I can't wait for Roth's next project. I hope it is as good as this is. This really might be one of my favorite horror/comedies ever.

[Hellbilly]

I have watched this movie several times since getting the dvd, and I just keep liking it more and more. I can't wait for Roth's next project. I hope it is as good as this is. This really might be one of my favorite horror/comedies ever.What the lady said :)

[rhett]

Rhett - Plain question, nothing attached here - I often wonder about people who write reviews. Does the fact that they sit down and watch a film knowing they have to review it, makes them more critical(step away from what is going on to contomplate the film making)?Good question, Mok. Really though, at least for me, I don't really look at the film much differently than one that I would just watch on my spare time. I guess film classes at university have corrupted my brain, but I always look at films critically now, whether I want to or not. Writing really brings out the most of ideas though...it organizes everything floating around in your head and often helps you to think of even more ideas you want to deal with. In many ways reviews just write themselves, so the whole critical process really happens in the writing stage, rather than the watching one. That is just me speaking though, I am sure real reviewers like Roger Ebert jot down pages of notes on each movie they watch, and that is why they get paid the big bucks, not just the gratification of having someone read your review like me.

[Mok]

I guess film classes at university have corrupted my brain, but I always look at films critically now, whether I want to or not.

Cool, I thought this might have an effect on viewing films. I usually only start steping away from films and analysing them if I'm not enjoying them. I find start asking myslef: "Why is this shitty? how could it have been done better? how would I have done that?" and so on. So I can imagine it might be hard to simply let a film captivate you. I guess that's what pot is for. :)

[Deaddevilman]

I saw this last night and thought it was good but not great. It was definately, IMO, a direct copy of The Evil Dead substituting the virus for the demons. The one thing that did annoy me on the DVD was the director Eli Roth. He came acroos as a pretentious silver spoon fed nerd.

[Grim]

The one thing that did annoy me on the DVD was the director Eli Roth. He came acroos as a pretentious silver spoon fed nerd.

That's odd, he came off as a really cool guy who knows his shit about horror films to me. I loved the commentary with him.

[onebyone]

That's odd, he came off as a really cool guy who knows his shit about horror films to me. I loved the commentary with him.

I agree, I thought he seemed like a cool guy I would love to have a drink with and shoot the shit about horror movies. Of course, I am a nerd and tend to gravitate towards my kind, but still.

Besides, to pull off that many amusing commentaries is no small feat. Seriously.

[Rainbowthief]

Some of you are analyzing this movie way too much. It's just a very light, humorous homage to late seventies and early eighties horror movies and, IMHO, it succeeds admirably at that. It has a sexy female star with two nude scenes, a sensitive guy trying to get laid, an insensitive lug who makes bad situations worse, an idiot cop, crazy hicks, tons of gore and is humorous without getting cheesy.

Cabin Fever doesn't try to be the thinking fan's horror movie, so if you insist on judging it like one, you'll be disappointed.

[Nemesis]

well said rainbowthief, only thing i can add is that there were two sexy female stars, not just one :-P

[betterdan]

Disco Stu just pm'ed me and wanted to add that the cop was sexy as hell too.

[rhett]

Some of you are analyzing this movie way too much. It's just a very light, humorous homage to late seventies and early eighties horror movies and, IMHO, it succeeds admirably at that.I don't understand why people constantly try to denounce the artistry behind filmmaking. Roth's father has a Ph.D and Roth himself attended several years of film school. Obviously he understands the genre and filmmaking process enough that he can construct a story that permeates beneath the surface. Even if Roth knew absolutely nothing about writing or the use of allegory, symbolism or connotation, it would still be unfair to take a film simply at face value.

You always have to consider the social context in which a film was made. Why did THE TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE come out when it did? Why was THE THING remade during a time when the AIDS epidemic was just starting to reach mass hysteria? Was EASY RIDER just a movie about a bunch of guys who like motorbikes? Every film comes out of a social context, and whether or not the writer knows it or not, these social factors have an external influence on the film itself. Look at all the changes in filmmaking that happened because of 9/11.

Roth's endless liftings from 70's and 80's horror films suggest a thinking beneath the surface. It is self-consciously referring to all these past horror films. Roth even states in his commentary how he needed to include the Winston party in order to comment on the 70's lifestyle, and how all these parties that characters in movies like PHANTASM always want to have are really just boring and sad. Roth uses his homages to demand that we rexamine the horror films of the past knowing what we know today. The movie comes out of a context where a bunch of new, young filmmakers like the Coens, Joe Carnahan and David Wain are constructing new films by using and commenting upon the films of the past. NARC takes THE FRENCH CONNECTION and takes it a step further, just like CABIN FEVER tries to mold THE THING into something different.

You may not want to think about a film critically, looking at its implications or influences, but they are always there...

Cabin Fever doesn't try to be the thinking fan's horror movie,Where is your proof?

[Mok]

Look at all the changes in filmmaking that happened because of 9/11.


I hardley consider myslef "in the loop" as far as film goes, so my question is not challenging what you said. Out of curiosity alone, how have films changed as a result of 9/11?"

[betterdan]

Rhett you're doing exactly what Rainbowthief said. Don't try to over analyze it just enjoy it.

[rhett]

Rhett you're doing exactly what Rainbowthief said. Don't try to over analyze it just enjoy it.I am not saying you can't just sit down and like a movie at face value. It is good to sometimes just sit there and enjoy some manipulative piece of Hollywood trash. What I am saying is that you can't just say "you are over analyzing something" or that a movie doesn't try to be a "thinking man's movie" because, no matter how you look at it there are definitely other things going on in a film besides what is being shown on screen. You can ignore it and just appreciate the basic things a film has to offer, but to deny it is being naive.

[betterdan]

On the otherhand to overanalyze is to be boring ;)

[rhett]

I hardley consider myslef "in the loop" as far as film goes, so my question is not challenging what you said. Out of curiosity alone, how have films changed as a result of 9/11?"Well, after 9/11 many action films were pushed back months and did terrible box office as a result (COLLATERAL DAMAGE, BIG TROUBLE). Hollywood began to reconsider how they present the "other" as the on-screen villain. You won't see too many movies now with Arab terrorists like you would have in the 90's. TRUE LIES 2 was scrapped as a result of the WTC attacks. Ethnicity has become much more of an issue, and as a result you are seeing a much more kind and developed portrayal of those of different color. There has also been much more escapism, existing in fictional worlds rather than the real world, to offer audiences a break from fear of war and violence. The big movies have been the LOTR and Harry Potter films, and many of the other big movies have avoided being set in contemporary culture. Comedies are on the rise, movies are more politically correct. The changes haven't been huge, but they have deifinitely happened.

[onebyone]

On the otherhand to overanalyze is to be boring ;)

Very, very boring.

I think some movies, like Mulholland Drive for example, are made to be analyzed again and again and then one more time. Others, like Cabin Fever, I just don't see the need. Of course you can look at influences etc, but to get into deep discussions over what seems to just be a fun horror movie is like raining on your own parade. I try not to do that myself. If that is naive, then I will wear the tag with pride while I am at the theater watching my fun horror movies and just having a blast.

[Rainbowthief]

I don't understand why people constantly try to denounce the artistry behind filmmaking.
I don't, and from the posts I've read during my years on this message board, I doubt that any of the other members do either.

I'm actually a filmmaker myself (well, aspiring really, but I hate using that word), so I often do find myself admiring movies with great writing, clever dialogue or scenes that contain impressive technical work, as well as criticizing things like poor editing and lighting. I try not to let it detract from my viewing pleasure, though, and it never does because I'm only in full critic mode when it comes to my own work.

Roth's father has a Ph.D
What does that have to do with Cabin Fever?

You always have to consider the social context in which a film was made. Why did THE TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE come out when it did? Why was THE THING remade during a time when the AIDS epidemic was just starting to reach mass hysteria? Was EASY RIDER just a movie about a bunch of guys who like motorbikes?
rhett, if that's true, then what does Dude, Where's My Car? say about this era?

I think the best director I can use as a point of reference is Peter Jackson, who's worked on both ends of the spectrum. I think that every film he's made is a work of immense talent, passion and originality. I love all of them. However, there is a world of difference between, say or Braindead and Heavenly Creatures, so I could not, in all fairness, hold the former to the same standards that I hold the latter. Braindead, while certainly not lacking in artistic value, is a gory, silly romp, while Heavenly Creatures addresses issues of sexuality and coming of age (among other things) that demand a more discerning critical view.

Where is my proof that Roth wasn't attempting to make a thinking fan's horror film? Well, horror comedy was probably not the sub-genre to choose for such a task. Besides, as you wrote: "Obviously he understands the genre and filmmaking process enough that he can construct a story that permeates beneath the surface." Had Roth wanted to make a deeper film, I think he would have.

[Rainbowthief]

BTW, rhett, I hope you don't take any of this as an attack on your review, which I enjoyed. My opinions are just that. Eli Roth himself is really the only one who can say what he intended to accomplish with his movie.

[rhett]

What does that have to do with Cabin Fever?Well, the apple does not fall far from the tree, and it suggests that Roth is a product of an academic upbringing. Roth's father is a psychologist, and the interpersonal dynamics that the main characters express while dealing with disease certainly suggests such a psychologist's influence. His father is obviously well educated, and Roth therefore probably is too, which would mean that his screenplay would be more than just a mindless homage.



rhett, if that's true, then what does Dude, Where's My Car? say about this era?I am sure you intended this to be a rhetorical question, but I will answer it anyway. DUDE, WHERE'S MY CAR? represents a new trend in modern filmmaking, presenting a society that has become so devoid of creativity and so bored with suburban lifestyle that it instead focuses on the mundane. The fact that something as trivial as misplacing a car can get a feature-length treatment certainly speaks lengths about our society. Connect this film with the mindless antics of the JACKASS movie, and you definitely see documentation of a youth culture bored with itself.


Where is my proof that Roth wasn't attempting to make a thinking fan's horror film? Well, horror comedy was probably not the sub-genre to choose for such a task.Come on, you seriously can't knock a film's merit by just considering the genre. As a horror fan you should know how unfairly labelled the genre is, and how the use of genre at all does nothing but limit one's mindset. If you think you are going to see a horror/comedy then that is all you will see. The motorcycle sub-genre is generally considered shallow exploitation, does that make EASY RIDER a shallow film? Rated X movies are generally considered porn, so does that make MIDNIGHT COWBOY pornography? There have been plenty of meaningful horror comedies, like BLOOD FOR DRACULA, FLESH FOR FRANKENSTEIN, AN AMERICAN WEREWOLF IN LONDON and even MAY. You can't just dismiss the quality of a film simply because it can be attributed to a particular genre. If that were the case, everyone would just write-off horror films, when we all know there have been several great, challenging and introspective horror films.

[The Joker]

Whats up everybody..

I rented and watched Cabin Fever last night, I didnt think it was too bad, but I noticed something about the ending.


**********SPOILER ALERT***********

Stop reading if you haven't seen the movie!!

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

At the end we see the bodies of the main characters being thrown in a pile, doused with lighter fluid and set on fire. Do you think this was to pay homage to Night of the Living Dead or were they just ripping it off??

[bigdaddyhorse]

I think it was paying homage, just as the scene before when the last survivor was gunned down also just like NOTLD.
Then again, paying homage could be a cheap cop-out/excuse to just rip off something else.

[The Joker]

yes BDH that part too was obvious

[rhett]

yes BDH that part too was obviousI liked the NOTLD homage, precisely because it dwells on the sheriff character for a long pause, and at that moment you totally think he is going to say "One more for the fire..." but he never does. So the whole scene serves as both an homage and somewhat of a red herring too.

[Tawny]

I liked the use of the Last House on the Left music. I thought that was cool. I guess I really liked this movie....except the ending. I wish they would have explained where the virus originated. If I would have known that there were 2 actors from Detroit Rock City in this,and a bunch of weed jokes, I would have rented it alot sooner. :D