Exactly.
Getting back to the original question - either the elder gods can read minds, or they’re just watching along with everyone else. If they can read minds, volunteers are obviously useless. If they’re just watching, then you’ve got to be certain that the volunteers are really good actors who never go off script - all it would take is one person screaming “I know you’re watching us! Let me out of here! I don’t want to do this any more!” to ruin the ceremony. So it’s not worth risking it - better to use real people and just control it from off stage as much as possible.
So if they can’t read minds (and I’m not certain about whether they can or not), volunteers could work, but aren’t worth the risk of attempting them.
Of course, a lot of gladiatorial fighting was staged like a wrestling match (if I Claudius is to believed) with things like fake blood bladders and dulled weapons. So more similar to a horror movie than an actual bloodbath.
So digging horror movies is not related to people who watch NASCAR or drag racing with the risk of a crash and injury in mind? All of which is simply today’s version of what happened in earlier civilizations…?
A) I don’t think it’d be all that easy to recruit volunteers, especially of the correct specific types to satiate each trope sufficiently.
B) Why innocents? Why volunteers? Why not have this be some sort of elaborate capital punishment system?
C) Why not just nuke the old ones and be done with it? If I had unlimited resources and technology and knew that we were living at the bubbling surface of the Old Ones, I’d build a rocket ship and take my chances on Mars.
So it’s a documentary?
You don’t think the part of us that enjoys watching someone saw the head off a blonde co-ed in a Friday the 13th movie is in anyway related to the part of us that enjoyed watching a Celt get hacked to death in the colosseum?
Have you seen what the Old Ones on Mars are like? They makes the Earth ones look like the Teletubbies.
Exactly. Perhaps we are missing some aspect of the point being made with that post…
I have no idea whether it is related or not. My point is that we can’t simply assume that they are related. But if the film is supposed to be indicting us for watching Horror films, then the film assumes the connection you’re describing in what’s quoted above–but it’s an assumption that requires argument.
I don’t understand this comment.
See my post two previous to this one.
Fiction and reality are (of course) extremely different things. It does not make sense to me to simply assume that one’s reactions to fictions have much, if anything, to do with how one would react to a reality.
Moreover, even if they do have something to do with each other, it does not make any sense to me to indict a person for their reactions to fiction as though they were reacting to a reality. Fiction and reality are… completely different things.
So. If the film is supposed to be indicting us for our reactions to fictional horror, it fails to make its point, because it fails to show us why we should think that our reaction to fictional horror is morally similar to reacting to real horror.
I hate to be “that guy” but the thread title is still a spoiler.
If you’ve never seen the movie but you’ve seen the discussion question “Would volunteers work?” then you’re going to understand exactly what’s going on in all the early control room scenes when that’s supposed to still be quite murky in the film.
This is confusing, because the actuality of the brutality in Cabin is exactly the same as in Halloween. I agree with post #52 though.
The Elder Gods in CitW are, from their point of view, watching actual brutality.
When you and I watch Halloween, on the other hand, from our point of view, we are watching merely fictional brutality.
Does that clear up the confusion?
I think we’re saying the same thing. If, within the Cabin world, the Elder Gods are a stand-in for the audience watching the Cabin movie, then the Elder Gods would be placated by the company showing a horror movie.
I feel like I understand the distinction, yes - but both behaviors are based on Humanity’s same horror/fascination with gore. How is the distinction important? Simply to clarify that the audience can’t have exactly the same POV as the Old Ones? Fine - we get it.
Well put!
It’s not that we “can’t” have the same POV, it’s that we don’t have the same POV, in a morally crucial way:
They are reacting to actual brutality.
We are reacting to fictional brutality.
I see no moral similarity here. So if the film is supposed to be making a point that turns on some such similarity, then the argument needs to be laid out more clearly. To me at least.
You said “both behaviors are based on Humanity’s same horror/fascination with gore,” but this is not obvious to me, and moreover, if it is true, it is not obvious why this is interesting or important. Again, if the film’s trying to make a point based on this observation, then the point needs to be laid out more clearly. And if this observation just is the point of the film, then I need to know why I should think its point true, and why I should find it important.
I think you may be taking the metaphor a bit too literally. No one (least of all the film) is arguing that, if you like watching Freddy Kreuger movies, you’d like watching a live person being murdered for real. But there is an undeniable element of the human psyche that responds positively to seeing other humans suffer. There is, of course, also an element of the human psyche that recoils when we see humans suffer. A lot of fiction (horror fiction in particular) exist at the collision of those two impulses. Cabin in the Woods, rather than simply existing at that confluence, is *about *that confluence.