Mr Whedon and Mr Goddard are not close personals of mine so it is an assumption.

Considering the amount of legal shuffling involved in making Who Framed Roger Rabbit? I assume they assumed they wouldn't have a chance, especially with their budget and the problems MGM were already having.

It would be more fun for me if the folklore was based on really real movie monsters which finally got themselves caught on celluloid once the technology had caught up with them.

If Pinhead was real (and looked exactly the way he does in the films) myths would spread, his image would be depicted from second/third/fourth hand sources and end up in woodcuts and medieval carvings, Chinese silk designs, Indian illuminated holy books etc and not look the same.

With the invention of photography and cinema we would finally get to see his true shape and it's in the basement of the cabin in the woods, only we think it's Doug Bradley wearing make-up in a silly horror film.

The film as it stands took me out of the moment so for me it would be more worth while to push the idea that little bit further.

That way you could never look at movie monsters in the same light again.

It would also have been a very clever business ploy because it would have encouraged fans of this film who may not have seen all those monsters in action to check them out.

All the animation studios did well out of Roger Rabbit so I could see a similar rebirth in horror cinema.

It certainly would be more fun than Freddy Vs Jason or Alien Vs Predator.