keelypso: (Default)
[personal profile] keelypso
I think I'm going to use this blog for the good of mankind. And by that, I mean I'm going to straight up use it to talk about at least one movie a week. So, for week 1, I'm going to do two movies, Scream and the third sequel, Scream 4.

Prepare for spoilers.

I haven't seen a lot of thrillers (I refuse to qualify either movies as "scary" or "horror"), but I've seen enough that these movies came off as extremely formulated. There was no scare at all because you always knew where the killer was. I think that's kind of the downfall with having your film being based on horror tropes. There was no suspense because you've seen enough of these films to know what's going to happen. I do think the character of Randy was brilliant, though. Well, in that he told you the rules of a horror film while in a slasher himself. And I did enjoy the scene where he was yelling at the screen while Ghostface was behind him.

However, Randy, like the rest of these characters, were some of the most idiotic characters ever committed to film. Particularly Stu in the first one. Matthew Lillard, the beautiful bastard he is, has this awesome ability to be the dumbest person on the screen anytime he's in any movie ever and, sweet baby Jesus, I have never seen anybody - fictional or otherwise - so devoid of any intellect ever. "I think I'm dying." Well, no fucking shit. You were just stabbed, you moron. This all being said, Stu may or may not have been my favorite character in the film. He was just so much fun!

The greatest flaw in their plan was not murdering Sidney the FIRST chance they got in the scenes at Stu's place. Like, seriously, stop being such a movie villain and kill her! Sidney already proved that she was capable of getting away. They could've gotten away with everything had they killed Sidney first and then bloodied themselves up. With Sidney still alive, there is always the chance she could've gotten away (which she did, obviously, because you can't kill your heroine) and, y'know, fucked everything up. But, no. That would imply that these characters were actually capable of being logical. Which none of them were.

Another big problem I had with the first film was that Sidney straight up accused her boyfriend, whose name I've already forgotten only two days later, of being Ghostface, which made the big reveal really unsurprising (although I was never going to be surprised with the ending, because I have the tendency to Wikipedia everything). It was kind of like "Really? The one suspicious guy in the whole damn movie is the killer? What a shock!" Stu's involvement was more of the shock for me. His reasoning was great. "Peer pressure."

You stay classy, Stu.

The deaths... left something to be desired. Quentin Tarantino has ruined me. I want all the blood and guts, dammit! ALL. OF. IT. Also, after having seen the original Scary Movie several of times, it kind of ruined the death scenes. After finally seeing this film, a lot of Scary Movie seems like a shot-for-shot remake. I have no shame in admitting I like Scary Movie better, though. That movie has the advantage of being a comedy, so I think them playing off of horror movie tropes works better. But then there's all the damn sequels, which uggghhhhh. Stop wasting your money, Hollywood.

All in all, I think that the film wasn't terrible, just annoying and a bit of a disappointment. And a lot of the disappointment stems from having seen Scary Movie first and already knowing what was going to happen.

Scream 4, on the other hand, was... more enjoyable for me. The film played more on the tropes found in remakes, which is what the current generation is stuck with. And, seriously, Hollywood. I understand that you want to revive successful franchises and have your precious cash cows back, but you need to stop. Remakes don't work because we've already seen this movie. We loved this movie. Please stop shitting on all the things we love.

Reboots of comic franchises are okay, though. There's more room for expansion and different story lines.

Back to the film at hand, I think, besides the opening Stab scenes, which were weird and confusing (which was commented on in the film, which made it all the more confusing), the film was okay. I wasn't overly fond of Emma Roberts acting, especially towards the end, but I wasn't as angered as I was with the original film. And seeing what became of Gail, Dewey and Sidney from the first film to this one (which was a 15 year gap) was kind of entertaining. I've only seen this one and the original film, so what happened in 2 and 3 is kind of a mystery to me, but not really. Because Wikipedia.

To be honest, 95% of my opinion of Scream 4 is based on Rory Culkin. I fucking love the Culkin brothers, yo. Mac, Kieran and Rory, I love you so.

Overall, I would rate the films as 3 out of 5 bowls of Mac and Cheese. They're decently entertaining with some clever moments scattered throughout. Also, Rory Culkin. And Mathew Lillard.

Profile

keelypso: (Default)
keelypso

About

I'm Keeley, I'm 19 and I'm obsessed with movies, particularly those of a Disney nature. This blog is primarily dedicated to talking about movies.

May 2013

S M T W T F S
   123 4
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031