Movie a Day by the Bay

I have only seen a bit of the remake of "The Hills Have Eyes" and I had to turn it off because it was just not my kind of movie. Never seen the original, but I probably should

I should watch that again; I saw it a long time ago and was bored. I love the crazy remake.

I also really liked You're Next. Might have to watch "The Guest", a friend of mine recommended it to me.

I love it, but then, I'm a sucker for that gritty 70's horror style.

I am too now, but I think I was about 15 when I saw it, and I was looking for more excitement then.

Matthew Lillard is by far my favorite character from Scream he's just too da*m hilarious

__________________
''Haters are my favourite. I've built an empire with the bricks they've thrown at me... Keep On Hating''
- CM Punk
http://threemanbooth.files.wordpress...unkshrug02.gif

Stuart's my favorite character too, Derek.

Stu was not my favorite character from Scream, but I do like Matthew Lillard a lot, probably thanks to that movie. I always used to think Billy was boring and Stu was what basically MADE the ending to Scream. He seems like such an odd killer. Like, it should have been someone else, not that goofball.

Stu is really the real twist of the movie. Yes, you thought Billy was dead, but you always suspected Billy did it before then. Who would think the killer is Stu? He's the party animal of the movie. Party animals are usually victims, not killers.

But that's part of the beauty of Scream, at least back then, is that you weren't expecting two killers. So even if you were paying attention to who was there and who wasn't, by the time you've noticed that 'no one' can be the killer, it's the end and the film's wrapping up. Even knowing that it's inverting horror movie clichés you'd be hard pushed to pick out that there were two and which two.

__________________
5-time MoFo Award winner.

Right. Which is also why I said Stu's part of the twist -- he's killer #2.

Actually, despite what I said about Stu not seeming like the killer because of his whole personality, I think you could guess it was him for several reasons --

1. When they were all sitting together in the park early in the film, it's brought up that Stu dated Casey Becker and she apparently dumped him. To Scream fans everywhere, despite Stu's "peer pressure" motive, this is seen as the real motive for why Stu joined with Billy -- to kill Casey for dumping him.

2. Tatum goes to the garage and gets killed there thanks to Stu sending her there -- he tells her to grab another beer for him. So it looks like he's setting her up to die.

3. The fact that somebody has to be the killer and Stu wasn't killed yet. It seems like he's busy with all the people partying and maybe even running off to see Principal Himbry's dead body, but as we see when Sidney is faced with the decision on whether she should trust Randy or Stu, Stu has NOT left the house. You can figure out he's a killer by that point if you're clever.

Yeah but Stu and Billy had already killed Sidney's mum before Cassie. So I think she was more added as a victim for dumping him, rather than that being the catalyst for him becoming a killer.

Agreed on the rest.

Well, whatever. The thing is, it's brought up that Stu dated Casey and apparently she dumped him for Steve. He told Tatum he dumped Casey for her, but obviously, Stu's a killer, he lies, and of course Drew Barrymore's gonna dump that dweeb for a football star.

I've heard that in movies, there should be a reason for why everything is brought up, for why people say what they say. Or for what they do. What's the reason we learn that Casey and Stu dated and apparently she dumped him? If Stu wasn't a killer, that's a stupid throwaway line. Info we didn't need. But Stu was a killer, it establishes why Casey Becker died, and it's the biggest clue that he's the killer.

I agree with all of that. All I was disagreeing with was that Casey was the reason he joined Billy in the first place.

Of course you could guess it was Stu. My point wasn't that you couldn't know/work out/guess who the killer(s) were in Scream, it's that if you're watching the film back in 97, even allowing for the knowledge it has of itself and the audience, if you've worked out who the killer is by then, it's too late as the film is wrapping up. It's not like you've sat there and the minute Stu and Billy are onscreen you go "Oh, it's obviously both of them" and then sit there for another 75 minutes. Scream plays with your knowledge of the genre and yet, for those in its audience without that knowledge, it's a good, straight forward horror/slasher film.

I saw it after I joined the forum, because of Sexy's praises. I'd probably go as high as . One of the most fun movies out there.

Yeah, I was definitely considering giving it a full four. It's a blast.

The first Chop Top scene is like a for me.

I just now noticed your rating of Christmas Evil. I couldn't be happier (well actually, I could be if you'd give it another popcorn, but even I wouldn't do that...yet.) I kind of think of it as an artsy-character study-dark comedy-slasher-thing. It's a very unique movie that I'd probably go for.