Search This Blog

Monday, February 28, 2000

“SCREAM 3” movie review

· In case you haven't known, the "Scream" trilogy was always meant to be a trilogy. When Kevin Williamson turned in his spec script entitled "Scream" he also turned in a 5 page outline for the other two films saying that he meant for it to always be a trilogy, like George Lucas with "Star Wars" but with a killer. If you don't know what a spec script is, it's a script you write without having someone telling you to write it or writing on contract. Sort of like when you bored, you'd feel like writing something (if that makes it any clearer.)

· Rumor has it that according to Kevin Williamson's outline for "Scream 3" it was supposed to go back to Woodsboro, but the majority of people wanted it in Hollywood so it takes place there. It's a better place anyway because if you saw "Scream 2" Sydney tries out acting. But lets clear up something,

· Sydney doesn't try out for any films in "Scream 3" but she does go to Hollywood.

· None of the cast members for "Stab" return for "Stab 3," and Cotton Weary appears again, and so does Jamie Kennedy (the ever so famous Randy Meeks). I know what you're thinking-he's dead. Will it was an idea Wes Craven and Jamie Kennedy had to put him in the film. In the film they show Randy Meeks on a video cassette telling the rules of a trilogy in case he didn't survive in the sequel because he lost his virginity, and he mentions to who in the "final act."

· If you do pay close attention to the "Scream" movies you will notice that Randy gave out rules to abide by for a successful horror movie, it's sequel, and the final film.

· If you haven't seen this film yet I won't give out any information as to who dies in the first scene and also who gets killed or who is the killer. But this tops the other Screams big time.

· Since this is the last "Scream" movie, it's the best one. If you're a big "Scream" fanatic, go see it. It's definitely worth the seven dollars.

Wednesday, February 16, 2000

Bad Influences

Foul music, slasher movies, cult cartoons, and 'killer' video games. A lot of people say that this type of stuff are a bad influence on kids. They say they give people bad ideas. If that was a known fact than how come I don't get any bad ideas in my head?

I'm a big "Scream" fan, "South Park" fan, and I enjoy such hard music as Metallica, Kid Rock, and Korn who talk about bad things. They never really mean any bit of it though.

If this stuff gives off bad ideas, than how come some people who listen to Marilyn Manson aren't gothic or killing people? I have a friend who I work with who is a big Marilyn Manson fanatic, yet he's not gothic and he doesn't like the idea of killing people. When the Columbine High School shootings happened, people blamed it on Marilyn Manson. All Marilyn Manson is is an artist. An entertainer. His job is to entertain people, not to teach people. The people who make horror movies, cult cartoons, and video games aren't out there to teach anyone anything. They're out there to entertain you.

Go ahead blame the music, movies, games, and cartoons all you want for the world's troubles, but they're the wrong things to blame. The fact is the bad influences to kids these days are other people. Parents, friends, peers, anyone in particular that people know well. Who do you think is dumb enough to listen to guys who look like girls that are freaks who wear black contact lenses? Who do you think will listen to people who wear clown makeup? Come on, people. Entertainment don't create psychos. Psychos are already created. It is in the minds of the psychos. Think about that.