- By Drew Taylor
- |
- April 13, 2011 4:07 AM
- |
- 5 Comments
The idea of reviving the "Scream" franchise seems like a good one, at least on paper. When the original film was released in 1996, it was unlike anything that had come before it – a horror movie where the characters were well versed enough in the conventions of the genre to try and escape alive. Years before Comic-Con hijacked the multiplexes, "Scream" was a movie where basement-dwelling geekiness wasn't just a character trait, it was essential to your survival. The subsequent films, the underrated "Scream 2," which had the characters riffing on sequels, and the disappointing "Scream 3," in which the scales were erroneously tipped too much in the favor of arch hipness (and away from any actual scares), expanded the mythology of the original while somehow muddying the pure pleasures that the first film offered up.
Recent Comments
Also, blaming Pixar for things out of their control (such as commercial marketing) is unfair - that
A terrible article that misses so many of the great things in the films. You talk about the
I thoroughly enjoyed it. I feel the "old sport" catchphrase was 100% necessary. The
I liked Brave way more than Up - Pixar's worst in my opinion (haven't seen Cars 2)
Reg: your comment on Zack Snyder's name. I am somewhat inclined to believe that as well. Except
I saw that one on it´s release back then in Germany at age 14....and you can be sure that this is
Damn.... May he rest is peace. He was a MAGNIFICENT actor.
"...with a complete lack of progression to the narrative." "This man is not our
im not a grammar nazi in the slightest but dear lord can someone read over these posts just once
I totally disagree, the movie really wasn't spectacular. IT HAS NOTHING to do with Christopher