This review is critically analysing Wes Cavern's movie Scream (I) made in 1996. This movie is a cult movie and it is an icon of the most basic killer movies, but at the same time it takes it to another level when it is just laughs from stupid and sexy girls being killed by the rules of that kind of horror movies. This review is based on Peter Stack's, James Berardinelli's and Roger Ebert's reviews.
Figure 1
This movie talks about people who know typical horror movie scenarios and suddenly becomes part of it by themselves. It uses all predictable actions in very interesting and maybe a bit humorous manner. Roger Ebert Points out some really important facts about it: " ``Scream'' is not about the plot. It is about itself. In other words, it is about characters who *know* they are in a plot. These characters read Fangoria magazine. They even use movie-style dialogue: ``I was attacked and nearly filleted last night.'' The heroine has been rejecting her boyfriend's advances, and just as well: As another character points out, virgins are never victims in horror films. Only bad boys and girls get slashed to pieces." (Chicago Sun Times, December 20, 1996). It is clear that most of the people can predict the movie, because everything happened thousands of times in the movies created before, but non of them showed how people would react to the same situation if they would already know all of those scenarios. Would it actually work out? James Berardinelli adds: "Scream never stops poking fun at itself. Craven and screenwriter Kevin Williamson allow their characters to make all sorts of disparaging remarks about the horror movie cliches they're living (and dying) through. In describing why she doesn't like slasher flicks, Sidney claims that "they're all the same…" (Reel Views, date of publishing unknown). Sometimes killer is given almost supernatural powers of being quickly in few places unnoticed although in the end it appears that there were too of them it is still would be very incredible to pull this off. The weirdest thing is that after so many successful murders - why they failed so badly right just before reaching their goal? Well, probably just because heroine had to survive in the just like by the rules of most of that kind of killer horror movies, but we know that there are many more parts, so it also helps to elaborate same plot further. There were many movies very heavily influenced bi it and parody show "The Most Scariest movie" is not an exception. It is a big mistake to watch the original after seeing all of those movies that came out after, because you know too much what to expect, but still, it has some pretty good and original ideas about scary movies that do not work as good as in this one.
Figure 2
All in all Scream now is one of the most popular movies of all time and there are quite some reasons why. Peter Stack tells one of them: "For many who have lost sight of how entertaining a horror thriller can be, this one aims to get folks hyped. A particularly gruesome sequence has a couple of guys stabbing each other with kitchen knives, but trying to not go deep enough to kill." (San Francisco Chronicle, December 20, 1996). It is entertaining, thrilling and smart - everything what you might want for a Saturday evening.
Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/1996/12/20/DD42123.DTL#ixzz1c5JqQYSg
Illustrations:
Figure 1: First victim
http://scream-trilogy.net/2011/03/scream-blu-rays-menus-screenshots/scream1bluray1/
Figure 2: Dewei
http://www.doblu.com/2011/10/04/scream-4-review/scre4m2022/
Bibliography:
James Berardinelli (Reel Views, date of publishing unknown)
http://www.reelviews.net/php_review_template.php?identifier=672
Peter Stack (San Francisko Chronicle, December 20, 1996)
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/1996/12/20/DD42123.DTL
Roger Ebert (Chicago Sun Times, December 20, 1996)
http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/19961220/REVIEWS/612200306/1023
No comments:
Post a Comment