When a Spoiler Calls, Part II

At the start of this week I told you dear readers about the escalating controversy surrounding Melbourne-based (yet nationally published) film critic Jim Schembri. You see, Schembri had written a review of Wes Craven's Scream 4 that revealed the identity of the killer in the very first sentence. A crime of stupidity if ever there was one, especially from a critic as seasoned and high ranking as Schembri. Read this piece from Monday that explains the whole story as we knew it at the time to catch yourself up because, ladies and gentlemen, Mr Schembri has one-upped himself in the "oh no he did not!" stakes.



Throughout the past week the man had promised "the full story" behind the "Scream 4 meta controversy", as seen above, which followed after a truly bizarre series of ridiculous tweets about time travel and Luke Buckmaster of Crikey. He kept promising and promising and never delivering. Naturally, it emerged at around Midnight on Good Friday when he suspected nobody would notice/care because it's a five-day weekend. It's amazing to think that on a weekend in which people celebrate a man who CAME BACK TO LIFE AFTER BEING EXECUTED that this would be the most ridiculous thing you'd read about today?


Yes, Jim Schembri posted up his "full story" and it's the biggest load of bullshit you're likely to read all week! In the piece titled "How I punk'd the Twitterverse" Schembri muses on how he played a big ol' prank on us Twitter users by outing the Scream 4 villain in his review; "I decided to create a online event. I wanted to become the scourge of the Twitterverse as I led the hordes down a merry trail of cryptic messages and misdirection." Except he didn't lead the hordes down a merry trail of cryptic messages and misdirection. He blatantly gave away the identity of the "who" in a "whodunnit". That isn't being cryptic, it's being an arrogant prick.

"I anticipated that the moment Scream 4 opened, sites such as Twitter would be positively brimming with spoilers", he says before later opining "Twitter wouldn't respect Scream 4, surely. Twitter doesn't respect anything." While it's true Scream 4 spoilers were overflowing on websites like Twitter as well as IMDb, YouTube and even websites like Scream-Trilogy.net, none of the people announcing said spoilers were film critics who get paid by a mega-corporation (Fairfax) to review movies on a professional basis. I'd also hazard a guess that many of them were not grown men who were clearly smart enough to end up as the lead film critic at publications like The Age and the Sydney Morning Herald. You don't get a job like that by being an idiot, but you sure can become one afterwards it seems. Still, this is the newspaper that somehow stuffed up today's paper by headmasting it with "THE SATURDAY AGE". On a Friday.

What it all boils down to is that Jim Schembri doesn't like Twitter ("(T)he Twitterverse, in my view, is largely populated by idle minds seeking to engage in banal, repetitive discourse and revel in the cheap thrills derived from being crude, vulgar, ignorant and abusive",) and felt like playing a prank on us. Except, wouldn't it have made sense to ACTUALLY PLAY A PRANK? Revealing the actual, true, real identity of the Scream 4 villain isn't a prank. Revealing the villain as someone who was not the villain would have been a prank. He would have gotten the vitriol is he craves and we all would have had a laugh when we realised "Oh that Jim Schembri was just fooling with us!"

Except here he wasn't just playing with the so-called "Twitterverse". Schembri's spoiler-laden review sat pretty upon the top of Rotten Tomatoes for several hours before, eventually, newer reviews began to push him down the lead page. Still, anybody who clicked on his review for the first day it appeared (it wasn't altered until 8am on Friday - a full day after the film's release and several hours after the print edition went on sale) would have been greeted with a spoiler that would ruin the movie's big climax. That's ANYBODY WHO CLICKED. I supposed Schembri believed everybody who uses the internet must use Twitter (and thus must be evil?), but they do not. Many do not like Twitter and yet they still would have been "punk'd" by this inexcusable social experiment. As another critic stated on, you guessed it, Twitter: "Once you start using your reviews as a forum for anything aside from your views on the film you're reviewing, it's pretty much over folks." Another states it "That piece insults the intelligence", another "How fitting of @jimschembri, on Good Friday, to depict himself as Twitter Christ. He spoiled for our sins, people", and another "I lost a bit of respect for The Age if it actually runs @jimschembri 's lie in print." And, of course, this one that sums up everything I've been saying: "Even if #Schembrigate was a genius twitter experiment, surely that doesn't justify spoiling the film for people WHO DON'T EVEN USE TWITTER".

And, even if Twitter is evil and full of crude, vulgar, ignorant and abrasive folks who are willing to spoil the enjoyment of movies for others then it's quite easy to find Twitter users who are not. I follow 460 people on Twitter and not one of them revealed the identity of the Scream 4 killer. I am followed by 1175 and I'm happy in knowing each and every one of them could go into Scream 4, if they so wish, and not know who the villain is. Unlike anybody who read Schembri's review. His revelation shows a distinct lack of respect for all of his readers, not just those who use Twitter as a valuable social networking tool.

And, for that matter, the irony of Schembri playing a wicked "punk" on Twitter is surely not lost on the man. Schembri himself has (as of right now) 497 followers and he started off the week with significantly less than that. Schembri, however, doesn't follow a single person; no filmmaker, no fellow critic, no friends. Nobody. And, for that matter, until this past week's clusterfuck of time machine tweets the man had never used the site for anything other than self-promotion of his The Age affiliated blog, Cinetopia. And, even further, as the image below shows, he doesn't even Tweet his reviews in any timely fashion! As ever, he's ahead of the technology curve is Mr Schembri.


None of this would have even been necessary if Schembri had have just admitted his fumble and apologised. Instead, he sent us down a ridiculously convoluted rabbit hole of pranks, punks and spoilers. It was obvious from his 1.5/5 review that he wasn't a fan of the movie, and yet in his article he continues to act petty and pouty towards the film whilst treating anybody who didn't want the ending spoiled with contempt.

Nobody likes being insulted, especially by a lame film. But that's how I felt about 10 minutes into Scream 4. ... No originality, no imagination. And predictable. The identity of the masked killer was obvious from the moment you first saw him. Or her. Or it. Hey, wouldn't want to spoil the film for anyone.

No, you wouldn't, but you did and I won't soon forget. Nor will anybody else who sees through his childish tantrum as anything but what it really is: a last minute attempt to save credibility, peddling a topic that his newspaper and other forms of print media are trying to push to their dwindling readers.

Poisin Pen has already written about it and I am sure you'll read a lot more about this throughout the weekend - freelance writers don't necessarily get five-day weekends - and beyond. Just remember, Jim Schembri played fast and loose with his readers by single-handedly destroying years worth of work by Wes Craven, Kevin Williamson, the cast, crew and producers with one sentence of a review. He thought his readers were beyond contempt, played a gag with no thought of the consequences and then admitted to using his position for an elaborate gag that nobody can make heads or tails of (apart from Schembri himself, of course).

He concludes his article by giving Wes Craven, a filmmaker for 40 years (his debut, The Last House on the Left was released in 1972), condescending tricks on how to truly breath life in Scream 4's tagline of "New Decade, New Rules". It may be a new decade, but the old rules still apply to being a film critic and Jim Schembri broke them. It appears doubtful The Age will hold him accountable at all, which is truly sad, since they published this nonsense drivel of his. I guess it's up to us to let him and The Age know that playing games with readers is a cruel thing to do. Especially if they want us to keep paying that $1.50 every morning, right?

Review: Scream 4

Scream 4
Dir. Wes Craven
Year: 2011
Aus Rating: MA15+
Running Time: 103mins

**NOTE: This review is spoiler free!**

Some people appear to have mistaken my anticipation for Scream 4 as just geeky franchise worship. And while it’s true that I would most definitely go and see even Scream 8: Ghostface Takes Manhattan, a lot of the reason why this movie feels like such an event is because this is the Scream 4 we never thought we’d get. By the time the fourth film of a horror franchise rolls around the cast and crew that made the original(s) so worthwhile have almost all but moved on, so when it was announced that not only that the original creative team – director Wes Craven and screenwriter Kevin Williamson – were returning, but also the three main principal cast members – Neve Campbell, David Arquette and Courteney Cox – well, that was the tipping point from being an exciting curiosity to full-blown mad anticipation. Did it live up to my own hype? It sure did!

Coming 11 years after Scream 3 reconfigured its story to Hollywood and became one big in-joke (a funny one that I like much more than most, it would seem), Scream 4 returns to the Californian town of Woodsboro from the original Scream where the residents seem equally divided between those who mourn the original tragedy and those who revel in it. The anniversary of the slayings is treated like Halloween by the younger generation, sending mock telephone calls to their friends and dressing public property up in scary costumes. Hollywood turned Woodsboro’s – or more specifically, Sidney Prescott’s – tragedy into a movie named Stab and now the students of Woodsboro High host a yearly “Stabathon”, a movie marathon featuring all 7 of the Stab movies. Even the fifth one that, hilariously, somehow involves time travel.


Returning to Woodsboro is the aforementioned Sidney Prescott, touring a new self help book touting herself as “no longer a victim”. But, needless to say, her return brings about a new batch of killings, committed by somebody – or somebodies – in a Ghostface mask who uses the telephone to taunt his prey. Sidney’s cousin, Jill, and her friends appear to have become the killer’s prime targets, and along with Sheriff Dwight nee Deputy Dewey and his former Hollywood entertainment reporter wife Gale Weathers they must try and hunt down the perpetrator for as long as they can survive.

Some may say I was predisposed to liking Scream 4, but as has been proven time and time again it is usually those who are so closely tied to a franchise that will find the most at fault with a new one - just look at the Indiana Jones and Star Wars series’ for examples of that. And while Scream 4 has its issues, it succeeds through a mix of the old fashioned slasher movie conventions that the original Scream trilogy manipulated so well, as well as new twists and tricks that will surprise anybody who has watched the original trilogy enough. Just when you think nobody else can die, they do. Just when you think the filmmakers will take a break from the murdering mayhem, they don’t. Just when you think the movie has ended, it hasn’t. Long-time fans will find a lot of cherish about this new sequel, which abides by its tagline of “new decade, new rules”. Regular moviegoers who just want a few frights on their Friday night will also find plenty to satisfy, I’m sure. Gorehounds disappointed by the rather bloodless Scream 3 will rejoice.

Where Scream differs so greatly to the vast majority of horror movies is in its characters. Where most have generally anonymous actors playing stock standard roles that equate to nothing more than “heroic boyfriend” or “sassy best friend”, Scream 4, just like its predecessors, goes a long way in establishing its band of new and old cast members as a real group of friends and family. Their interactions with one another, their back and forth dialogue and secrets bubbling beneath the surface make them far more interesting and worthy of investing time in. When one dies – and to pretend they all get out alive is silly – there’s actually feelings there. When the killer (or killers) is revealed, it hits like a punch to the gut. In fact, Scream 4 works much better than Scream 2 or 3 in that regards, by having worked its characters harder and stronger (despite a much shorter, punchier running time). There are several deaths that were met with shock, surprise and near hysterical behaviour (and not just by me, I assure you). The performances are generally strong, with particular notice going to Campbell – looking so mature and beautiful, even if she’s dressed in dowdy outfits for the second half – Roberts, Hayden Panettiere, Rory Culkin and Alison Brie. And to say it doesn't feel good to see Arquette and Cox in fine form is a big fat lie. Cox especially gets several great one-liners, relishing the chance to spit foul language out of her mouth that she can't do on Cougar Town.


If I have to be critical then my displeased glare would be focused very quickly upon the opening scene. For a franchise that became famous for its typically violent prologue (remember Drew Barrymore’s untimely end 15 years ago?), Craven and Williamson have taken an incredibly big gamble with it this time and haven’t altogether succeeded. They do, however, include several great gags that go a long way to relieving the pent up pressure that 11 years between franchise instalments can produce. Elsewhere, I have to question the character of Mary McDonnell’s Kate Roberts. Written like an afterthought, acted like she’s in another movie (actually, she would fit right in with the more comically aligned Scream 3) and all but forgotten at long stretches. It’s especially disappointing for a franchise that has always gone to great lengths to make the adults as interesting and important as the teenagers. It’s also sadly quite obvious that some scenes have been heavily tinkered with, especially when you compare it to the trailers and television commercials. It’s like there’s a different film waiting for the DVD release.

And, honestly, the number of times a character places their body against a door with the killer right outside? The number of times a character walks outside to investigate a strange noise? That's a bit silly. Haven't they learnt anything?

Still, Scream 4 succeeds far more often than it falters and that’s most surely because of the direction of horror maestro Wes Craven and screenwriter Kevin Williamson. Both have done a stunning job of subverting expectations, whilst at the same time delivering on exactly what we wanted. They have given us Scream nerds what we wanted, and given Hollywood what it needed. They have shown how you do a sequel and proven that the fourth film in a franchise needn’t be a simple throwaway grab for cash. It can be relevant and necessary.

Williamson, who wrote with additional work done by Ehren Kruger and Craven, appears to have made Hollywood and this generation’s ever-churning instant news cycle his prime target. One scene in which Hayden Panettiere’s Kirby reels off a seemingly never-ending list of horror remakes is particularly telling and even mustered up an applause or two from the audience. The screenplay also has swift, if increasingly meta, jabs at the horror genre in general as well as the internet’s jagged turn from being a place of film discussion to a place of mass hysteria. There’s even a joke about the use of the word “meta”! Meanwhile, the media, in their bloodthirsty quest for the latest in breaking news get the biggest twist of the knife of all. Emma Roberts gets a moment of such pure and utter classic filmmaking that I have to hand it to Craven for having the guts to do it.


The Scream films have always been known for their references to other films and the latest is perhaps the most referential of all. The jokes on its own franchise with the Stab film-within-a-film-within-a-film-within-a-film(?) as well as footage from Scream 2 (if that makes sense) are just the beginning. Endless horror movie citations from Saw to Peeping Tom, film posters adorning the walls of nearly every room, two police officers that recall Craven’s own Last House on the Left and even recreations of other famed horror movies (one such scene that emulates the original Scream from 1996 specifically had me in fits of “oh shit!”) They never let up and even when Halloween II gets a big shout out, I couldn’t help but admire the bravura. It even gets in jokes about Facebook, Twitter and Jersey Shore without looking desperate for hip points and its handling of modern mobile phone technology is keenly done alongside the old fashioned clunky landline phones that are as iconic to these films as the Edvard Munch inspired mask.

The team behind Scream 4 have gone for broke. They know people stop caring about horror sequels after a while and the only way this was going to be any different was to take everything they had done before and turn it up to eleven. They succeeded in making a Scream for a new generation, one that is more brutal and more gory, yet still funny and entertaining. This could perhaps rank as the greatest franchise revival in cinema history and while even discussing the potential for a Scream 5 seems ridiculous given where this fourth film goes, if they show half as much ingenuity in it as they do here then it will be just as much of a must see as Scream 4. A- (although who knows where it'll sit once I've seen it five times, 20 times, 106 times...)

Scream to Scream, Scene by Scene: END CREDITS of Scream (1:40:29-1:46:29)

In this project I attempt to review the entire Scream trilogy scene by scene in chronological order. Heavy spoilers and gore throughout!



SCENE 34 (End Credits)
Length: 6mins


The end, or: Requiem for a Scream.

We've reached the end of our scene by scene dissection of Scream and while I can't say I had done so in the amount of time I had originally hoped, I'm glad I was able to finish it nonetheless. There was some who thought I'd give up after only a few scenes, but how wrong they were. Things such as the Melbourne International Film Festival and a month-long back-and-forth house-sitting expedition held up matters greatly and I ended up finishing a month behind schedule (I wrote the intro on June 23). I had anticipated that Scream would take a while because there's so much exposition to get out of the way, but then Scream 2 and Scream 3 are longer movies (120 and 116 minutes respectively compared to the 106 of Scream).

I have all but scrapped the idea of this project concluding on 14 April 2011, the release date of Scream 4, but who knows what will happen between now and then. Maybe I'll get some freakish creative wave and ride it on throughout the summer. Or, more likely, I'll sit here, my back sticking to my chair as I eat an icypole and think to myself "it's too hot to write about Sarah Michelle Gellar apparently being a bitch on set and inspiring the character of Sarah Darling!", but you never know.



I implore you to get up out of your seat (or off your bed or off the couch or whatever) and give these two men a rousing standing ovation. For reals. They deserve it.

Alas, in the tradition of Gale Weathers... back to me!

If I could do it all again what would I change? I'd do for screencaps for scene 1. To be totally honest with you guys, I hadn't intended on being so thorough as to have over 530 screencaps! If I'd know that I was going to have 66 shots alone from Tatum's death scene I definitely would have gone a bit overboard for Casey's opening sequence. You can probably guarantee that the Scream 2 opening with Jada Pinkett (do I call her that, as she was named at the time, or Jada Pinkett-Smith, which she has since changed her name to?) will feature a few more shots than Scream's. I'm not in a rhythm with how I screencap each scene so I can't exactly stop now.


I do think Soho's cover of "Whisper to a Scream", as heard over the end credits, is my favourite song from the, admittedly quite excellent, soundtrack (it's certainly a better compilation than the sequels, especially Scream 3, which was so strangely obsessed with heavy rock type music, blegh!).

I am looking forward to discussing Scream 2 with you guys. My favourite scene of the entire trilogy is found within it and, I gotta tell ya, I am looking forward to Laurie Metcalfe getting some blog love. That never happens!










I like these credit facial cards that they used. I especially like that several of them use images that I specifically mentioned as favourite shots of the individual characters. I'm looking at Arquette's so cute "she's with me!" moment and Kennedy's grape eatin' "working, thank you" reaction.

Speaking of Jamie Kennedy, why isn't he included amongst the first batch of performers who are all in alphabetical order. He's probably in it less than the others, but he is equally important.


Seriously, it bears repeating!

I don't mean to give short thrift to the rest of the production team, but I can't screencap every single credit! They're all deserving of a moment of honour though! As the credits come to their end, Dillon Dixon's "I Don't Care" plays and it's another of my favourites from the soundtrack - well, it's not on the physical soundtrack, unfortunately - that was actually written by Marco Beltrami, the score's composer.



Love this diss to "The Santa Rosa City School District Governing Board" since they forced the production to move to another town called Healdsburg to film the school sequences after they read the screenplay and decided it was too violent.


And that, they say, is that. Up next... Scream 2!

{fin}
Intro, Scene 1 Scene 2, Scene 3, Scene 4, Scene 5, Scene 6, Scene 7, Scene 8, Scene 9, Scene 10, Scene 11, Scene 12, Scene 13, Scene 14, Scene 15, Scene 16, Scene 17, Scene 18, Scene 19, Scene 20, Scene 21, Scene 22, Scene 23, Scene 24, Scene 25, Scene 26, Scene 27, Scene 28, Scene 29, Scene 30, Scene 31 Scene 32, Scene 33

Scream to Scream, Scene by Scene: SCENE 23 of Scream (1:02:28-1:05:43)

In this project I attempt to review the entire Scream trilogy scene by scene in chronological order. Heavy spoilers and gore throughout!

SCENE 23
Length: 3mins 15secs
Primary Characters: Tatum Riley and Ghostface
Pop Culture References:

• I Spit on Your Grave (Tatum jokes about the movie)
• Casper (Tatum calls the killer "Casper")
  

Oh my god you guys, y'all have no idea how much I've been dreading this day since the very day that I came up with the idea of doing this project. It's like losing a best friend (in Sidney's case, very literally). As you've surely noticed throughout this series I have a big movie crush on Rose McGowen as Tatum Riley, she's some sort of awesome super being. Granted, she got herself one of the best deaths in the entire trilogy, but there's still a pang of sadness that comes with writing about her untimely death in the cat flap of a garage.


What was it that Sidney said about "big breasted girls"? Poor Tatum. I think it's yet another facet of this movie's inherent homosexuality that we never see any naked boobage (is "boobage" a word? I think when discussing horror films it most certainly is!) in the Scream films. Because, let's face it, eeewww! :) Still, this shot is quite humourous, don't you agree? Was she walking around the party like that or did the cold air of the garage just hit her all of a sudden?


Much like how I wrote about the way Wes Craven frames the art direction so wonderfully during the Casey Becker scene, I like how this shot does the same. Showing his relatively close Tatum is to everyone else at the part, the balls that "Ghostface" (in this scene, Billy) has to do something like this at such close proximity and to add to the idea that Stu's house has a lot of doors, rooms and passageways, which is something that definitely becomes obvious during Sidney's upcoming chase sequence, but we'll get to that later.


I have nothing to say for this, but I want to take the opportunity to screencap Tatum as much as possible. Poor gal!




Tatum never saw it comin'! Stu sends to her garage, he follows and closes the door behind her to keep her locked in a room with Billy aka Ghostface. So simple.



I think this is the dangerous low-budget Wes Craven having a moment here. This shot, the way it zooms in on Tatum in her tight top and mini-skirt from behind is like a crass, exploitation film that Craven would've made in his youth, something akin to Last House on the Left.




In a way, this scene is the ultimate dissection of everything that Scream is about. It acknowledges all the cliches, it even abides by them (big-breasted girl, doors that seem to close by themselves, things falling over, cats jumping out of strange places, characters making stupid choices, etc) and yet does so in a way that is both fresh and winking. The audiences knows everything that's going on in this scene and if you're unaware of the film, watching it for the first time, you may even groan at the prospect of the cat jump scare, but it all works because then when you've calmed yourself down from the silliness of such a scare out comes the actual frights and they are legitimately scary and tense and sad. Throw in a couple of movie references like you'll read below and you've got yourself a perfect storm of Scream-isms. I knew Tatum was the best!


The lights turning out mysteriously! Another cliche that feels like it should be tired and yet when placed in the right hands - in this case Wes Craven - it's like an old joke that still gets the laughs. Everyone watching this scene by now figures "Oh, Tatum's gonna die", but unlike in Scream 3 where it seems everyone just dies by getting a knife in the back or a knife in a chest or a knife in the back and the chest, this film has an ace up its sleeve that will make you remember it. You will not forget this scene!


"Hey shitheads!"
I'm not sure if that was a very 1996 insult, but I love it. It sounds so immature and yet so Tatum; "shitheads"


Confused. "Is that you Randy?" I think Randy dug himself into a hole here with everyone thinking all the freaky stuff is him when it never was. Although I do like how in the last scene (although I didn't screencap it) they show Randy saying he's going to go get a camera (to take a photo of Gale) and then never returns. Smart.


"What movie's this from? I Spit on Your Garage?"
Definitely one of my favourite film references of the entire trilogy. When I was younger I didn't get all the references in Scream, but this one I got because I Spit on Your Grave was one of the videos I always saw when I perused the horror section at the local video stores. Of course, in 1997 I Spit on Your Grave was banned and I never actually saw it until after 2004 when the ban was lifted. I'm glad that movie was unbanned, but it's a terrible, terrible movie. Still, Tatum referencing it is a hoot. I Spit on Your Garage could be fun though!


It bugs me that Billy didn't fix his mask. It's dented on the left side of the mouth. All it needs is to be popped out, but maybe he was in a rush? Or perhaps it's just the lighting and there is nothing wrong with it.


Just looking at this shot now as I've paused it and it disturbs me more than it ever has before when it's in motion. The way Ghostface towers over Tatum is quite saddening and the angle of the camera just adds another element of strangeness to it. It doesn't feel like a natural shot, like it's unreal in some way. I don't know, I don't think I'm making sense here, but there's just something about this shot that irks me. Perhaps it's just the disappointment with knowing that Tatum dies, but this shot makes her look so helpless. Of course, she proves a better fight than some others, but helpless nonetheless.


"Oh, you wanna play psycho killer?"
*nods*
"Can I be the helpless victim?"
*nods*
"Okay, let's see. Oh no, please don't kill me mister Ghostface, I wanna be in the sequel!"

One of the most iconic moments of dialogue for the trilogy. The way Tatum acknowledges the fact that she's such a typical victim and the referencing of sequels in itself setting up the sequel that all the characters know there is going to be.


Whatta shot! Again, has a disturbing quality to it as it's frozen in time that I'd never noticed before.


Now now Tatum, it's not time to go sitting around in ugly lawn furniture.






You gotta laugh at that fourth image there. I do like that they gave Tatum a worthy fight here. It reminds me of Jenny McCarthy's death in Scream 3 which had a similar vibe, but they ruined it by having her incapable of doing anything to defend herself. More on that in, like, 5 months time! (oh gawd, don't remind me!)


If you pay close enough attention you see that Tatum reaches for the garage door button, but just as she is about to press it she notices the killer get up off the ground so she stops what she was doing and does...






...that.

(Meanwhile, can I just point out how difficult this scene is to screencap? So fast moving!)

...and then this...



...so it would seem she has the upper hand. Until...































Yes, I took all of those screencaps. I can't quite believe it myself, but I did. phew! Still, I think it warrants it, don't you agree? It's a marvellous scene for reasons I've already explained, but this specific moment is filled with so many great individual shots that I just had to show them all. My particular favourite is the one of Tatum emerging out the other side of the cat flap. It's my favourite because it just shows how close she was to getting help. If there had been one person out there vomiting their guts up then maybe she might've made it. Oh well.

I'm not going to question how her breasts go from being outside the cat flap to inside the cat flap because, I imagine, they needed to make it look like she broke her neck when if only her neck was through the cat flap then she easily could have slid back out of it. Wait, I said I wasn't going to question it! Fun fact though, Rose McGowan actually can fit through there! She tested it herself on set and discovered it was doable. Oh well.


And back to party, apparently, Ghostface goes. Giving more credence to the "it's Randy!" theory, although it's illogical as to why Billy went inside and how he got out again since... well, that's the next scene.

What a bloody tremendous scene and definitely the most sad until a certain someone in Scream 2. After all of that (67 screencaps for this one 3minute and 16second scene!), I am exhausted!!

Intro, Scene 1 Scene 2, Scene 3, Scene 4, Scene 5, Scene 6, Scene 7, Scene 8, Scene 9, Scene 10, Scene 11, Scene 12, Scene 13, Scene 14, Scene 15, Scene 16, Scene 17, Scene 18, Scene 19, Scene 20, Scene 21, Scene 22