quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

quote:

ORIGINAL: CORLEONE

Let's face facts. Horror franchises run and run and get worse and worse with each film. But Scream 4 is better than Scream 3. So I say, well done to all involved.

Better than Scream 3 is hardly the best endorsment ever.

quote:

ORIGINAL: CORLEONE

It's the best horror fourquel ever!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dpp1978
There are certainly times where calling a person a cunt is not only reasonable, it is a gross understatement.

quote:


ORIGINAL: elab49
I really wish I could go down to see Privates

quote:

ORIGINAL: Deviation

quote:

ORIGINAL: CORLEONE

It's the best horror fourquel ever!

I haven't seen it but I know that Men Behind the Sun 4 is better, Problem is, I haven't seen Men Behind the Sun 4 either.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dpp1978
There are certainly times where calling a person a cunt is not only reasonable, it is a gross understatement.

quote:


ORIGINAL: elab49
I really wish I could go down to see Privates

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dpp1978
There are certainly times where calling a person a cunt is not only reasonable, it is a gross understatement.

quote:


ORIGINAL: elab49
I really wish I could go down to see Privates

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dpp1978
There are certainly times where calling a person a cunt is not only reasonable, it is a gross understatement.

quote:


ORIGINAL: elab49
I really wish I could go down to see Privates

quote:

ORIGINAL: MI Cruise

The Scream trilogy is now regarded as modern horror classics (well maybe not the third one) and this highly awaited fourth instalment is finally here. Last year there were talks of which actors/actresses were going to be in this film and to avoid spoilers I stopped listening to this news, and was even lucky enough not to have caught any trailers, thereby going into this movie totally unaware except knowing that Kevin Williamson was back and that everyone’s favourite Scream trio would be returning.

After more than a decade we return to Woodsburo, we pick up events in 2010/11 where everything has changed, from the rules of the horror genre right down to the way we communicate with each other on social networking sites such as Facebook. The opening of the movie is a great way to get things started along with seeing the original cast which was a delight. (not having re-watched the Scream trilogy before watching this one)

One of the good things about this type of movie is that this old school horror, yes there are your torture porn and handheld cam movies but slashers is a sub-genre reserved for remakes nowadays and a new slasher movie is either rubbish or not mainstream (if it turns out to be good), watching this film just gives you a sense of nostalgia and although this may just be because it is the Scream franchise its a good feeling nonetheless and isn’t it awesome having them talking about real life horror movies in the film providing witty conversation, thanks to Kevin Williamson whose return ensures that the verbal sparring between friends in the movie is clever along with being funny.

Eventually we would have had to come to the negatives, thankfully there isn’t many. The movie moves along at a fast pace and at times this is good as it keeps the action going, however it also means it does not slow down to let us connect with these new characters and therefore like many slashers gone before we do not care when characters are eventually killed off. The movie can also be criticised for almost being a replica of Scream, there are many similarities and even though it does try and do this in a tongue in cheek way it lacks the spark and charm of the original even down to the way the mystery unfolds.

Overall this was never going to top the first two movies but it does beat the third one which is great news, I was worried that this wasn’t going to be that good, but it does it ends up winning you over.

4/5

Single Virgin Mod Candidate 2013

quote:

ORIGINAL: horribleives
To paraphrase the great man himself:

Vad3r won't go anywhere near this.

quote:

ORIGINAL: elab49

quote:

ORIGINAL: Drooch

quote:

ORIGINAL: elab49

quote:

ORIGINAL: Drooch

quote:

ORIGINAL: horribleives

quote:

ORIGINAL: Drooch
It should gain at least three stars for being a good film and a strong example of the genre, regardless of whether one likes it or not.

For the zillionth time - he didn't think it was a good film or a strong example of the genre. I can't believe you still don't get it.

From the nature of his review, which avoids critiquing this film as much as possible and spends most of his word limit with filler about other films, I have to question if he was paying attention. That's assuming he even saw the film, which I genuinely doubt. If he did, and he REALLY believes that this film deserves two stars - in which the original creative team of horror-masters Craven and Williamson sincerely attempt, and for the most part succeed, in making a contemporary update of their winning formula - amongst all the lazy dreck that Hollywood peddles (especially in the horror genre) - then he's not fit to judge this kind of film. If he'd qualified his rating with some proper critique then he could possibly be excused, but he doesn't.

Suggesting a professional writer didn't bother seeing a film he reviewed is frankly libellous. You really need to understand what an opinion is - because yours isn't worth any more than anybody elses, even if you keep rather insanely insisting it's some kind of objective fact. Which does raise the question - apart from disagreeing with him, what exactly are your qualifications to say you're right, everyone who disagrees with you is wrong and you're the arbiter of objective quality in film?

I actually enjoyed the first 3 Scream films. I know it's not accepted to enjoy 3, and it's pretty shit, but it's also mad as badshit and rather endearing in that. So I'd probably place it above 2, although I did like Laurie Metcalfe. I like Scream a lot although I've just realised it wasn't in my top 100 horrors, which is probably a little unfair.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TiKM6g-dfBo&feature=related

For you - time 2.00 onwards.

You need to understand that, aside from our subjective opinions, one can objectively measure the quality of a work

You didn't watch the clip did you? You'd be the stick in the mud up the back of the class refusing to tear the book, hoarding it to yourself and sneaking it back to your room, screaming silent revenge against those who won't plot poems on charts to objectively demonstrate which ones are good.

And if you don't think it's libellous to suggest a reviewer that is paid for reviews doesn't bother watching the films he's paid to review, making him professionally negligent and it being presumably a sackable offence, then you need to check that one in the dictionary when you eventually check up on the 'opinion' thing.

I don't do 'star ratings', so I gave an overview of my opinion of the previous films. I agree with the review. It was a poor quality horror. It was a poor quality film. And it was dull. Perhaps I didn't see the film either. Perhaps everyone else on the thread who disagrees with you didn't see the film either.

quote:

  ORIGINAL: superdan

I'm seriously starting to think Drooch is Wes Craven, or at the very least some sockpuppet from one of the production companies.


I also have my suspicions.

This does seem to be a step-change over the normal couple demanding their own is absolute for every biggish Hollywood film.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Drooch
Stop brown-nosing Empire and irrationally defending their unfocused, amateur review, and threatening those who rightly call Empire out on their laziness with hints of legal action. Small wonder the movie industry is going down the toilet with all the elab49's celebrating shit films and shit reviews, and hating on anything that strives to be better than the steaming pile of cookie-cutter dreck that Hollywood conveyor-belts out. Well done, you enemy of film.

quote:

enemy of film.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dpp1978
There are certainly times where calling a person a cunt is not only reasonable, it is a gross understatement.

quote:


ORIGINAL: elab49
I really wish I could go down to see Privates

quote:

ORIGINAL: CORLEONE

It's the best horror fourquel ever!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Drooch
and hating on anything that strives to be better than the steaming pile of cookie-cutter dreck that Hollywood conveyor-belts out.

quote:

ORIGINAL: matty_b
You have a nice face, Shifty. A face I would have a cup of tea with.

quote:

ORIGINAL: porntrooper
Shifty said it best

quote:

ORIGINAL: Drooch

quote:

ORIGINAL: elab49

quote:

ORIGINAL: Drooch

quote:

ORIGINAL: elab49

quote:

ORIGINAL: Drooch

quote:

ORIGINAL: horribleives

quote:

ORIGINAL: Drooch
It should gain at least three stars for being a good film and a strong example of the genre, regardless of whether one likes it or not.

For the zillionth time - he didn't think it was a good film or a strong example of the genre. I can't believe you still don't get it.

From the nature of his review, which avoids critiquing this film as much as possible and spends most of his word limit with filler about other films, I have to question if he was paying attention. That's assuming he even saw the film, which I genuinely doubt. If he did, and he REALLY believes that this film deserves two stars - in which the original creative team of horror-masters Craven and Williamson sincerely attempt, and for the most part succeed, in making a contemporary update of their winning formula - amongst all the lazy dreck that Hollywood peddles (especially in the horror genre) - then he's not fit to judge this kind of film. If he'd qualified his rating with some proper critique then he could possibly be excused, but he doesn't.

Suggesting a professional writer didn't bother seeing a film he reviewed is frankly libellous. You really need to understand what an opinion is - because yours isn't worth any more than anybody elses, even if you keep rather insanely insisting it's some kind of objective fact. Which does raise the question - apart from disagreeing with him, what exactly are your qualifications to say you're right, everyone who disagrees with you is wrong and you're the arbiter of objective quality in film?

I actually enjoyed the first 3 Scream films. I know it's not accepted to enjoy 3, and it's pretty shit, but it's also mad as badshit and rather endearing in that. So I'd probably place it above 2, although I did like Laurie Metcalfe. I like Scream a lot although I've just realised it wasn't in my top 100 horrors, which is probably a little unfair.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TiKM6g-dfBo&feature=related

For you - time 2.00 onwards.

You need to understand that, aside from our subjective opinions, one can objectively measure the quality of a work

You didn't watch the clip did you? You'd be the stick in the mud up the back of the class refusing to tear the book, hoarding it to yourself and sneaking it back to your room, screaming silent revenge against those who won't plot poems on charts to objectively demonstrate which ones are good.

And if you don't think it's libellous to suggest a reviewer that is paid for reviews doesn't bother watching the films he's paid to review, making him professionally negligent and it being presumably a sackable offence, then you need to check that one in the dictionary when you eventually check up on the 'opinion' thing.

I don't do 'star ratings', so I gave an overview of my opinion of the previous films. I agree with the review. It was a poor quality horror. It was a poor quality film. And it was dull. Perhaps I didn't see the film either. Perhaps everyone else on the thread who disagrees with you didn't see the film either.

quote:

  ORIGINAL: superdan

I'm seriously starting to think Drooch is Wes Craven, or at the very least some sockpuppet from one of the production companies.


I also have my suspicions.

This does seem to be a step-change over the normal couple demanding their own is absolute for every biggish Hollywood film.

Great clip, love it. Unfortunately, irrelevant to this discussion. Plotting a graph to determine the greatness of poetry is ridiculous. Stating that there are 'good films' and 'bad films' and everything in between is perfectly reasonable, especially considering that I encourage a reviewer to offer their subjective response in addition to an objective critique. At the end of the day, you're suggesting that quality cannot be measured, that objective critique is a fallacy, that there is no such thing as a spectrum of well-made to poorly-made, that there would be no point in training in any craft because becoming 'better' is impossible since only subjective opinions exist - that the ballet dancer that lurches around and falls flat on her face is no poorer at her craft than the prima ballerina who has trained for a decade and mastered every manoeuvre with precision and passionate expression. You're unbelievably full of shit.

Stop brown-nosing Empire and irrationally defending their unfocused, amateur review, and threatening those who rightly call Empire out on their laziness with hints of legal action. Small wonder the movie industry is going down the toilet with all the elab49's celebrating shit films and shit reviews, and hating on anything that strives to be better than the steaming pile of cookie-cutter dreck that Hollywood conveyor-belts out. Well done, you enemy of film.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shifty Bench

quote:

ORIGINAL: Drooch
and hating on anything that strives to be better than the steaming pile of cookie-cutter dreck that Hollywood conveyor-belts out.

Did Scream 4 try that? If it did, then epic fail. I admire your passion but seriously, the movie is not worth all this shite. . Seriously.

And I liked Scream 4.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Drooch



Yeah, of course it strove to be better - much of the film is a commentary on lazy remakes, reboots, and elaborate idea-starved sequels.

And to be clear, because there seems to be some misconception here - I'm not saying that Scream 4 is a great film, but I am saying that it does not deserve two stars.

quote:

ORIGINAL: vad3r

quote:

ORIGINAL: MI Cruise

The Scream trilogy is now regarded as modern horror classics (well maybe not the third one) and this highly awaited fourth instalment is finally here. Last year there were talks of which actors/actresses were going to be in this film and to avoid spoilers I stopped listening to this news, and was even lucky enough not to have caught any trailers, thereby going into this movie totally unaware except knowing that Kevin Williamson was back and that everyone’s favourite Scream trio would be returning.

After more than a decade we return to Woodsburo, we pick up events in 2010/11 where everything has changed, from the rules of the horror genre right down to the way we communicate with each other on social networking sites such as Facebook. The opening of the movie is a great way to get things started along with seeing the original cast which was a delight. (not having re-watched the Scream trilogy before watching this one)

One of the good things about this type of movie is that this old school horror, yes there are your torture porn and handheld cam movies but slashers is a sub-genre reserved for remakes nowadays and a new slasher movie is either rubbish or not mainstream (if it turns out to be good), watching this film just gives you a sense of nostalgia and although this may just be because it is the Scream franchise its a good feeling nonetheless and isn’t it awesome having them talking about real life horror movies in the film providing witty conversation, thanks to Kevin Williamson whose return ensures that the verbal sparring between friends in the movie is clever along with being funny.

Eventually we would have had to come to the negatives, thankfully there isn’t many. The movie moves along at a fast pace and at times this is good as it keeps the action going, however it also means it does not slow down to let us connect with these new characters and therefore like many slashers gone before we do not care when characters are eventually killed off. The movie can also be criticised for almost being a replica of Scream, there are many similarities and even though it does try and do this in a tongue in cheek way it lacks the spark and charm of the original even down to the way the mystery unfolds.

Overall this was never going to top the first two movies but it does beat the third one which is great news, I was worried that this wasn’t going to be that good, but it does it ends up winning you over.

4/5

But does Alison Brie take her clothes off?

quote:

ORIGINAL: sanchia

quote:

ORIGINAL: Drooch



Yeah, of course it strove to be better - much of the film is a commentary on lazy remakes, reboots, and elaborate idea-starved sequels.

And to be clear, because there seems to be some misconception here - I'm not saying that Scream 4 is a great film, but I am saying that it does not deserve two stars.

And essentially it does it by being all of the above. It is not bad but it fails to offer quality it offers mediocrity which is a shame considering the pedigree of the original. I would agree in my opinion it is not a two starred and just scrapes a 3.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Groovy Mule

I think you are on extremely shaky ground in suggesting that the reviewer reviewed the film without watching it.  By all means criticise the writing or the conclusions but to make allegations like that is plain wrong.

I must admit I don't quite understand all of your arguments.  You seem to suggest that there is an objective standard of "quality" but then refer it to screenwriting, acting and direction, all of which are subjective.  You also seem to suggest that where something is a "quality" film that it should automatically get 3 stars - I don't agree and in a 5 star rating system gives very little room for manoeuvre.

quote:

ORIGINAL: elab49

The key, though, is you'd say - that's the point of this thread, to give your opinion and argue the toss where it conflicts with others. That's part of the fun of the review threads. But at no point does any one opinion get to say it's my way or the highway, thou shalt have no other opinion but mine and any who do are clearly corrupt, incompetent, idiots, frauds, didn't see the film or some other form of nincompoop.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dpp1978
There are certainly times where calling a person a cunt is not only reasonable, it is a gross understatement.

quote:


ORIGINAL: elab49
I really wish I could go down to see Privates