Wing of Ghostface - 237 - Scream VI

For longtime fans, Scream VI is a satisfying, blood-soaked entry that balances legacy and reinvention. It’s not perfect, but it’s bold, entertaining, and proves that Ghostface still has plenty of life—and knives—left.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:03):
Welcome to the ned Party. Welcome back to House Light.
It's our director discussion show here on the Nerd Party Network.

(00:25):
This week, we're concluding the wing of ghost Face with
Scream six from twenty twenty three, the sequel to the requel,
directed again by Matt and Tyler. The franchise moves to
New York and college. Could it be more cliche? I'm
Darren Fbi Moser, and I'm joined again by my friends
John Man, seeking roommate Mills, and the inventor of the

(00:47):
telescoping ladder, Tristan Riddell. All bets are off as we
talk about Scream six or Scream v I as it were.

Speaker 2 (00:58):
Here, and I'm gonna throw are the flag here first? Okay, yeah, yeah,
blah blah, daring to me, this is our first time
watching and all that sort of thing. But they go
to the Trouble of five, and we had this whole
discussion last week of like, oh, well they drop the
fab because they didn't want people to feel like they
had to see the previous storm, and we're like, well
why would you name it screaming? And then for this
one they're like a screw it six is back on there. Well,

(01:20):
why did you skip what I understand, But the thing
is you re establish You're like, we're just calling the
fifth one scream so that we don't have numbers involved,
and then this one's screamed six. Well, then you just
completely negated the whole reason to drop the.

Speaker 1 (01:35):
Five in the last one. Okay, this is made by
film people, and film people are also responsible for the
spines of DVD sets. Have you ever looked at a
series of you know, season one, season two, season but
you're not count you're not counting around. It moves around,
and I'm going to talk about it.

Speaker 2 (01:56):
You're not countering my point. It's all the more reason just.

Speaker 1 (02:00):
There's no reason less, there's no reason. Yeah, I I
I would rather it have been a six without the
Roman numeral as I hate Roman numerals. But I don't know,
I don't have a better title for it than Scream six.
So but yes, as you as you John scream loud,
Scream louder. Yeah, they needed to start doing the secondary titles.
It was for that.

Speaker 2 (02:20):
If you look at.

Speaker 3 (02:21):
Halloween, you know, like that's what they Yeah, that's what
did the Star Trek, That's what they did with Halloween.
It was like Halloween, and then it was like, okay,
so now we got to call it Halloween twenty eighteen,
then Halloween Kills and Halloween Ends. You know, if you're
going to do it from New York or something. Yes, Oh,
I freaking love that, Darren, you said I ironically, I
say it with conviction, this game.

Speaker 1 (02:42):
Live from New York, right, but very very yeah.

Speaker 2 (02:47):
But then I'll pile on with what you talked about there, Darren,
where it's they used just numbers previously and now they're
going ahead and now it's the v I And I'm like,
so you're numbering isn't even consistent.

Speaker 1 (03:00):
Who the hell's running the.

Speaker 2 (03:00):
Show over here? It does have a franchise by this point,
figure this out.

Speaker 1 (03:04):
I don't know, but you know what, in this way,
it's just like a franchise, because franchises aren't consistent. So this,
like you said, John, this is our first time watching this.
Uh it's again. I told Tristen it felt weird talking
about a movie set only a matter of years ago.
Usually our things are well, checking the notes, they're from

(03:25):
the nineties. We podcast a lot from the nineties. I
have the sets to back that up. But so again,
was scream just not really something on your radar, John,
Was this not something you were It didn't have the
draw to pull you into theaters because I know you didn't,
because neither of us watched Scream twenty twenty two in theaters,

(03:49):
so I went on the docket.

Speaker 2 (03:51):
I think it's just, you know, it was just consistency
for my sake, because before we started the series, I
had stopped it too. I hadn't moved past that. So
by the time they get to six, I'm definitely not
gonna bother with anything. I'm like, Yeah, no, I tapped
out a long time ago. Guys, I'm good and so
you know, I mean, it's fine that they kept going,
but I just I wasn't there. I didn't care, all right.

Speaker 1 (04:14):
But on the other side, Tristan, you watched twenty two
in theaters? Was it getting you re rehyped for the
screen franchise? Were you looking forward to this March tenth
release day? Gosh, that's weird, but sure.

Speaker 3 (04:32):
I can't remember if I saw. I don't think I
saw Scream twenty twenty two in theaters. Yeah, I honestly
have no memory of it. I don't know if I
saw it in theaters because like, as you guys know
and as the fans know, I'm a gigantic Scream fan.

Speaker 2 (04:47):
But it just.

Speaker 3 (04:49):
I'm one of those lazy people where it takes a
lot to get me to the theater. It takes a lot,
especially nowadays, And so I didn't see it like I
was excited for it, because you know, I liked Scream
twenty two. I liked it even if it has its flaws,
Like I was, you know, we talked about it last week,
you know, like it's I think it's good. It reinvigorates

(05:10):
the franchise, but it's really messy and has some things
against it. But at the same time, I was like,
I like this cast, like this is a good cast,
Like I was interested to see where it was moving forward.
And when I saw the trailer for this one, I
was like, yes, I'm I'm sold. I was immediately sold
with the trailer where it was on the subway and

(05:32):
it was during Halloween, and it was set in New
York and totally not Montreal at all.

Speaker 4 (05:40):
New York, not rely, no, not even a little bit.

Speaker 1 (05:43):
No, No, that's a good point. And I really did
like the subway scene. I think that's a quintessential New
York location. You know they hit that, they hit Central
Park a little bit, but yeah, it so yeah. So
going into this one for me not knowing anything about it,
new we had the Now we have a name for them,

(06:04):
which almost feels like a reason they should die. But
you know, we have what the Fab four, the Final
four and four four four, the Core four. That's it.
I know it rhymed somewhere, but the Core four and
they all survive. Spoilers alert, we don't say spoiler here
on House Slights because you really should have watched it

(06:25):
before listening to a podcast about a movie.

Speaker 2 (06:27):
Right, Why would you be listening to us talk about
if you hadn't seen it. That's the that's the core
four question, right.

Speaker 1 (06:33):
That is the core for that's going to become a
thing now watch. But I like the fact that the
Core four survived. I think that's a nice I mean,
you know, a lot of people survive stabbings a little
more than they should in general in these movies, like
a lot there'd be a little bit more bleeding out
in the real world. But hey, not not that too.

Speaker 2 (06:56):
Bad at the very least. See, this is where I
will nitpick a little bit, is at the very least,
and it wasn't as pronounced after the second one, but
they at least gave Dewey sort of a lifelong condition
he had to deal with the nerve damage that was
introduced from being stabbed in the first one.

Speaker 1 (07:18):
Stay.

Speaker 2 (07:20):
Yeah, but I mean it's like it's one of those
things where it's like it stuck with him. And yet
I don't remember all of their names, but boy twin
he Cha has absolutely no lingering effects that are visible
from you know. I mean, he he suffered what should
have killed him, and it's great that he survived, obviously,

(07:43):
but not even a limp, not even a oh it's
gonna rain my knees acting up, nothing, not even anything.

Speaker 3 (07:51):
Was the only thing that we got was in Tara's
scar on her hand. That's the only thing that we
saw that was kind of referencing the past injuries, and
once again in proper scream fashion, like when we see
Mendy show up at the very end. Okay, so like like, well, Chad,

(08:11):
Chad is Chad again should be dead?

Speaker 1 (08:14):
Should not just should be dead? Yeah, but like Dewey.

Speaker 4 (08:17):
Dead, Okay, he was ravaged and then he miraculously survives
and then Mindy who is stabbed and then twisted in
the gut, runs up to him at the end, like
she didn't even look like she has a bandage on
her that she was even at the hospital.

Speaker 2 (08:33):
She had a band She had a light bandage on
underneath her her belly shirt. And I was like, oh yeah,
I mean, yes, you can't help, but be like, well,
I mean, let's give them points that they bandaged her
instead of it being over the.

Speaker 1 (08:46):
Clothing this time.

Speaker 2 (08:47):
They love doing that. But additionally bandage. But additionally there's
you know, once again getting to how hospitals work. Oh,
I'm going to run out of the hospital. Oh no,
I'm sorry. There's a staff that will prevent you from
from leaving injury.

Speaker 1 (09:01):
Like we said the line, no one could stop her.
So it's all good. She just shows up at the
last moment, right hospital staff, God turn onto a knife.
She got stabbed in the gut. Guts are serious, guys,
I don't think she.

Speaker 3 (09:16):
Got stabbed in the gut and stabbed in the back,
stabbed in the gut, stamped in the back and acted
like they didn't happen. And then at the very end,
so you know, she walks off into the sunset.

Speaker 2 (09:28):
The arm in the sling. That's right, the old movie Cheat.

Speaker 3 (09:32):
And that was a thing though that I was so
surprised by. I was like, wait, she was stabbed in
the back and the gut, I.

Speaker 1 (09:37):
Think, slink. They also cut her shoulder, I think, But
well she fell, she also fell oh okay, okay, yeah,
but they cut her because remember when they're well, one
of the times they're running, they go around the corner
and she runs into the far wall and she winces
because she hit the arm again that had been cut.
We did see the scar from the eye lady on

(10:00):
her gut, so that would be was still there. But yeah,
I mean, guys, we don't come to screen movies for
realism of stabbing wounds.

Speaker 2 (10:09):
I I I understand, but it's cathartic to get it
out every so often because we.

Speaker 3 (10:14):
Have we have to mention it, we have to talk
about it. But that's why we're talking about it at
the top of the show.

Speaker 1 (10:18):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (10:18):
But but it's it's also like it's it's it's sort
of a pick a lane thing for me though, because
you're supposed to be this is a real world horror movie.
It's like, what are your You always love to say
this Darren, what are your rules? They're playing by action
movie rules, right, they're playing by stuff I saw. Yeah, yeah, and.

Speaker 5 (10:40):
That's john he did. Yeah, we're gonna walk past it.
We're gonna walk fast it. Dude, he did survive. Okay,
that's he saw. We're gonna walk past that.

Speaker 1 (10:52):
But Johnny Kane gets like run through the ringer and
the fact that he's still like McClain.

Speaker 3 (10:58):
Cain is the is the politician well and Vietnam War
stand I told you Darren stands by it. It's true
either that is entirely accurate. Yes, yes, yes, that's sorry McLain.
I have to say it like a clan. She's the

(11:19):
most McLean of the moment.

Speaker 1 (11:22):
But yes, action movie, action movie star. So with this movie,
you're they kind of from the beginning, they're throwing out
the rules. You know, anyone is a suspect. Although I
feel like this movie is the one where they act
the most smart, like literally trusting nobody. Like the fact

(11:45):
that the you know, hot hot shirtless guy whatever I
think that was his name, you know, it was sent
away at the end Bravo, Like that is a good idea.
Now granted, you you know, I think I like the
fact that you know, the FBI wasn't the bad guy
in the end, but they do lead you to believe
that for a moment, which is you know, true screen, which.

Speaker 2 (12:08):
Is a red herring. I don't like the way that
they did. I would have preferred them to leave Dermott
mulrooney from instead of hearing him say in the police station,
look up the file on that FBI lady, that that
was intended to fool us. It was not intend right.

(12:28):
He shows up at the end and says, I did
my research and I found out she's fake. No, he's lying.
We're left just as in the dark as to who's
telling the truth on that one.

Speaker 3 (12:38):
So that actually made me think that he wasn't lying.
The first time I watched the movie, I was like, oh,
maybe she I mean, like, maybe she is suspended plausible.

Speaker 1 (12:48):
It became at least y, which was I think the
whole goal was to make it make you, as the viewer,
doubt for a moment of oh yeah, people who are
around this stuff do kind of crack up, so that's
not outside the realm of possibility.

Speaker 3 (13:02):
I don't think I ever thought she was the killer,
even when he said that it was just like, oh
she is. Maybe she's a little unhinged, maybe she became
obsessed that kind of thing, But I never really thought
she was a killer.

Speaker 2 (13:15):
Question. By the way, the movie, the old movie theater
that's turned into a scream shrine, I thought it was
a neat concept, that was a neat idea. But just
to make sure I'm tracking, so Richie had all that
stuff back at home and the dad transported it to
New York with him.

Speaker 1 (13:39):
I think he had some sort of shrine, and I
think the dad like basically grew it to what it was,
because that would have been how they got access to,
you know, the screen masks, which, like they say, are evidence,
you know, those don't aren't just laying around. So yeah,
that part they kind of spoke really quickly about. But

(14:01):
my impression was that, yeah, he had started it, but
the dad and the siblings in their quote unquote grief,
you know, basically built it to what it should have been,
you know, right, but who knows. It was hard to
say it could have been all made by him, but
I don't know. That's yeah.

Speaker 2 (14:21):
So you know what though, I mean, we're talking about
the killers, we're talking about the reveal and everything I'm
curious with you, guys, how effective did you find that
opening of the Blind Date who winds up being you know,
a killer and then the killer winds up being killed
by the real killer.

Speaker 1 (14:39):
Like, I.

Speaker 3 (14:41):
Loved it. I freaking loved it. I was sold immediately.
It was the moment when he because it's a very
classic intro, you know, like, oh, you know, like the
pretty young girl is is on her own and you
know she's going to die, and she does die, and
you're like, okay, you're following the formula. Then all of

(15:01):
a sudden, ghost Face takes off his mask. Yeah, you know,
you're you're you're blown away. You're just like, wait, why
is this weird? This doesn't happen. Why is this happening?
And it's kind of like that moment and force awakens
when Finn takes off his helmet. You're like, oh, we've
never seen that before. That's crazy, Like this is kind
of takes.

Speaker 1 (15:19):
His helmet off and you're like, whoa, oh, we're doing
no helmets.

Speaker 3 (15:22):
Okay, yeah, uh it's so And then to have it
revealed later on that like, oh, well, these are copycats
and a ghost face is preventing other ghost face from
doing what they want to do. It really makes sense
because every ghost face is a copycat. Every single ghost
face is a copycat. And so this kind of answers

(15:46):
the question of what if you know, multiple people had
the same idea, and this this answers.

Speaker 1 (15:53):
That ghost face cells happening and one cell kills the
other cell, which is kind of cool.

Speaker 2 (16:00):
Yeah, Okay, see I got the impression with the with
the resolution at the end that they all knew each other,
and it was basically just like it was doing away
with the idea that there was any honor among thieves,
basically that you don't.

Speaker 1 (16:16):
Know each other because they yeah, they they weren't connected
at least a little bit. No, I think you're right now.

Speaker 2 (16:22):
I know I could be wrong, but because the thing is,
I'm trying to remember the mechanics of it was there
was the shrine.

Speaker 1 (16:28):
And connection was that they put it refrigerator body in
their names, and that's how put it in their names.
That doesn't nessily mean they knew about it.

Speaker 2 (16:37):
True, I figured they knew each other in some way
about what message. Either way, I still think that it
does away with the idea of honor among thieves because
he's getting freaked out because he believes that the guy
that he does know has gone bad on him. And
I like that idea where he suddenly realizes, oh, this

(16:58):
was stupid to begin with, right you know that.

Speaker 1 (17:01):
I mean, once they're on the other end, they're like, oh,
I regret this. Suddenly it's not fun anymore when you
don't have power, and that's you know, that's a good dynamic.
I will also give you know, Tony REVELRII a lot
of credit because I thought he was extremely effective in
that opening. I really liked the way he played the

(17:22):
character and the way you saw how it's just how
demented he was without being loopy about it, Like you
could see a sociopath which he is behaving fine in
public and just you know, he's just killed somebody. And
then he's talking with Terry and he's like, hey, what's up.

(17:43):
You know, hey, oh, try to get your sister out there.
You know, Like to him, there's no emotional backwash of
the fact that he just murdered somebody.

Speaker 2 (17:51):
It's just there. He's a true sociopath.

Speaker 1 (17:54):
And and in a way, that was what made that conversation.
It's the normal opening phone conversation, but instead one of
them is a ghost face copycat, which honestly something very
new that we had not seen and done very well.
I think, like you said, Tristan, it was a great hook,
like you know, like you're like, Okay, buckle up, this

(18:17):
one's going to be a little different. Obviously, there's still
the formula, but it is not nearly as as.

Speaker 3 (18:23):
Bad it Darren. I want to ask you about the
formula because this is the sequel to the requel. So
this is kind of like, this is the Scream two
of the new ones, and it's takes place at a college,
and just like the second one did, and you have
a father, you have you have a parent who is

(18:46):
killing because of the death of a child, and you
have this core group of friends who went to college together,
some new some from Wardsborough. And but yet there's a
lot of things that are different. You know, there's like
some of the things that we've already mentioned. Did you
think it was too close to Scream two or did
you think it was just right or was it not?

(19:09):
Did it not pay homage enough? What did you think
about the similarities between Scream six and Scream two.

Speaker 1 (19:15):
Yeah, no, that's a great question. I think overall, They
did a really good job of revisiting but doing it
in new enough way. I mean, sequels are in a
possible formula to get right to appease everybody, because you
have to really find that balance of oh, it's similar
enough to still feel like a Scream movie, but different

(19:38):
enough that give me something fresh and it's like, oh,
man walking that tightrope or ladder as it were. But
I think they did a good job. I think the
core four is the big difference, the fact that once
ghost Face was in their house, it's them for trying

(19:58):
to get through as their are peeling away all of
the new and ancillary characters from before, the girlfriends and
the roommates and the extras, and you know, they're the
ones that are dying, and you know it's not our heroes.
And that's different than the early screen movies where it

(20:19):
is all about Sydney. It's all about you know, the
very very small group. It's a bigger group, which I
think works.

Speaker 2 (20:29):
Yeah, I mean, that's that's sort of the thing where
I will come at it again, same criticism I had
last time, of there's no this time. I won't lay
it solely on on Brera, but the script itself. There's
no focus character like Sydney, and I honestly think that, yes,

(20:53):
we're trying to do different things. This is a different era,
this is blah blah blah all that stuff. But even
The Avenger had Iron Man as their sort of core
character that everything else revolved around. And I don't get
a sense of anybody coalescing around anyone. I think there's

(21:13):
more coalescing around Sam this time than there was the
first time around. I will agree it definitely is more, Yeah,
but I don't think there's enough. There's not enough of
a gravitic pull toward that main character. And I'm not
going to blame her for it this time. I think
it's a lack of focus on the part of the script.
I think that there were certain opportunities they had to

(21:34):
narrow the focus, and for instance, her dealing with the
Mission Impossible Therapist as I'll call him, was. I thought
they were going to have more with that. It would
have been interesting to have her going through more with
him to do basically to keep it around there, to

(21:57):
reframe a couple of things. I think that there are
certain aspects that you know, you guys, feel free to
tell me. I'm completely wrong or whatever, But I honestly
think there are points where this movie can't get out
of its own way, a lot like other second movies
in a new trilogy. And I'll actually pick on the

(22:19):
Halloween New Trilogy this time, where when we got to
Halloween Kills, there were interesting things and neat ideas that
they had there, and then as it went on, you
just got this sense of they didn't quite know how
to write themselves out of certain corners, and so they
took the first available exit out of that corner. And

(22:41):
it's not necessarily a satisfying one. You know, am I
way off base? Did you guys get the same sense?

Speaker 1 (22:48):
I think, you know, being a more modern movie and
being an ensemble movie, not so on a huge ensemble,
but it is written more for the group than for
the individual. So in a way, like I agree with
what you said where it felt it coalesced a little
more on Sam, but I didn't mind the level of

(23:11):
coalescing in general, because I'm like, that's just what this
These movies are the you know, the twenty twenty on,
It's going to be the group, and so I wasn't
looking for it to be the final girl, you know,
and all of that. So maybe I wasn't disappointed because
my expectations were met in.

Speaker 2 (23:31):
What we got. Sure, I get that.

Speaker 3 (23:35):
I think that. I mean, you're not wrong that there's
a definite lack of a Sydney. There's not a Sydney
replacement in here, because I think once again, you know,
they're trying to say it's Sam, but it's not, you know,
because we have Sam, we have we have Tarrow, we
have Gail, we have like they took all of you know,
Curry and spread her over multiple people. Yes they did,

(23:59):
because I think they wanted to get Nev Campbell to
come back for this one. They wanted her to be
a focus of this of this movie, but they wanted
her to take less money than she did in twenty
twenty two. And Nev Campbell's just like hah no, and
she so she didn't show up. I mean, and more
power to her. I mean, like I think, like Matthew

(24:20):
Lillard wrote on social saying, like, do you think Tom
Cruise would take less money for Maverick five?

Speaker 2 (24:28):
Right, I'll go all the way back to the third
Godfather movie. Devaal was like, you should pay me as
much as Pacino and Keaton and Paramount was like, no,
we'll pay you half as much, and it was like, great,
have a fun time without me, guys. And that's the
reason we don't get Tom Hagen back in the third
Godfather film, because somebody made a bad financial decision.

Speaker 3 (24:51):
And with the lack like you feel the lack of
Tom Hagen, oh my gosh, yes, immensely. And Godfather Part three,
I don't particul feel the lack of Sydney in this one.

Speaker 1 (25:02):
I don't know where you would have put her.

Speaker 2 (25:04):
I think I think they did a better job of
not having Sydney than the Third Godfather did of not
having Tom Hagen. I agree with you on that because
there's so much going on that I am willing to
I think you said it best, Aaron. Where was she

(25:26):
going to be? There was?

Speaker 1 (25:28):
They nearly had room for Gail, and that was just
enough for me. I think it's like you passed the torch.
To have her come back would have been to hand
it back, and it's like, why do that keep moving forward?

Speaker 3 (25:39):
I mean yeah, because they were all shoehorned in besides
Dewey in the last one, like Gail and Sidney were
very much shoehorned in. They did not need to be
in that one. And honestly, even though I think the
scene where Gail is attacked is a really good scene,
I feel like we didn't really need Gail in this
one either.

Speaker 2 (25:58):
No, well, I agree three with you one hundred percent.
We did not need Gail. I think that having Gail
in it actually works against the movie because we would
have had more time with Kirby if Gail had not
been in there, and that would have been to the
benefit of the movie to have more time with Kirby.

Speaker 3 (26:16):
And Kirby should have been the new legacy character.

Speaker 2 (26:19):
Yes, like she should have been that.

Speaker 3 (26:21):
Middle of the road. And I say that not as
a knock, but like she she joined in in the
middle of the franchise. I know it's not the exact middle,
but you know what I'm saying, yep, And continues on
where Gail and Dewey and Sydney are like they two
of them get their happy ending.

Speaker 2 (26:40):
I will also go ahead and throw out there that
they're completely wrong that the best Knight Marrion elm Street
movie is actually Night Maaron elm Street three Dream Warriors.

Speaker 1 (26:50):
But that's just me. So I was just say. That
scene cracked me up because as they're doing it, I'm like,
I feel like this is so predictable what they're gonna say.
I bet you she's gonna say game recognizes game. And
then she said, and like, oh my gosh.

Speaker 3 (27:05):
That see that scene was a little iroll.

Speaker 1 (27:06):
It was a little iroll, But yes, Kristin, I wanted
to ask you, so the Killers, there's three Killers guys
or something shaking it up, But how do you feel
in this movie as far as the choices of the
Killers make to maneuver our heroes into that final kill box?

(27:29):
Do you think did they make smart decisions or where
they're glaring plot holes? I have my opinion, but I'm
curious yours. Do you feel like it made sense? How
because obviously they're pulling the strings a lot in this
did that make sense?

Speaker 3 (27:48):
I really liked the Quinn take back. I think it
was it made sense because of mulroney's character being in
law enforcement, like he was able to kind of manipulate
things in order to make that plausible. I think it
was like the The Billy reveal amped up to eleven,
which I really appreciate. I think that, uh, the the

(28:12):
Ethan thing was fine, you know, like I I didn't
really feel one way or the other about it. Where
it was cool that Mindy didn't trust Ethan because I
really liked where she's just when she like did that
gesture where she's she you know, two fingers and say
like I'm looking at you, you know, like I see you,
I see you, Villain, I see you, and then she's

(28:34):
just like crap, I'm always wrong, and then she's revealed
to be to be right. I I liked that, So
I liked that aspect of it. Where it was it
was a lot of misdirection. There was a lot of
really well done misdirection. The It's it's hard because this
type of reveal where an entire family isn't on it,

(28:54):
Like this has to be the most messed up biological
family where you can convince that you're a father and
can convince your kids to be psychos too, or they're
all psychos.

Speaker 2 (29:09):
You know.

Speaker 3 (29:09):
It's one of those things that's hard. I'm not saying
it's bad, but it's hard to do that at the
very last ten minutes of a movie when that story
probably needs about thirty minutes.

Speaker 2 (29:24):
It's very Texas Chainsaw Massacre in terms of like the
whole family is in on the bit.

Speaker 3 (29:31):
But you're in the element, yeah, of the Texas Chainsaw,
You're in your basis element.

Speaker 2 (29:36):
You're absolutely right. I'm not discounting what you're saying, but
I'm saying, like the whole family thing, I'm like, I
get what they're going for, and that's my that's what
I'm getting at. What I'm saying, the movie can't get
out of its own way is just like all of
these other middle in the New Trilogy movies. They overthink

(29:56):
so much and as a result, things get flunky, things
get jammed together, and that reveal at the end instead
of me going oh wow, I sat there and I
saw the reveal and I was like, oh okay, like
it was. And then when they threw on top of
their oh no, a graeving father can get away with
swapping out the cadaver of what is supposedly dead, I'm like, Okay,

(30:21):
we're going like we're going like full on insane. Okay,
so we're not obeying any rules of reality at all here.
I get that, all right, fine, but then it just
the payoff of the sequence at the end is not
worth that big reveal, Like they're there. There there's no suspense,

(30:43):
there's no shock, it's just oh, that's okay, like shrug.
I didn't I didn't feel any like impact from that reveal.
It was more of a oh, all right. It just
didn't land with me at all.

Speaker 1 (30:58):
And in a way, we also kind of should have
seen it coming, because if this is the spiritual successor
to Screen two, which famously has you know Billy's mom,
you know where he's yelling it, this is literally like
Ritchie's dead, Like there's basically that same vibe is what
they're going for. But the problem is you're in the

(31:20):
sixth movie, not the second movie. And so it's just
I mean, I don't envy having to write another screen
movie and trying to recapture that magic again and again
and again, and you're not gonna always bat a thousand
and so that I see it that way, I think.

Speaker 3 (31:38):
For me, I think the best thing about the reveal
for me personally, and I felt it was like I
mentioned before the Quinn reveal, like bringing her back. I
was like, oh, that's cool, and just seeing two ghost
faces ghost faces ghost yasi, I don't ghost faces. Seeing
two ghost faces on the screen at the same time,

(31:59):
you know, just blew my little mind because we'd never
seen that before and I know that's really simple, but
yet it was effective. But then also saying that there
was three killers instead, and that's the only way it
would have worked. It's the only way that this much
of misdirection would have worked, as if there was three
of them, not two of them. And it's you know,
when you go back and rewatch it, it's really fun,

(32:22):
you know, just like with the fourth one and the
third one, not the third one, but like just like
with the fourth one and the last one, going back
and trying to figure out, you know, who was who
and which one is which, but this one's even more
convoluted in trying to figure that out.

Speaker 1 (32:37):
But yeah, right, because like Gail Weathers, I mean, yeah,
because the dad is at the park and the brother
is in the van, so it has to be the
daughter because there's no one else that could be across
town at that moment. So yeah, that is one of
the fun aspects of the screen movies, is the rewatch
where you can try to because they never cheatd there.

(32:59):
I mean, if there's two or three, like, there's always
one of them is doing it and it's never like
it's impossible that there's a ghost face there because both
are on the screen. So what do you think of that? John?
I just.

Speaker 2 (33:13):
I was just frustrated by the movie honestly by that
point because I didn't I didn't I didn't wind up
again invested. I don't want to restate like how it
didn't really have an impact for me, But it was
more one of those things where when the dad is revealed,

(33:33):
I sort of you know, you go back to the beginning,
and my reaction was Okay, well, he's probably involved in
some way, but I just didn't know that he was
going to be Richie's dad sort of thing. And then
when they're they're trying to throw the Red Herring Wars like, hey,
look up the FBI person, my reaction wasn't oh, it
could be Kirby. It was Okay, what was the angle here?

(33:57):
And I think that gets to what you're saying Darren,
where it's like, oh, I don't envy writing a screen movie,
because by this point in the franchise, it's like what
are you going to throw at me? Where I'm not
going to look at it skeptically and say yeah, okay whatever, Sure, yeah, like,
that's why I.

Speaker 1 (34:12):
Being suspicious of the characters as they are of each other,
because literally, anybody I'm not.

Speaker 2 (34:17):
Being but I'm not being suspicious of the character so
much as not trusting the screenwriters or the directors. At
this point, I feel like they're just lying to me
and lying to me badly in such way where it's like,
I don't feel like you're you're lying, You're the magician's trick.
Isn't playing for me the same way. That's one reason

(34:38):
why I love the opening of it so much, is
it was what you were saying earlier, Tristan. He pulls
off the mask in the beginning, I'm like, oh, oh cool, okay,
this is completely wild movie, right, and his friend, his
friend calls and he's like his friend is screwing with him,
and I'm like, oh wow, his friend is going to

(35:00):
betray him. Oh wait, it's not the front. Oh that's cool.
You know, like this whole layered thing. I just don't
think it ever delivers on that promise.

Speaker 1 (35:09):
And I think he does all that up in the
first ten minutes and then yes, it was a normal
screen movie after that.

Speaker 2 (35:14):
And again I'll go back and I'll throw this at
Halloween kills, same sort of thing where they suddenly found
a way after the last movie. You know, at the
end of Halloween twenty eighteen, it felt like a finish
where you said, oh wow, okay, they came back and
they made a real Halloween two or three, depending on

(35:38):
your point of view at this time, and they actually
close the deal. There's no way he's getting out of this.
I'm happy, it's great. And then they really cleverly find
a way to get Michael Myers out. I'm sorry, the
shape when he's wearing mask. They get the shape out
at the end, and then he goes on this killing
spree that's stretched. It's not as well done as the
opening of this movie. And then it just that Goodwill

(36:01):
just starts getting eroded quicker and quicker through the movie,
until at the end, I'm sitting there saying, can we
just wrap this up? Guys, like I just it's just
this one's a tough one for me because I want
to be forgiving for it, because I think that some
of the stuff I talked about last time, where I
thought that the direction was weird in terms of, you know,

(36:24):
it felt handheld and then locked off, and it didn't
feel like it had chosen a clear visual style in
terms of how it was shot. This one, I think
looks beautiful. I think this looks gorgeous.

Speaker 3 (36:37):
I was going to ask you about that, John, because
so this is the last two films were shot digitally
and because the previous four were shot on film. But
the main difference between the two that were shot digitally
is this one is the first scream film to be
shot on spherical lenses. They did not use an anamorphic lens, okay,

(36:59):
And so it kind of gives you know, like when
we when you see an anamorphic lens, you very much
you feel the texture of it, the feeling the look
is very cinematic, and with shooting digitally and on spherical
it makes things look a little bit closer to the eye,
like like colors are represented a little bit better, like

(37:21):
shapes and textures are are a little bit more lifelike.
What did you did you notice that? Did you guess
whether it was subconscious or consciously? What did you think
about that difference?

Speaker 2 (37:31):
No, I mean I immediately, if I were to compare
the two, I thought that I thought everything looked richer.
I thought everything looked just it felt more real. I
guess you could say it felt I felt like I
was alive in there with them. The last one, the
lighting felt like a movie. It looked like a movie.

(37:52):
And then the way that they shot different stuff, I
was like, Okay, it didn't really decide on what it's
you know, it's photographic approach really was. That was one
of my gripes with it. With this one, I thought
it looked gorgeous. I absolutely loved it. And again it
goes back again to Halloween Kills, which I thought was

(38:14):
shot beautifully and I hated the movie. Not saying I
hated this one, but I hated Halloween Kills, and I
think that it was unfortunate because I felt I felt
actually kind of sad at the end because I was like, oh,
this was so gorgeous. I wish I loved this. And
with this one, I thought especially you know what I

(38:37):
was actually thinking of you, Darren. I mean, I thought
the night scenes looked great. You know, the way that
I thought everything was very clear.

Speaker 1 (38:45):
I'm not the only person out there who doesn't like
muddy dark. You can't see it night shots, but I
get it.

Speaker 2 (38:51):
I get it.

Speaker 1 (38:52):
No, No, I it's funny because it. This one's an
interesting one to talk about because it is so close
to the previous it's by the same director. It's kind
of like that second try of not try. I'm not
demeaning it, but like that second round at the you know,
at the movies, getting to revisit characters, getting to revisiting

(39:13):
new location. You're moving a little bit out of the mold,
which is nice. But I mean we kind of picked
up at the twenty twenty two to one about you know,
moving around the kitchen and every time the frame was
filled with the door, and you're like, is he gonna
be behind it? Like there was none of that, Like
a lot of the cheap didn't work stuff did not

(39:35):
happen here. I mean the even just the whole subway
scene beautifully, you know, and it's a long scene to
keep that suspense going, but it does. It's fresh enough
and angled enough where you know, you're stuck in a
small room with a bunch of ghost faces and one
of them's looking right at you. But but yeah, but

(39:58):
Tristan on the directing aspect, does this feel like a
director who is getting to continue in the playground he created,
you know, with these new characters. New location, you know,
the core four. Does it feel like they're they're getting
to expand or is it still finding his footing in

(40:21):
this franchise or do you think he's off to the
races both of them.

Speaker 3 (40:25):
Well, I think I think the first one twenty two
definitely was that. I think it was a really fresh take.
It was a lot of fun. There was a lot
of missteps, as we talked about, but at the same time,
this one felt like solid footing. Like this one felt
like you're in there's a new world that they created,

(40:48):
like the sandbox. Like you said, they're playing in it
and they know what they're doing now, they know how
to This definitely feels like directors who are more confident
with the source material. You definitely felt the love. You
definitely felt a love in twenty two, but this one
you feel the confidence a bit more and that I
think that goes with the the cinematography, the acting. I

(41:10):
think Sam, not Sam, but Melissa Brera's acting is much better.
And I think it's because they they knew how to
work with her this time. I think they knew what
she could do, what she couldn't do, like her strengths,
her weaknesses, how much screen time. She should be allotted,
you know, things like that. I think they I feel

(41:33):
not to overstate it, but like I just feel like
they felt like they knew what they were doing this time.
They're like this is ours now, like this is our time.
You know.

Speaker 2 (41:42):
I want to follow up on that because this movie
feels less. It's weird to say this was something that
is so squarely in the horror franchise category, but it
felt less fun. Screen movies are always supposed well. Screen
movies are always supposed to be marked by the fact

(42:03):
that it's meta, but it's that fun sense of meta
where it's almost like a Theater of the absurd sort
of thing, whereas this the meta part of it, like
calling out the rules. I mean, the rules are nonsense
with requal sequels whatever. You know, I'm not going to
rehash that, right, and especially when they're like subverting expectations.

(42:27):
I'm like, if I hear that phrase one more time
and I'm not the one saying it just to get
a Darren's headshake at me when I say it, like
I just I don't want to hear it anymore. But
like this, this feels not like a screen movie. And
what I mean by that is it feels more like
just a straight horror movie. It feels more like just

(42:48):
horror without the humor. And if I go back and
I replay in my brain the screen movies that I
liked up to this point, there's more fun, there's more
humor in them. And I don't want to throw it
out there that it's because we don't have a Dewey character,

(43:09):
but it feels like it's because we don't have a
Dewey character. It really feels like we don't have that
pure of heart, goofy sidekick kind of guy going around there.
And I miss.

Speaker 1 (43:22):
Kind of with Chad, but I guess, but not nearly.
I'm not saying no, not in.

Speaker 2 (43:28):
The Dewey sense, and I really miss that. And that's
what makes it feel weird to me. I don't have
a Dewey here.

Speaker 1 (43:35):
It's it's interesting because as great as the opening was,
you know when he when ghost Face turns and is
literally like forget the movies, like you know, forget movies,
Like we're moving on from that. I mean that's true
in a way, they're really downplaying as much as we
ie roll on the whole, like let's talk about the rules,

(43:57):
like literally in the movie about the movie. But yeah,
that a lot of that heart of what makes a
screen movie was kind of stripped away formulaically, very much
a screen movie ghost phase. You got the family connection
you have, Like I'm not saying any of those things
are bad, and it fires on all cylinders in that aspect.

(44:19):
But we are definitely not in the nineties, you know,
in the early two thousands of just how movies told
their stories, you know, for a comparison to twenty two,
I mean I almost feel like you can only compare
it to twenty two, like there's nothing to really look
at the previous ones. And I don't know if this

(44:42):
analogy will break down. But in a way, and I
mainly mean this for legacy characters, I'll preface that, but
in a way, you know, when you were interested, when
you were talking about the director and playing in the sandbox,
this felt like first contact to generations where generations held

(45:02):
on to well, we have to keep kirking it, but
the torch has already been passed. Why are we bringing
back these characters? So in that aspect, I feel like
twenty two, you know, having Sydney having Gail, like trying
to build its own thing, but still keeping one foot
in the past, whereas this one is like, no, we
got a new city, we got a new ship, you know,

(45:24):
where it's the same old villain's coming back, you know,
and you feel that severing of the past, which is
weird for I say ghostce movies for screen movies, because
it works. They are inherently about the past. Like I
don't think I've watched a franchise that is so ingrained
in the lore of itself. It is a key feature

(45:48):
of these movies. If they never reverenced the past, it
wouldn't be a screen movie. You have to have that
at least some some bits.

Speaker 3 (45:56):
That's very accurate. And John, see this analogy would work
if you were a normal human being and recognize that
First Contact is a fantastic movie and better than generations.

Speaker 2 (46:06):
Ah, let's not let's not go down this road, gentlemen.
Let's let's not do this. Let's or why would we
pick a fight about something that was a TV movie
that got released theatrically.

Speaker 1 (46:17):
It's okay, it's okay, it's okay.

Speaker 2 (46:19):
I you know, I think that I get the point
you're going for, Darren. At that point, my question becomes
what's the point of making this a screen movie. And
I'm not saying that dismissively. I'm not saying that to
stomp on it. But it seems to go down that
road of well, we're totally gonna do something that's not

(46:40):
a scream movie, but it's a scream movie because it's
in the franchise. And at that point, I like, to me,
that feels like the ultimate Hollywood cheat of oh, well,
we're just gonna repurpose this thing because it'll get the
old time fans in the theater.

Speaker 3 (47:00):
Really, no, I'm calling I'm calling a flag on that.
You're taking it away too far.

Speaker 1 (47:04):
It's no, no, no, no.

Speaker 2 (47:06):
So I wasn't even finished with my point. You can
you can throw whatever flags you want to. I will
pick that flag up and I will wipe my butt
with it.

Speaker 3 (47:13):
This is this there's no, this is no way just
like a generic horror movie with a ghost face face
on it, Like there's just there's just because that's what
you're describing. That is not the case here whatsoever.

Speaker 2 (47:28):
Not it's a yes and no because no, no, it's
a straight no. It's what I'm saying is why retrofit
anything into it? Why not just make this movie without
it being a ghost face movie, because I think it's
on better footing if it doesn't have that legacy behind it.

(47:51):
I think it actually would have been a better movie
if they hadn't made it a ghost face movie. I
feel if anything that holds it back from everything it
could become. And that's that's that's a compliment. You can
take it as a backhanded compliment if you want to.
But I look at this movie from beginning to finish,
and I say, oh, it's actually kind of a shame

(48:12):
it's a screen movie because there's so much non screen
stuff happening here that I would have liked to see
this not be restrained by being a screen movie. I
know that makes sense to somebody out there here in.

Speaker 1 (48:26):
Outside of my head. I get what you're saying, John,
It's a it's a hard formula because in a way,
you can't have it both ways. Like there's intrinsic things
about this being a screen movie that make it good.
But I mean, I think the short answer is sequels
and franchises are way more guaranteed at the box office.

(48:47):
So yeah, that's oh, I know, I know, And that's
what I'm saying going to cast these actors at a
brand new horror franchise. No, it's got to be a
Scream five and six. Well I meant the same time.
You know, it's like Darren, like you said, you know,
it's not the nineties anymore. Would we really like if
you're going to do a requel and a sequel to

(49:07):
a requel whatever. I hate saying that out loud, but
if you're going to do these things, like if you're
going to do a soft reboot of the franchise, you know,
like do you want to go the Force Awakens route
and just make the same movie doing the same things,
because that's you know, you'd get people who would complain
about that where it's just like, oh, this is just

(49:27):
a rehash, you know, like like like yeah, but like
you know, like John, you're talking about how you know,
like it's the you have a movie that breaks the
formula but yet has homages to the past, and you're
saying like, oh, it'd be a better movie without those homages.
But that's what makes this movie possible. And I'm not
talking about from a production standpoint or from a theatrical standpoint.

(49:50):
It's so ingrained with the characters and with the plot
itself that I don't think it's possible to remove the
scream element, the Woodsboro element, the ghost face element. I
don't think it's possible to have this plot exist. You'd
have to it just you you could have the I
guess you could have the same scenes and the same

(50:12):
as actual the end. Yeah, no, it would be a
completely different movie, just with the same action. You know,
it's like, oh, well, Diehard's a great movie, but did
they really have to have it in a tower? Yeah?

Speaker 2 (50:25):
I now, I stand by what I'm saying here. Where
like I just I see so many things that are
are good, but it feels like it's restrained in a
strange way because it's some great ideas that could have
been even better if it's not coming in from the

(50:50):
franchise point of view. Again, I'm if anything that's highly
complementary of this of the ideas here, you're saying this
movie could have been its own movie, its own kickoff,
and still have been just as good. And I mean again,
it's like I said, it's a hard catch twenty two.

Speaker 1 (51:09):
Like you, you know, it's good in its core because
it's a screen movie. But I get your compliment like
that that I do see it through you know, through
the tattered.

Speaker 2 (51:20):
I mean movie. My My question is is a different
editor this time? And you know, Tristan, I love to
to pick on you and and playfully ask this question
every time, but do you see different result with a
different editor this time? Do you think that this flows
better on both a macro and a micro level.

Speaker 3 (51:42):
I do, I do. I do think it flows better.
I think that there were there were times in the
first one in twenty two where I was like, is
that really the best take? Like or there was a
few times when I'm like, are we still here? Okay?
I didn't feel that hardly at all with this one.
I felt it a little bit. During the subway scene,

(52:02):
even though I was enjoying myself, I was a little
surprised that we were still I was like, wow, this
is quite long, like but I shouldn't be thinking about
how long this is. But at the same time, it's
still a great scene. I think that was the only
time that I felt like, Wow, this is this is
this is kind of slow, but I thought the pacing
the location changes.

Speaker 1 (52:23):
No.

Speaker 3 (52:23):
From a macro and micro level, I was really impressed
because there was a lot of time like with this
being a new age movie, you know, like clearly not
in the nineties, clearly not in the early two thousands. Like,
I felt that they did a really good job of
resisting the urge of doing crazy editing where everything's fast

(52:44):
and you can't tell what's going on. It restrained itself.
And I'm not saying they did that last time, but
it would have been easy to with a different editor,
to kind of completely change the language of the film.
And I felt like it didn't change the language of
the film, but it did improve it.

Speaker 2 (53:02):
I think that from my perspective, I think that it
does flow well overall. I think that there are moments
where it's difficult, because I think that the editing does
a great job with what is put together and what

(53:23):
is there at its core, and I think, if anything,
the editor I can't pronounce Jay's last name, pri Chidney,
p Kidney, it's one of those two molds something that's
very cohesive and flows very well. I think that there
are also micro moments where, you know, the the apartment

(53:44):
attack scene where they're going across the ladder really well done,
really really well done, but exposes how some of the
shortcomings of the script undo it undo the movie in
a sense because you have the quote unquote love interest
who falls to her death. And all it did for

(54:07):
me was just look at it as this is sort
of like a throwaway from my.

Speaker 1 (54:14):
Body count somehow right to it. If you're not killing
any of the core four, you have to kill everybody
around them, basically.

Speaker 2 (54:22):
And and it was it was just weird because of
the fact that I think that the they shot what
they wrote, and the editor made what they shot flow
as well as anything was ever going to. But some
of the stuff exposed things I would have advocated for

(54:43):
removing or changing at the script level, if that makes sense.

Speaker 1 (54:47):
Quite so. Quite so. Yeah, and we'll you know, it'd
be interesting to pick this one back up when Scream
seven comes out sometime next year.

Speaker 3 (54:55):
I want to know what you guys want from Scream seven.
I have had firm opinions on what I want. Are
we Are we being influenced at all by the casting
news we know of or are we just I think
so exlating it because it seems like we're going back
to basics with the vast majority of the Wisborough clan

(55:16):
coming back. Uh, It's it's hard to Yeah, like what
I want Okay, I'll say this, and this is something
that I think would be interesting, and they kind of
dabbled in it.

Speaker 1 (55:31):
With the the cells of ghost faces in the very beginning.
I want to see where Yeah, I want to see
ghost more ghost face turning on ghost faces where they're
not all on the same team, where they're all where
they have conflicting goals, and that could be a way
to throw it where you're like, oh, but I thought

(55:53):
the goal was to you know, target you know, Sidney,
It's like, nope, this their goal is to target this
other group because of some other reason, and because the
that's something where all of the ghost faces have always
been like either family or friends or like they're on
the same page, all both of them, because there's always

(56:14):
you know, two. I also thought that was maybe another
direction they were maybe gonna take it. When they went
around the room and they listed all the ghost faces
and one of them was a single, I was like,
maybe they were going to find the lost pair, you know,
that wasn't revealed in that in that one. But I
want to see ghost war. That's what I want to see.
Ghost face war.

Speaker 2 (56:33):
Oh wow, just like a throwdown of just ghostface killers
going after each other. Yeah, and then there's like one
on this idea.

Speaker 1 (56:42):
Where like they're both going after someone and they look
at each other and you realize, oh, all right, they're
not on the same page.

Speaker 2 (56:48):
No, no, we're rainstorming here. It all winds up being
Sydney has engineered something where it's like an arena battle
like The Running Man, and it's nothing but ghostfaces fighting
each other. She's sitting up like, yeah, she's like sitting
up on a throne watching this, this maze of ghost
faces going out. You know what I think we I

(57:09):
think we we got a winner right there. Let's let's
take ghost Face into the realm of sci fi. I
love this. I love No, please don't. Yes, yes, yes
we should. You know what I love. I wasn't think
but that's where we go with that. For no reason,
even though it's a seven cream next with the X
is just bigger than the ANY and the T.

Speaker 3 (57:30):
I have a little bit more ground to take.

Speaker 1 (57:33):
I wasn't that ungrouded.

Speaker 3 (57:35):
No, I'm talking about then, taking space is what I
was saying. Knowing that nev Campbell is coming back, and
knowing that uh Ortega and Burra are out, what I
have preferred to have one more with this cast, yes,
but at the same time, it's done, like their story

(57:56):
is done, like unless they pulled a rabbit out of
their hat and pull to Scream three, where you're just
like really like we're having one more to say, Like
is what else is there to say? Even though I
like the cast and I would have liked to have
had this be a trilogy, like a new trilogy, I'm
fine with it. I'm fine with just having this cast

(58:16):
for two movies because I think it's good, it's entertaining,
it makes a great double bill. Knowing that Nev Campbell's
coming back and it's going to be focused on Sydney,
that it's going to be Sydney's movie, I'm like, Okay,
show me a Sydney that is happy, that is healthy
and is like Linda Hamilton or Jamie Lee Curtis, like

(58:36):
like Linda Hamilton and Terminator two or Lourie Strode in
Halloween twenty eighteen, but happy and healthy where she is
ready like the ghost like have like you have to
have multiples. I think all of our brains are going
towards that, like have multiple ghost faces descend upon her
home and she is freakin ready, it's a fortress. There's

(58:59):
guns make it.

Speaker 1 (59:02):
During the movie.

Speaker 2 (59:04):
Yes, exactly.

Speaker 3 (59:05):
I want to see that, and I want to see
it all orchestrated by Stu Macher. As was, Oh, I
agree all throughout. I agree with the Stumcher thing. I
want to see him come back.

Speaker 1 (59:15):
Isn't where they said maybe he's not dead in this one? Yes,
it was like a throwaway line, but I was like,
why did you say that?

Speaker 3 (59:23):
And and this is being directed by Kevin Williamson.

Speaker 2 (59:26):
Right, I would love Stumacher to come back and to
have him just sort of like throw you know, fake
ghost face after fake ghost face and then it's it's
just we're going to have our final battle here because
I got cheated and if I had been in charge,
Billy Billy should have been the second. I should have

(59:46):
been in charge, because I would have done this right.
I love that like wrath of wrath of Stu Macher,
scream the wrath of Stumacher, the wrath of Mocker. There
we go, Okay, we got to win right there, shop
at the title, don't don't worry. Well, we'll get there.
We'll get there.

Speaker 3 (01:00:01):
We'll get there, We'll get there.

Speaker 2 (01:00:02):
The bone but there I agree with you, Tristan. At
the end of this, it very much felt like what
else is there to do? She throws the mask on
the ground, it closes on the last shot. It felt
like this was the wrap up, This is done, and
she had kept there to come. There's a sliver of
a plot, but she did no. She she drops it

(01:00:24):
on the ground and that's that's the end of it.
And I'm like, okay, I mean, there was no promised
new trilogy, so like, there's no there's no sort of
you know that the whole sequel with with the Halloween
trilogy quote unquote that was come out, or the Star
Wars sequel trilogy when the second one ends, where you're like, well,
what the hell, what's happening after this one? What's going

(01:00:47):
Although with Halloween Kills it's even worse little but there's.

Speaker 1 (01:00:51):
You keep bringing it up.

Speaker 2 (01:00:53):
You don't have to, No, I don't have to, but
it's just to delineate the fact that with like with
the Last Jedi, there's very much a sense of like, well,
where are we going from here? And then with Halloween Kills,
you know that there has to be another one, but
you're like, wait, wait, this is how you're ending this.
Like there's a very separate, sort of weird reaction to

(01:01:17):
both of those because you know there's a third one coming,
and the way that they end is different but similar
in the sense of like where you're just like, where
could we possibly go from here?

Speaker 1 (01:01:28):
Guys? But I.

Speaker 2 (01:01:32):
Can honestly say I don't know what the hell I
want them to do in the next one, because it
can't be a continuation of this. This plot thread is over,
and if you're going to bring Sydney back, then you
got to commit to it. You can't do a Rise
of Skywalker and try to be like, oh, well, no,
we didn't really mean this in the last one. No no, no,
let this one die, Let this one be done. Don't

(01:01:54):
touch it. This is a separate thread. Come back to Sydney.

Speaker 1 (01:02:00):
Cool.

Speaker 2 (01:02:00):
That's where we'll be with it. We'll basically do a
direct sequel to four, and we'll do it in such
a way that five and six, if you like them,
you can keep them in your head canon. If you
don't like them, you jump from four to seven and
you're happy. Just like the Star Trek six thing or
the Star Trek two thing, we keep bringing up Star Trek,
but that's because that series had its own troubles. But yeah,

(01:02:23):
that's where I am.

Speaker 1 (01:02:24):
Yeah. I do think that Chad and Mindy are coming
back as well, but I don't know how big of
a role that is. It could be a you know,
a scene.

Speaker 2 (01:02:34):
Kill them in the opening sequence, wrap it up that way,
that's the way you gotta do it.

Speaker 1 (01:02:38):
Maybe I like that, all right? Scream three h two
ohs coming back? No, So this was a good discussion.
This was an interesting movie, and again only being a
year apart, we haven't had that since the nineties for
this franchise, so it was fun closing out the wing
of ghost Face. John. Last week you gave Scream twenty

(01:03:02):
twenty two A two. It was not high on your
rating list, the lowest of the screen so far. Did
this improve any final thoughts that you haven't shared?

Speaker 2 (01:03:14):
Honestly, I'm pinned here and this is going to be
my rating in the moment, but it could change in
the future. I don't know. I think that it is
crafted incredibly well. I think that the editing is great.
I think that the photography is great. I think it's
so much better technically than the last one that I

(01:03:37):
want to give it a better rating than I'm going to.
But I think after a very strong opening, it wore
down on me a little bit, and then when it
got to the final reveal, the final reveal, my reaction
wasn't oh wow, it was oh really, And so I'm

(01:03:58):
going to wind up giving it a two and it's
you know what, let me revise that in the moment.
I'll give it a two and a half. Jeff, are
you just throwing No, I'll give it a two and
a half. But it's one of those ones where in
the because in the back of my brain like a two,
I'm not going to come back to it. I'm not

(01:04:19):
going to come back to Scream five. I could care
less Scream six. I could see myself coming back to
give it another shot. So I'll go ahead and give
it a two and a half.

Speaker 1 (01:04:30):
That's where I land. All right, What about you, Tristan.
I know you love your half points, your quarter points,
all the points you gave Scream twenty twenty two a three,
which is a pretty decent middle of the road. Are
you revisiting Scream six with Roman Num Worlds?

Speaker 3 (01:04:48):
Well, Scream VII. The first time I saw it, I
really liked it, I was like, Wow, this is even
better than Scream twenty twenty two, and I walked out
of I don't even know if I wouldn't the theater,
but I walked out of the proverbial theater, giving it
three and a half stars. But after watching it again,
I am like, you know what, I enjoy this even

(01:05:09):
more than I did the first time I saw it
or the second time. And I think there's so many
things that work so well. There are things that don't work.
There are things that are weird or things that could
have been done better. But as we say, a lot
if it's if the great stuff is truly great, it
can make up for a lot of misgivings. And I

(01:05:30):
think this is one of those movies. And so I'm
giving this a solid four. I think this is a
great film. I think it's a lot of fun. I
think this is a great entry into the Scream franchise.
And for me, it goes Scream, Scream to this movie,
then Scream twenty two, then three, then four.

Speaker 1 (01:05:51):
All right, yeah for this one first time watching it. Yeah,
Like we've said, I think it improved on a lot
of things from last week from Screen twenty two, which
I really enjoyed and I think, you know, more of
the same characters, fun sandbox. I kind of liked it
being in the New York like a different It wasn't

(01:06:12):
in Woodsboro anymore. And you know, there were less Actually,
I don't think there were any car chases in this.
They were like driving places, but there was. You know,
it's not that kind of city, and I guess we
made up for it in the subway. But I'm also
going to give this a solid four. I mean, I
think I like it better than Scream twenty two, but

(01:06:36):
not enough to make it a five. Like that's a
bit of a jump for me in my mind. But
I could see me watching Scream one and Scream two
and the New Scream you know saga as it were
with twenty two and twenty three. Often. I want to
go back and watch this one again. I want to.

(01:06:56):
It did give me not the family vibe. The family
if I twist at the end was like, oh, look
a Scream family. I mean that that is. But the
three the three ghost Faces was a surprise, and that
was like, Okay, here's something new. It was a great
bookend to the It would hit to ghost Face taking
off his mask, in the beginning. I think that is

(01:07:17):
probably the best moment where we were all like what what, like,
what's going on? And then he's like, oh, you have
to die because you can't be the ghost face, or
maybe we're gonna follow you along and it's gonna be
a weird mystery where we know who the ghost face
is the entire time. Wouldn't that be a trip?

Speaker 3 (01:07:35):
I probably would have liked that better, honestly, So, Darren,
what's your ranking? Since you have you have said movies?

Speaker 1 (01:07:42):
I said four? Oh in order you mean, yeah, so
mine is ah man, I loved me a Scream two
Electric Boogoloo, so I gave that five and then equally tied.
I have screamed the original screen.

Speaker 3 (01:07:57):
No, no, no, you know you cannot, you cannot have a HI.
You gotta you gotta put it in a ranking.

Speaker 1 (01:08:03):
And you're making me want to have like half points. Okay,
I don't have to do that. Uh yeah, I'd say
scream two, Scream one, Scream six, Scream five, then four,
then three. Okay.

Speaker 3 (01:08:17):
So you're putting twenty two above twenty three.

Speaker 1 (01:08:20):
This putting twenty three above twenty two.

Speaker 2 (01:08:23):
Oh okay, Yeah, this is how I know Tristan is
mad at me for my ratings. He didn't ask me
to rank the movies. That's the little tell right.

Speaker 3 (01:08:31):
There, because it doesn't matter.

Speaker 2 (01:08:33):
Oh it doesn't matter. Oh I don't matter. Okay.

Speaker 1 (01:08:37):
See the thing is John's I would like to know
how you are rating the Scream movie.

Speaker 2 (01:08:41):
It's too late, Darren. At this point, I'm buying a
ghost mask and I'm gonna go out. I'm gonna burn
Tristan's car.

Speaker 3 (01:08:47):
Let me let me say it, John, let me say
it for you. Scream one, Scream four, Scream then Scream two. Uh,
Scream twenty three, and then Scream twenty two and then
Scream three.

Speaker 2 (01:09:01):
You're just going by my ratings?

Speaker 3 (01:09:05):
Nope, Nope. There's there was some hard calls in there,
and I made them correctly, didn't I didn't.

Speaker 2 (01:09:09):
I no, no, not at all. I did no because
he didn't.

Speaker 1 (01:09:12):
No, he didn't, he didn't.

Speaker 2 (01:09:14):
You can Scream two is actually the bottom of the list,
even though it got a three.

Speaker 1 (01:09:19):
On the Amazing We are done.

Speaker 2 (01:09:22):
It works that way completely. And you know what, young man,
don't you make me come through there?

Speaker 1 (01:09:27):
I need a mute switch. So we're ending the wing
of ghost Face. It was really fun going through the
wing of ghost Face, finishing off Wes Craven's character. And
I'm sure we'll pick it up again next year as
we do a pickup as we often do. But what
you listeners want to know is what are we talking
about Next week? We're starting a new house here. It's

(01:09:50):
going to be the House of Spike Jones. Here on
House Slights, Join the Revolution, Join the net Party.