Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
*** Sidney was trying to move on with her life. Getting harassed into doing publicity on the story of her dead mother and friends isn't something she was too keen on.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
*** [[spoiler: Billy]] had basically fallen to the point of AxCrazy at this point and [[spoiler: Stu]] was never the sharpest tool in the shed to begin with. It probably wasn't a well thought out plan.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
*** Plus, at this point, we've already established she's not the brightest bulb in the box. Remember, [[LiveActionTV/StarTrekTheOriginalSeries she's a reporter, dammit, not a doctor]]. And with the whole "Psychotic Killer on The Loose for the Third Time" thing, she'd likely assume that he's already dead.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
*** Although to be fair, he had been told she agreed to do the interview. He did mention that he wanted to get the whole ordeal behind the two of them and try to get on better terms.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
** Is it possible he just traced her phone when he called her on the hotline? I mean, you don't generally run that kind of thing out of your home.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
***** It's not known how long Jill was gone for. She could have only just left by the time Sidney discovered her room was empty. She's just killed [[spoiler: the cops]] so she panics when she sees her mother's car pull up and [[spoiler: kills her]] to give Sidney a reason to go to Kirby's alone. So then she just hurries over to Kirby's. She's best friends with her so perhaps she knows the shortest way to the house? Remember she can cut through other people's gardens and go anywhere while Sidney has to take the road. To a house she hasn't been to before. At night.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
** Sidney was Billy's girlfriend and likely knew her for several years before she left. Gail likely didn't know the woman and says she'd only seen pictures. Up until the reveal she thought "Debbie Salt" was a student from one of her lectures. If Gail thought she looked familiar, that's where she'd associate her with. She's not expecting Billy's long lost mother to be waltzing around the campus is she?
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 31 (click to see context) from:
* Why doesn't Sid [[KillHimAlready Ghostace when he is asleep in the cop car]] instead of trying to sneak over him? This is safer than leaving him the opportunity to wake up and it would have quickly ended the threat.
to:
* Why doesn't Sid [[KillHimAlready Ghostace kill Ghostface when he is asleep in the cop car]] instead of trying to sneak over him? This is safer than leaving him the opportunity to wake up and it would have quickly ended the threat.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* Why doesn't Sid [[KillHimAlready Ghostace when he is asleep in the cop car]] instead of trying to sneak over him? This is safer than leaving him the opportunity to wake up and it would have quickly ended the threat.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 76 (click to see context) from:
* The shooting the killer in the head thing bugs me. I have no problem with a character killing in self-defence. The intent there isn't to kill but to protect their own life with their attacker's death being a consequence of that. However, if the killer is unarmed and weak enough that they can be restrained, then, the response should be to wait until medical help and the police show up. Shooting an unarmed individual who has recently been unconscious, has lost a significant amount of blood, and who may or may not have internal injuries doesn't fall under the category of self-defense due to the fact less extreme options are available. 'This person killed my loved ones and tried to kill me,' are not acceptable moral nor legal justifications for taking an at-the-moment defenceless person's life. Sidney, Dewey, and whoever else shot the still alive killers are murders themselves.
to:
* The shooting the killer in the head thing bugs me. I have no problem with a character killing in self-defence. The intent there isn't to kill but to protect their own life with their attacker's death being a consequence of that. However, if the killer is unarmed and weak enough that they can be restrained, then, the response should be to wait until medical help and the police show up. Shooting an unarmed individual who has recently been unconscious, has lost a significant amount of blood, and who may or may not have internal injuries doesn't fall under the category of self-defense self-defence due to the fact less extreme options are available. 'This person killed my loved ones and tried to kill me,' are not acceptable moral nor legal justifications for taking an at-the-moment defenceless person's life. Sidney, Dewey, and whoever else shot the still alive killers are murders murderers themselves.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
**They could know about it because[[spoiler:Billy and Stu]] told Sidney about the trivia part
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
** Remember also that these are GenreSavvy horror movie characters, so they know that if they ''don't'' finish off the killers, it will almost certainly lead to dozens more deaths. In horror films, after all, PoliceAreUseless, every prison is made of [[CardboardPrison cardboard]], and every injury that isn't explicity a killing blow is OnlyAFleshWound. How many people died because Dr. Loomis didn't headshot Michael Myers the first chance he got? If Charles Lee Ray had his brains blown out before performing his voodoo curse, he could never have become the killer doll Chucky. If Tommy Jarvis had severed Jason Voorhees' head rather than just hacking his face a bit, that killer may never have come back to slaughter hundreds more people. Since the ''Scream'' characters are aware of the horror movie conventions in effect in their daily lives, I would argue finishing off a 'defenseless' killer ''is'' technically self defense in this case.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
**I think they decided that he got it off of his phone's memory/contacts.
-> Gale: Do you have Sid's number in your memory? Dewey: *looks up as if he's searching through his brain's memory* Gale: No, doofus! Your phone.
-> Gale: Do you have Sid's number in your memory? Dewey: *looks up as if he's searching through his brain's memory* Gale: No, doofus! Your phone.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
** I think it becomes FridgeBrilliance when you note this attitude is reinforced constantly around Sydney and company.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
*** Equally possible is it's Jason Mewes and Kevin Smith who just happen to be in-character.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 75 (click to see context) from:
to:
** Legally, it might not completely excuse the killing, but it would probably make it legally manslaughter (or a less severe degree of murder). If the shooter has just seen their victim kill multiple other people and repeatedly attempt to kill them, that situation is definitely going to affect their judgement, and the law would most likely take that into account.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
**Don't mean to be condescending with the list format but it helps me organize my response
A) The cops likely wouldn't have tested the red stains in the room and the stains on Billy, they would assume it's blood since Billy and the rest of the house are already covered in blood.
B) Semen at a wild teen party is nothing new, they would have figured someone got laid before the murder broke out.
C) Billy and Stu have been badly wounded, the first priority wouldn't have been to accuse them of a crime but to get them to a hospital. They would be cleaned up at said hospital, so there goes the gun residue.
D) This is the only one that really could have screwed them but they're badly wounded and the only people left to tell the story (if everything went according to plan) so the cops would have to choose to investigate the markings on him and believe that Billy and Stu stabbed each other and made up the story or excuse the marks as something that happened during the massacre and forget about it.
A) The cops likely wouldn't have tested the red stains in the room and the stains on Billy, they would assume it's blood since Billy and the rest of the house are already covered in blood.
B) Semen at a wild teen party is nothing new, they would have figured someone got laid before the murder broke out.
C) Billy and Stu have been badly wounded, the first priority wouldn't have been to accuse them of a crime but to get them to a hospital. They would be cleaned up at said hospital, so there goes the gun residue.
D) This is the only one that really could have screwed them but they're badly wounded and the only people left to tell the story (if everything went according to plan) so the cops would have to choose to investigate the markings on him and believe that Billy and Stu stabbed each other and made up the story or excuse the marks as something that happened during the massacre and forget about it.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
*How, exactly, could the killers expect to get away with their plan? Billy would have a lot of explaining to do - like why was his shirt covered in red tinted corn syrup and why was the corn syrup also all over the master bedroom in a way that would make it obvious that somebody faked a killing. With semen and other samples on the bed, it goes without saying that the police would very quickly figure out that Sydney had sex with him that night in that bed and that shortly after, he pretended to be killed. To top it off, he also had gunshot residue on his hands, and Sydney's father - the man supposed to be framed for the murders - would show obvious signs of being tied up for a couple days not the least of which would be the unmistakable marring of his face and wrists from the duct tape.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 31 (click to see context) from:
*** Yes, but that still [[BatmanForever raises too many questions]].
to:
*** Yes, but that still [[BatmanForever [[Film/BatmanForever raises too many questions]].
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
** Imagine this, you've seen ''Stab 6'', and you watch ''Stab 7''. The opening is either (A) the opening from ''Stab 6'', which, if it was me, would make me take out the DVD and make sure it was the right one or (B) a ''different'' opening that claims to be ''Stab 6'', which, because you've already seen it, you know to be fake, thus ruining the twist. Either way it doesn't work.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 21 (click to see context) from:
** Manly because he was trying to pressure her into doing a interview.
to:
** Manly Mainly because he was trying to pressure her into doing a interview.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 34 (click to see context) from:
* So... how did [[spoiler:Roman]] get Sidney's phone number anyway? The only ones who used Sidney's phone where [[spoiler:Jennifer]] and [[spoiler:Kincaid]].
to:
* So... how did [[spoiler:Roman]] get Sidney's phone number anyway? The only ones who used Sidney's Dewey's phone where [[spoiler:Jennifer]] and [[spoiler:Kincaid]].
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* So... how did [[spoiler:Roman]] get Sidney's phone number anyway? The only ones who used Sidney's phone where [[spoiler:Jennifer]] and [[spoiler:Kincaid]].
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 15,16 (click to see context) from:
* At the end, why didn't Stu and Billy give each other those stab wounds ''after'' polishing off Sidney and her father? It would have been a lot easier and less risky.
** They wanted Sidney to watch? Billy was angry at her because her mother broke up his parents' marriage, maybe he wanted to make her suffer by drawing out the process and show her exactly ''how'' he was going to get away with it before he killed her.
** They wanted Sidney to watch? Billy was angry at her because her mother broke up his parents' marriage, maybe he wanted to make her suffer by drawing out the process and show her exactly ''how'' he was going to get away with it before he killed her.
to:
* At the end, why didn't Stu [[spoiler:Stu and Billy give each other those stab wounds wounds]] ''after'' polishing off Sidney and her father? It would have been a lot easier and less risky.
** They wanted Sidney to watch?Billy [[spoiler:Billy was angry at her because her mother broke up his parents' marriage, marriage]], maybe he wanted to make her suffer by drawing out the process and show her exactly ''how'' he was going to get away with it before he killed her.
** They wanted Sidney to watch?
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
*** In Scream 4, they mention that only the first three films were based on fact. They started from scratch, using the events of Scream 3 as the basis for Stab 3. The "return to Woodsboro" plot originally planned for Stab 3 was abandoned in favor of the more interesting story that actually happened.
Changed line(s) 51 (click to see context) from:
** I get that Stab 7 opening with the beginning of Stab 6 was a twist to throw off viewers of Scream 4, but how would that work within the Scream universe? If anybody had seen Stab 6, they'd instantly recognize those events once Stab 7 started. Thus, it's less a twist and more just a really confusing prank to make pepople think they're watching Stab 6 again.
to:
** I get that Stab 7 opening with the beginning of Stab 6 was a twist to throw off viewers of Scream 4, but how would that work within the Scream universe? If anybody had seen Stab 6, they'd instantly recognize those events once Stab 7 started. Thus, it's less a twist and more just a really confusing prank to make pepople people think they're watching Stab 6 again.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
** They wanted Sidney to watch? Billy was angry at her because her mother broke up his parents' marriage, maybe he wanted to make her suffer by drawing out the process and show her exactly ''how'' he was going to get away with it before he killed her.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
** The traces would have been very faint, and a lot of small-town police departments don't have very big forensics budgets, especially back then.
* At the end, why didn't Stu and Billy give each other those stab wounds ''after'' polishing off Sidney and her father? It would have been a lot easier and less risky.
* At the end, why didn't Stu and Billy give each other those stab wounds ''after'' polishing off Sidney and her father? It would have been a lot easier and less risky.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* Why did the police not do some tests on the mask, once they go it? There could have been some fingerprints on it or there might have been some DNA on the inside where it touched the killer's face.
