View Full Version : The joy of being a collector...

Mike T
03-03-2011, 02:44 AM
...is when you procrastinate sooooo long about buying a certain series of horror-satires on DVD, due to the fact that there's no decent versions of the films available globally, that by the time you get around to thinking about them...they're on Blu-ray!

Scream Trilogy announced for Blu-ray! (http://www.dvdactive.com/news/releases/scream-trilogy.html)*

I know I'm probably in the minority for liking these films these days (such is the fashionable thing to bash films that resurrected a whole genre), but I liked the first two and never ever got around to the third. :p

Now I just have to keep my fingers crossed that they're All Region...

*source: DVD Active

Ian Miller
03-03-2011, 03:45 AM
(such is the fashionable thing to bash films that resurrected a whole genre)

You mean ironic, "hip", and self-serving deconstructions from writers and directors with no affection for what they're satirizing? That's one genre that could have stayed gone!:pyoo:

Of course, I saw all three theatrically, but that's beside the point!

Mike T
03-03-2011, 06:43 AM
Well...I liked the two out of three I saw and am happy to see them coming to Blu-ray. ;)

Ian Jane
03-03-2011, 09:45 AM
I really dug the first one and am not ashamed to admit it. I don't know if I ever saw 2 or 3. If I did they obviously didn't make much of an impression on me.

Todd Jordan
03-03-2011, 11:14 AM
I thought the first one had merit, but not enough to want to see more of the same in 2 and 3. And if the films resurrected a whole genre which one was it? Shitty new horror movies and remakes out the ass that rarely produce anything worth paying attention to?

Ian Jane
03-03-2011, 11:45 AM
There was a huge wave of teen-centric slashers that followed in Scream's wake, so yeah, it did resurrect the genre - even if most of what was resurrected wasn't so hot (though I think the Final Destination films are fun).

Mark Tolch
03-03-2011, 12:03 PM
The first one was decent, outside of Lilliard and the horror film knowitall who annoys the piss out of me. The second one had the guy from Sliders in it, no? I think that i saw the third one but it was horrifically bad.

I still watch the first one if it comes on TV.

Ian Jane
03-03-2011, 12:13 PM
I think a lot of the hatred for Screams comes from what it inspired and all the lousy cash-in's and knock offs that followed it. If you take those out of the equation (which can be tough as there were so many of them) it's a pretty clever and suspenseful picture, I think.

03-03-2011, 12:32 PM
The first SCREAM film was just okay in my book, but what got me at the time was the reverence for it's "meta" aspects - a slasher film where the characters are aware of that genre's cliches, allowing the filmmakers to bend the standard rules for those types of movie. So many reviewers praised Williamson and Craven for messing with these genre tropes, and yes it was arguably the first time it had been done with slasher films specifically, but we'd seen this in other subgenres already - werewolves in AMERICAN WEREWOLF IN LONDON; vampires in FRIGHT NIGHT and THE LOST BOYS; zombies in RETURN OF THE LIVING DEAD. Really, I don't think SCREAM is any better than those previous films, and as far as resurrecting the slasher film, the 9th FRIDAY THE 13th film had come out only 3 years prior to SCREAM, the 6th HALLOWEEN movie only 1 year, and Craven's last entry in the NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET series 2 years previous. It can be said that it rebooted the subgenre, perhaps, but it's sequels and imitators never did much to twist those old cliches into something fresh and ultimately led to the string of remakes of the "classic" slashers.

Ian Jane
03-03-2011, 12:38 PM
Some good points and you're right in claiming it rebooted it rather than resurrected it. Slashers never really went away and probably never will as they're cheap to make and have a fairly loyal built in audience. Studios know this and will exploit it as long as they can. But did Williamson and Craven really get praised more than Landis and the rest? I don't know that they did. It just so happened that there was a lull in between when those guys were doing the self referrential thing and when Wes and comapny did it.

I haven't seen it in a few years and am actually rather keen on checking it out again when the Blu-ray streets. I don't know if I need all three but I'd gladly buy the first one as I never bothered getting it on DVD.

03-03-2011, 12:55 PM
But did Williamson and Craven really get praised more than Landis and the rest? I don't know that they did. It just so happened that there was a lull in between when those guys were doing the self referrential thing and when Wes and comapny did it.

I don't think that they were given any more or less praise, but I do recall at the time not seeing reviews for SCREAM that mentioned the films I called out. The general reaction was "Isn't this unique and clever what these guys did here with these horror movie cliches." without referring to the fact that they were following a trail laid out in the previous decade by those other filmmakers, and many reviews neglected to make the distinction between horror films in general and the slasher subgenre specifically. I was sort of obsessed, as I tend to get about trivial stuff like this, and read as many reviews as I could find at the time in the hopes of seeing someone point out the fact that what SCREAM did really wasn't anything new, but they all kind of said the same thing, from what I remember.

03-03-2011, 01:07 PM
Here's Roger Ebert's review (http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/19961220/REVIEWS/612200306/1023) of SCREAM - you can take what he says here and apply it to AWIL, FRIGHT NIGHT, LOST BOYS, ROTLD, and yet those films don't come up. Instead this review implies that SCREAM was the first film to do what it did - "True, they went to the movies in ``The Last Picture Show,'' and the heroes of ``Clerks'' worked in a video store. Even Bonnie and Clyde went to the movies. But those movies were about the *act* of going to the movies. ``Scream'' is about *knowledge* of the movies: The characters in ``Scream'' are in a horror film, and because they've seen so many horror films, they know what to do, and what not to do."

Again, the characters in the films I listed all knew, or thought they knew what to do in their situation based on what they'd seen in movies. They each have moments in which characters more or less say "This is how you deal with werewolves/vampires/zombies, and I know this 'cuz I saw it on the late show.". SCREAM indulges in this a bit more than those other films, but not by much.

Ian Jane
03-03-2011, 01:10 PM
So your issue isn't so much with the movie but then how it was received by critics for being unique when it really wasn't, at least in regards to it's self referrential traits?

A lot of people thought part of what made Shaun of the Dead great was that it sort of did the same thing, the guys had seen zombie movies and what not and thought they knew what to do and the film was praised for this as well and I don't know that when it was that much credit was given to ROTLD for doing something similiar years earlier.

03-03-2011, 01:14 PM
Yes. Again, the movie in and of itself worked for me - I certainly didn't hate it - but over the years I have allowed it's rep to taint my view of it. You know me - I get goofy about that stuff. :blush:

Ian Jane
03-03-2011, 01:16 PM
We all get goofy about things now and then. So did you have the same reaction to Hot Fuzz as well?

And where does that leave flat our parodies like the Scary Movie series in the ToyBoy lexicon of good and bad? Or did you know what those because they mostly suck?

I guess it's a fine line between being 'meta' (I hate that term) or self referrential and being a parody. Obviously the Scary Movie series takes it to a whole different and more ridiculous level but the humor in Scream is one of the film's strong points and what makes it fun in my opinion.

03-03-2011, 01:34 PM
I don't know if I read any reviews for HOT FUZZ. I try not to read reviews much anymore, since that's usually where my real beefs end up. :(

03-03-2011, 03:51 PM
Back to the topic of this thread - I have really bad luck when it comes to procrastinating on purchases, meaning that whenever I do finally get around to buying something there will be an announcement the next day that a better version is coming soon.

Ian Jane
03-03-2011, 03:58 PM
That's one bonus of being OCD about getting stuff the day it comes out. You wind up double dipping a lot, though at least you get it, have it sitting on a shelf beside you still sealed and unwatched and providing you with comfort before it gets re-released in a better version - which you'll inevitibly buy.

I've gotten better about that in the last year or so, but at one point I had five different versions of Cannibal Holocaust for some reason. I still have three versions of the Beyond. I don't know why. Different extras that I probably won't watch again I guess.

03-03-2011, 04:09 PM
I've slowed way down on my DVD purchases in the last few years, thinking that we'd see a BD boom on niche titles but that hasn't really panned out.

Ian Jane
03-03-2011, 04:14 PM
It's starting to pick up but not the way DVD did when it first launched and we had an awesome landslide of awesomeness.

Mike Howlett
03-03-2011, 06:22 PM
I think I saw the 3 SCREAM films in the theater and liked them for what they were... good popcorn horror movies. The first, obviously, was my favorite and it's the only one that I have any memory of any more. I doubt I'll be picking up the Blu-Rays. Besides, my wife despises Courtney Cox.

Ian Miller
03-03-2011, 07:57 PM
Like I said in my faux-aggressive post, I saw all three theatrically and certainly enjoyed myself during each viewing but have had no desire to revisit them.

In terms of new media and releases, I'm almost always behind the ball, and the one time I decide not to be, what did I pre-order? The MASSACRE MAFIA STYLE rip-off edition! Oh well, that 35.00 is loooong gone.

Todd Jordan
03-03-2011, 08:41 PM
That happens to me too. I didn't want to miss out on Massacre. I just got that Pinky set after its been out for quite some time. Like Toyboy, I've backed way off on buying stuff. The Pinky box was the first in months.

Ian Jane
03-04-2011, 09:53 AM
I still buy too much stuff. DVDs, BDs, CDs. I buy a lot of them, and I don't even have the space. I just have OCD. It bugs me not having something I know I'm gonna want.

Mike T
03-04-2011, 11:01 AM
Back to the topic of this thread - I have really bad luck when it comes to procrastinating on purchases, meaning that whenever I do finally get around to buying something there will be an announcement the next day that a better version is coming soon.

No need to worry about wandering OT...I enjoy the repartee and reading all this stuff. I am in the same boat as you though; finally buying something I had pondered for faaaaar too long usually means a fresh "new and improved" edition, or BD of DVD, is approx. a few weeks away. It's uncanny! I eventually broke down and bought the steelbook "Complete Dossier" DVD edition of Apocalypse Now a short while back and what do you know? The BD was announced within weeks of me doing so... :drum:

As for having too many editions of a title: I'm ultra-crazy when it comes to this, I have been told. Having three or four discs of one title is absurd to me, especially when I might have one that eclipses them all. So, as I can't be arsed with eBay, trading, secondhand stores who might give me a dollar for something I paid forty for, and the like, DVD has become so disposable that I usually just bin the excess. I look at this way: if they're worth nothing outside of the (limited) collectors market...why bother keeping them, or spending more than they're worth to get rid of them? :dunno: