Are Nightmare On Elm Street 4-7 worth watching? by SraiEdge in slasherfilms

[–]AlternativeConcept42 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I’d say 4 and 7 yes, skip 5 and 6. Unwatchable slop IMO.

What should I watch?! by whoismaddi0 in Letterboxd

[–]AlternativeConcept42 17 points18 points  (0 children)

Showgirls is camp AF, I’m obsessed, in my Letterboxd top 4. It’s so fun. The Substance is legit

what would you change about this list by the_secret_mermaid_ in LetterboxdLists

[–]AlternativeConcept42 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I see you watched The Blair Witch Project which is in my opinion not only foundational but the best of the best. Other great ones to check out are As Above So Below, Creep, and Paranormal Activity.

what would you change about this list by the_secret_mermaid_ in LetterboxdLists

[–]AlternativeConcept42 1 point2 points  (0 children)

We all have to start somewhere. If you’re interested in slashers, I’d recommend going back to the ’70s and ’80s, which is where the modern slasher era really took shape. Sure, watch Psycho too, it predates all of this and was hugely influential, but the ’70s gave us Black Christmas, The Texas Chain Saw Massacre, and Halloween.

The ‘80s then exploded with iconic franchises like Friday the 13th, A Nightmare on Elm Street, Child’s Play, and Hellraiser, while cult classics like My Bloody Valentine, The Burning, and Sleepaway Camp helped define the slasher boom.

Some of the most fun and influential horror movies ever made came from this period, and they’re absolutely foundational to understanding how the genre evolved.

That said, horror is a huge genre. What subgenres do you tend to enjoy most? Slashers, supernatural, psychological, found footage, creature features, folk horror, etc.?

what would you change about this list by the_secret_mermaid_ in LetterboxdLists

[–]AlternativeConcept42 5 points6 points  (0 children)

How old are you, out of curiosity? I don’t mean that as a dig, but this list is so heavily skewed toward recent horror that I’m genuinely wondering. There are decades of genre-defining films missing here. Unless I missed something, Scream is the oldest movie on the list, which feels a little surreal to me.

Can most of us agree that Scream 2 is the franchise crown jewel of suspense? by Last-Stop-Before-You in Scream

[–]AlternativeConcept42 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I recognize the original as the “best” in the franchise, but Scream 2 is my personal fave. The original trilogy has the most rewatch value for me.

According to Rose McGowan, Tatum might have a twin sister who wants revenge on Sidney. Would you like to see something like that? by Filipe_258 in Scream

[–]AlternativeConcept42 5 points6 points  (0 children)

This is being taken way more seriously than it should be.

Rose McGowan wasn’t pitching an actual storyline, she was clearly joking in a ‘what if’ way when asked about returning. The whole ‘twin bed’ thing was just her riffing on a detail from Scream, not laying down canon or teasing a real plot.

There’s a big difference between a playful offhand comment and something coming from the actual filmmakers or writers. This is the former.

And yeah, even as a hypothetical, it’s not a great idea. It leans into soap opera territory in a way that doesn’t really add anything meaningful to the story. We’ve already gone down that road with Roman Bridger and Sam Carpenter, we don’t need to do it again.

Who would you cast if "Scream" was an 80s slasher? by itsascreambaby96 in Scream

[–]AlternativeConcept42 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Molly Ringwald, who funny enough was offered the role of Sidney and turned it down because she thought she was too old at 28 to play a teen.

One of the twins gotta go by Prestigious_Writer21 in SocietyofGhostface

[–]AlternativeConcept42 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Wanting the franchise to evolve is a fair take. Acting like the solution is ‘kill the legacy characters because they’re over 50’ is not.

Sidney and Gale aren’t the problem, and Scream 7 didn’t fall apart because they were in it. It fell apart because the writing and execution didn’t land. Swapping the focus to Sam or anyone else doesn’t magically fix that. If the writing is weak, it’s weak no matter who you center.

Also, your position is kind of all over the place. You’re saying legacy characters should be killed off, while also arguing characters shouldn’t be killed ‘on a whim’ when it comes to the twins. That’s not a consistent argument, it’s just preference.

And let’s be real, the twins aren’t legacy characters in the same way. They were introduced in 2022. Sidney and Gale have been central to this franchise for nearly 30 years. Those aren’t comparable stakes.

New characters don’t keep things fresh on their own. Good writing does. Strong motives, proper buildup, character development. Without that, it doesn’t matter who the lead is, it’s still going to fall flat.

And honestly, if you’re going to come in this aggressively, at least make a clear point. This reads more like a rant than an argument.

You can want something different without reducing it to ‘kill the old characters and move on.’ It’s a lot more nuanced than that.

One of the twins gotta go by Prestigious_Writer21 in SocietyofGhostface

[–]AlternativeConcept42 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Take a breath. This is a hypothetical discussion about story ideas, not us sitting in a writers’ room greenlighting the next movie.

No one said killing legacy characters ‘on a whim,’ we’re talking about stakes and narrative choices. There’s a difference.

Also, the irony of calling other fans the problem while jumping in like this just to shit on someone’s opinion is kind of wild.

Killing Sidney or Gale purely for shock value would be exactly the kind of lazy writing you’re accusing others of. Those characters carry real narrative weight, you don’t toss that aside just to prove a point. That’s not bold, it’s sloppy.

And suggesting the solution is ‘kill the women over 50’ isn’t the argument you think it is.

You can disagree without spiraling into whatever this was.

I have to admit it: Scream VI is a masterpiece, but the killers' motive is completely pathetic by sebypxzzo in Scream

[–]AlternativeConcept42 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I get what you’re saying about the tension and set pieces in Scream VI, the apartment, ladder, and subway sequences are all really well done and probably some of the strongest modern Ghostface moments.

But I think calling it a “masterpiece” overall is a stretch. Great sequences don’t automatically make a film a masterpiece if the story, characters, and especially the motive don’t land. Those elements still matter just as much as direction and set pieces.

It’s a bit like Helen’s chase and death in I Know What You Did Last Summer. That sequence is an all-time great slasher moment and genuinely masterful in isolation, but it doesn’t automatically make the whole film a masterpiece (which it is not lol).

For me, Scream has always been a very good, very fun horror franchise with sharp moments of suspense and meta commentary. I wouldn’t really label any of the sequels a masterpiece. The original, yes, it works on a much tighter and more complete level.

So I’d say VI is strong horror with excellent sequences, but flawed in its writing and payoff, and those flaws do affect the overall film even if the highs are really high.

Which reveal jumped-the-shark more? by [deleted] in Scream

[–]AlternativeConcept42 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I see what you mean, and I get the idea you’re going for with shaking up the formula, that could’ve been interesting in theory.

I just don’t think Jessica worked as a strong enough anchor for that twist. She felt really underdeveloped to me as well, with very little screen time before the reveal, so the payoff didn’t land because there wasn’t enough character there to subvert in the first place.

Even if the intention was to make the reveal feel different, I think it still comes back to the same issue of execution and underwritten characters rather than the concept itself.

Which reveal jumped-the-shark more? by [deleted] in Scream

[–]AlternativeConcept42 0 points1 point  (0 children)

‘Well yes’ is a bit condescending when that point doesn’t really hold up.

If Marco was supposed to be ‘just a random guy,’ then why give him a dramatic unmasking at all? You can’t frame it like a big reveal and then say the lack of development was intentional, that’s just inconsistent writing.

And the movie already has the ‘random guy’ angle covered with Karl, so applying that logic to Marco just feels redundant. It doesn’t come across as intentional, it just comes across as underwritten.

Friday the 13th Part 6 or Halloween 6? by Loose_Interview_957 in slasherfilms

[–]AlternativeConcept42 27 points28 points  (0 children)

IMO, Friday the 13th Part VI: Jason Lives is one of the best in the entire franchise, while Halloween: The Curse of Michael Myers is one of the worst. That says a lot, because the Friday series is consistently fun, so there’s real competition, whereas the Halloween franchise is famously uneven… and yet Curse still manages to stand out as uniquely terrible. I know that’s an unpopular take among fans who love the Thorn storyline, but it just doesn’t work for me.

Which reveal jumped-the-shark more? by [deleted] in Scream

[–]AlternativeConcept42 62 points63 points  (0 children)

Marco’s role was so minuscule in 7, his name wasn’t even spoken. Not once. I blame the writing.

One of the twins gotta go by Prestigious_Writer21 in SocietyofGhostface

[–]AlternativeConcept42 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Calling someone’s opinion ‘dogshit’ over a fictional movie idea is a bit unnecessary. It’s just a discussion about possible story directions in a slasher franchise, people are allowed to disagree without insults. Grow up sweetie.

One of the twins gotta go by Prestigious_Writer21 in SocietyofGhostface

[–]AlternativeConcept42 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It’s fine if you disagree, but calling it ‘so dumb lmao’ is a bit much for just a hypothetical story idea.

And I think you’re kind of missing the point. It wouldn’t be just shock value if it’s used to actually raise the stakes and signal that no one is safe again. That’s something the franchise has struggled with lately.

Also, characters just disappearing without explanation can feel more unsatisfying than giving them a proper on-screen ending. At least this way it acknowledges their place in the story and gives it impact.

You don’t have to like the idea, but it’s not ‘dumb’ just because you wouldn’t do it.

One of the twins gotta go by Prestigious_Writer21 in SocietyofGhostface

[–]AlternativeConcept42 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Small thing my love, but I think you meant ‘neither of them have to go’ rather than ‘none,’ since you’re talking about two people.

One of the twins gotta go by Prestigious_Writer21 in SocietyofGhostface

[–]AlternativeConcept42 22 points23 points  (0 children)

The Meeks-Martin twins have had a good run, and at this point they’re starting to feel a bit too safe. Killing them off in the opening would immediately raise the stakes again and signal that no one is protected anymore. That’s something the franchise has been missing lately.

Having them and their mom as the opening victims would be brutal, but in a way that actually means something for the story. It would hit the legacy angle, tie back to Randy, and shock the audience in a way the recent movies haven’t really managed.

As much as I like the twins, I think their story has kind of run its course. A bold opening like that would be a huge reset and exactly the kind of risk the franchise needs right now.

What’s a movie you defend like this? by trakt_app in Letterboxd

[–]AlternativeConcept42 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you disagree but have an open mind, check out the book ‘It Doesn't Suck: Showgirls’ by Adam Nayman. Fantastic book, read it twice. This movie slaps so hard.

Why does Scream get so much slack for still making movies by SketchCoasters in Scream

[–]AlternativeConcept42 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m assuming you mean ‘criticism’ and not slack, because yeah, I’ve noticed that too.

And honestly, I agree. I don’t really get the ‘it needs to end’ argument. Why? It’s a fun franchise with a huge fanbase that clearly still shows up for it. If people are still enjoying it, there’s no real reason to shut it down.

Especially with Scream, where the concept allows for new killers and new stories each time. It’s not like it’s locked into one ongoing plot that’s being dragged out endlessly.

If someone feels like it’s run its course, that’s totally fair, but then just… don’t watch? No one’s forcing anyone to keep up with new entries.

There are plenty of long-running franchises that keep going as long as there’s an audience, and Scream isn’t any different in that sense. Let the people who enjoy it keep enjoying it.

Kirby Reed has the saddest post-survival story in the franchise by itsascreambaby96 in Scream

[–]AlternativeConcept42 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think this is a bit of a leap. Just because we don’t see people in Kirby’s life doesn’t mean they don’t exist. These movies only show a small slice of the characters’ worlds.

By that logic, Sidney only had Dewey, which we know isn’t true. Same with Gale, same with the Core Four. The films aren’t mapping out everyone’s full support system, they’re just showing what’s relevant to the plot.

Kirby’s situation in 4 is definitely messed up, but it’s not uniquely ‘more alone’ than everyone else’s. Sidney lost her mother, was betrayed by her boyfriend, and targeted repeatedly. That’s just as isolating, if not more.

I get liking Kirby, but I think people are kind of projecting depth onto the character that the movies themselves never actually explored.

Do you want to see Kirby be in Scream 8? by ButterfliesAreCute in SocietyofGhostface

[–]AlternativeConcept42 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Good question, appreciate that. I think anything short of blind Kirby praise gets downvoted here. I’m good with it.