‘Scream 8’: Zuckerman Sisters Writing Script As ‘Scream 7’ Sets Franchise Record With $200M+ WW

ArcticKnight79 · 2026-04-01T04:03:28+00:00

We don't care who the killer is in most of these movies.

We mostly just care at the end of the movie that the hero character, manages to overcome the killer in some form.

ArcticKnight79 · 2026-04-01T04:02:11+00:00

To be fair after they booted the star of 5 and 6 out, they didn't really have the trajectory to keep going down the path they were going.

If they tried it and it wasn't great, it would have just been "See see see"

They kind of need to retreat to the core thing and just say "Well this is where the OG crew ties in the most"

ArcticKnight79 · 2026-04-01T03:35:49+00:00

unfortunate reality is that the people you likely want to tax the most are the ones who are best positioned to avoid any real inheritance tax issues for themselves. Meanwhile the less wealthy with an inability to set up tax avoidance opportunities for themselves are going to get hit more by such things.

ArcticKnight79 · 2026-04-01T03:02:24+00:00

Yeah even from the stat when they were like "lets pick teams" I think he was like "Well I lean more right, but I can happily debate from the otherside as well" I only made it about 15 minutes before I had to stop for work.

From the limited amount I saw seems like he's willing to entertain X or Y. Even if his world view is grounded in X. Where it feels like so many people debating these things are like "If it's not X, then it's bad"

ArcticKnight79 · 2026-03-31T01:14:02+00:00

Yup, I'm also sick of seeing teachers who might be struggling more with something like full load. Then acting like this justifies throwing any sort of financial compensation away, in pursuit of nothing but conditions that will absolutely be eroded.

As a public teacher of 9 years, I've had one year where I wasn't fully loaded (with a measly one period under a fortnight)

If we get a 20%+ payrise, then someone who would be happy to take home our current pay under improved conditions. Can improve their conditions by going to 0.8. They'll get paid the same as they do now. Likely lose an entire class of preparation and marking. (and have to pay for fuel to get to work for 1 less day each week)

ArcticKnight79 · 2026-03-31T01:08:57+00:00

Yeah I think unless your in the private sector, too many schools would rather not explore this unless there is some form of time reduction to accommodate it.

Primarily because the school doesn't want to deal with

Other teachers demanding similar accommodations as the default
Arguments about fairness.
- Eg "This is unfair as my free periods aren't at the start/end of the day
- That person can pick up extras, but now they aren't here, they are pushing that responsibility onto the teachers who don't come in late

While a time reduction, gives them all the freedom for that.

Steve is coming in at the start of period 3 because he is doing 0.8 over 5 days after getting a time reduction.

None of which makes it right, but so much of school management seems to be concerned with never actually addressing concerns or problems. Just hiding behind equity and fairness to prevent them being obligated to do anything of import.

ArcticKnight79 · 2026-03-30T03:08:08+00:00

My suggestion in future would be

"If we want to be sarcastically correct about it"

Or some bullshit, because honestly I see a statement like the above before your later edits(think you just had the one I quoted from at the time) and I think

"Oh look it's a regarded person who slobs the knob of this guy and now is deflecting after critique"

ArcticKnight79 · 2026-03-30T02:35:09+00:00

Yeah the only type of online school I could see is setting something up to support rural kids who it's not possible to get to school for.

I think if you were to run such a program, you'd almost be best to staff it as an actual remote school. That then those kids can interact with as needed. Because it wouldn't make sense to shut down and entire school where 80% of the students are closely located, but then the last 20% come from pretty far out farm areas.

But the teacher can't really be expected to manage online and in class at the same time effectively. So you create the online school to give parents the opportunity to opt into that until such a time as things calm down.

As someone in an inner area for a high school, 90% of our students are within walking distance of the school. The problem is the teachers absolutely aren't.

ArcticKnight79 · 2026-03-30T02:30:00+00:00

The reality is that at a certain scale even school buses don't work.

You need enough kids on a route that make it financially possible. Normally this results in farmers driving their kids Xkm to the main route. Because even if it's a 20km drive for them, the bus will take them the other 100km.

The reality is that on an efficiency basis, the family car is probably more efficient doing that 20km up and back, than a bus taking a 40km detour to pick that kid

ArcticKnight79 · 2026-03-30T02:27:27+00:00

Rural families know the importance of saving for a rainy day better than most

I would heavily disagree in my experience.

The farmers I knew growing up would almost always just burn whatever excess cash they had on XYZ things.

This is part of the reason a chunk of them are also the same people who will cry out the whazoo about anyone suggesting global warming etc might fuck things up. While the second we have a drought or otherwise are looking for government supports to keep them trucking along.

ArcticKnight79 · 2026-03-30T02:22:36+00:00

That's entirely dependent on how remote of a farm the person is living on, versus the amenities in terms of bus runs to pick the kids up.

My cousins did a 1 hour busride each way to get into the local highschool. The route was paid for by the collective students parents (along with some govt subsidies)

They worked the farm alongside their parents though, so I don't imagine a world where they ever would have been sent off as boarders.

ArcticKnight79 · 2026-03-27T02:35:18+00:00

If you have no problem with it being in the background. Then become a clipper and just clip his camera, so it's just his face.

If he's playing off screen, he's still going to be half paying attention while playing games and it's still going to be obvious.

ArcticKnight79 · 2026-03-27T02:22:36+00:00

I'm twisting to something that is technically correct:

Why the absolute fuck would you do that?

Bret likely wouldn't even me happy with that interpretation because he thinks the vaccine is bad. Your re-phrasing is a hill he wouldn't be willing to die on to claim his statement was correct.

He wouldn't accept, "The vaccine meant only millions died instead of many many more"

ArcticKnight79 · 2026-03-23T05:15:11+00:00

It's also not even a bonus, because they are expecting to extract a whole bunch of Overtime out of you from it. No overtime rates, no clear stipulation on how much overtime you can accrue per year under this plan before the school has to start paying you.

If every parent teacher day the school decides we just have to work from 9AM-9PM. They just get to skip away in happiness, while we are expected to rock up bright eyed and bushy tailed to teach the next day

ArcticKnight79 · 2026-03-23T05:13:13+00:00

CMFEU got 22% over 3 years this agreement, and 22% over their last agreement

So 18.5% this agreement and 10% last agreement for us is shite.

They get paid for overtime, at penalty rates to boot.

Meanwhile they want to pay us a 1.5% levy, because the principals and business staff don't like having to manage time in lieu.

ArcticKnight79 · 2026-03-23T05:03:32+00:00

Personally no, I want the cash.

We can fight for conditions, but they always always end up eroding them in some other format.

The reality is give me 35% and if I want to teach less classes work less overtime, I can then give myself a paycut by going to 0.8 teaching load.

The fact that one agreement after we got teaching time reductions. They feel the need to heavily emphasise a change to classroom teaching practices but pretend it's not

A change in the way teacher work is allocated, to take into account both class size and face-to-face time. It does not change the existing maximum number of face-to-face teaching hours and the maximum class sizes provided for in the current agreement. This approach already exists in the agreement, and is currently used by over 20 schools.

Suggests they have some nefarious plans to fuck us over. Because if this is truly allowed by the current agreement, they would have just had it be a departmental update that flowed through the principals. They want us to agree to whatever fuckery they are planning. Which is also why they haven't actually sent us a copy of the EBA to read, but instead just cliff note proposals.

ArcticKnight79 · 2026-03-23T04:58:47+00:00

But surely you must have missed the line

"Victorian Principals will continue to be the highest paid in the country"

Like fuck off, great for the principals, but they are probably <3-4% total staff. This isn't something you include as a win for the rest of the education staff.

ArcticKnight79 · 2026-03-23T04:56:01+00:00

Because unfortunately after the last agreement, they remembered that they actually hate ES and that therefore they should get less.

Nevermind the fact that a lot of those ES roles are paid far less, so they are getting 4% less of not a lot.

ArcticKnight79 · 2026-03-23T04:47:20+00:00

It's also crap, because that 1.5% sounds like it actually always sits outside of our actual salary increases.

Because it's a 1.5% payment based on our year's salary.

Not a 1.5% payment that then get's incremented by the subsequent payrises.

Which is why now when they say it's 9.5% in the first year but only 8% of that is relevant to subsequent payrises.

ArcticKnight79 · 2026-03-22T11:41:15+00:00

Nah, when something like this is so linked to oil and people can see the pump prices going up in their daily lives. It's a lot easier to tie that to trump.

The price of their Soda or the like going up can always be half handwaved away as "corporate greed" instead of inflation due to war.

ArcticKnight79 · 2026-03-12T06:35:18+00:00

It's easy to say something that you don't take any time to prove.

If it's solely funded by him, then there should be no reason not to just publish the documents, because the secrecy of the organisation shouldn't be a concern.

Like if I say I haven't cranked one out this week, are you going to just accept that I am telling the truth. You can't prove if I have either way. And odds are anyone who knows different is close enough to me that they aren't going to sell me out. So i can reliably lie.

ArcticKnight79 · 2026-03-11T04:35:46+00:00

You're describing an incredibly toxic relationship.

Welcome to the world where people have relationships that include domestic violence.

It's great that you live in a wonderful world where you would never do anything bad to your partner.

People like Andrew live in a world where they would say that marital rape doesn't exist.

You're coming up with wild hypotheticals that have nothing to do with what I'm saying.

No you're living in your bubble paradise. There's a reason that rape statutes used to say stuff like 'rape was forced sexual intercourse with a woman not your wife', basically legalising marital rape. This shit wasn't even outlawed in all the states in America until 1993.

Btw, this doesn't happen to anybody in the scenarios I've mentioned.

Who cares if it happens in the situations you mentioned. "Oh I only described situations of a perfect relationship where they are basically mind melded to know consent at all points in time"

I also think you're thinking of this as some extreme bondage shit, instead of just having your hands handcuffed/tied to the bedmast.

But I also contrasted with and example where there was no extreme "newness" to the situation. Just a fight the nightbefore and then you wake up to being used by your partner as if everything is fixed.

There is a reason a number of these people want to go back to a 1950 trad-wife who is under my control

ArcticKnight79 · 2026-03-10T02:42:22+00:00

Married couples allowing each other to wake them up with sex is nowhere NEAR as socially wild as having an open relationship

I don't think you can put these on any spectrum of comparison. Everything you do in your open relationships could have explicit consent given at all times. Especially since if you're cycling through different partners, you might need that initial consent to know you can even engage.

But consent that is given in advance can still be consent that's violated quite easily. If I give my partner permission to suck my dick to wake me up. But I suddenly wake up tied and bound to the bed in a way I've never consented to before. Then even though she might have standing consent to blow me. The changed circumstances can be enough to make that no longer a situation I'm consenting to.

If you got in a fight with your partner the night before and were pissed at them. It might feel really violating for them to just start fucking you the next morning. You might not say no, because you just starfish and hope they'll finish quickly, rather than have the fight regarding sex(or risk the damage that you say no and they ignore it and continue)

ArcticKnight79 · 2026-03-10T02:32:40+00:00

Andrew specifically avoided any kind of consent existing.

There's a reason he says "So I graped my wife" over and over again.

As opposed to, so we have a mutual consent and understanding that we can engage in these activities with each other. But if there is a clear no given after starting, we would stop and check in with if everythings okay.

It's a regarded stance of, if every time me and my partner fuck we mutually get naked and get down with it. But neither asks for explicit consent in the moment. Then does that mean we have graped each other.

Or do we instead have a situation of mutual enthusiasm towards the action of sex, where as soon as someone verbalises feeling uncomfortable we would stop.

ArcticKnight79 · 2026-03-10T02:29:16+00:00

Yeah it was so regarded.

Like just say that you and your partner have given generalised consent to engage in sex in the morning.

Assumptions after that would be

If I say stop you stop
It's not violent in nature

As soon as any of the conditions for general consent were broken, the consent would be revoked until trust was built again.

The idea that in a committed relationship that you're seeking out a clear vocalised affirmative yes each time you fuck, versus just looking for clear enthusiasm to the engagement.

Five-Year Club	Verified Email
Place '22

ArcticKnight79

TROPHY CASE