I think it's really telling, for instance, that at the moment of Big Reveal where we learn that Billy killed Sid's mother, the fact that she was also raped (or had sex) isn't revisited. Had she really just been with the dude they framed, or did Billy rape her, too?
-
Show this thread
-
The fact that Sid doesn't ask this, even though her own issues with sexual intimacy stem from her reaction to the crime, tell me that Craven wasn't cognisant of or especially interested in the misogyny underlying the tropes he was otherwise trying to play with.
3 replies 0 retweets 58 likesShow this thread -
Craven's failure to see how drenched in sexism his killers are and how it informs their anger, even though he wrote them that way, reminds me of that famous
@danielortberg piece about Women Listening To Men In Art History http://the-toast.net/2014/06/23/women-listening-men-art-history/ … - specifically:1 reply 7 retweets 59 likesShow this thread -
Like the painters recreating bored women without apparent insight into *why* they were bored, Craven is recreating nerd misogyny without apparent insight into the fact that it is an actual, bitter hatred of women and not just using bitches and sluts as handy insults.
2 replies 6 retweets 62 likesShow this thread -
When Sid tells Stu and Billy that they've seen too many movies, they retaliate with the line that movies don't make serial killers - the whole thing a deliberate invocation of the 80s/90s paranoia that video games, films, DnD etc were Turning The Youths To Evil.
1 reply 0 retweets 34 likesShow this thread -
Arguably the biggest sign that Craven misses the misogyny inherent in his own killers? SID DOESN'T CONFRONT STU ABOUT TATUM'S DEATH. They were dating! Was it Stu who killed her? Did Billy strike out on his own? Her death was the only needless one, a red herring on Craven's part.
3 replies 0 retweets 33 likesShow this thread -
The principal is killed because, well, they're angry teens who hate school; even three years before Columbine, that's not a psychological stretch. But Tatum? You could maybe argue they were taunting Sid by taking her friend, but the plan was to survive. What's Stu's motive?
2 replies 0 retweets 28 likesShow this thread -
They don't remember to taunt her about Tatum; Sid only finds her dead by accident, after fleeing. If their plan had worked and they'd gotten away with killing Sid and her dad, looking like heroic survivors, why wouldn't Stu want Tatum there to comfort him?
1 reply 0 retweets 26 likesShow this thread -
Tatum's death, I would argue, is proof that Craven is playing with horror tropes without being fully aware of or invested in their misogyny: you can take that scene out of the film and absolutely nothing changes. It's there for shock and to throw us off Stu's trail: nothing more.
1 reply 0 retweets 38 likesShow this thread -
ANYWAY. That was fun! I might have to watch the sequel soon and livetweet it in turn. Some nights, you've just gotta watch a horror film and crush an obscene amount of mint choc chip ice cream while spouting commentary, y'know? FIN.
2 replies 0 retweets 41 likesShow this thread
OH WAIT, FINAL POINT: I am COMPLETELY FREAKED OUT by how closely Murderboy Skeet Ulrich, aka Billy, resembles an evil, bizarro world version of absolute sweetheart hockey player Tyson Barrie. JUST LOOK AT THEM.pic.twitter.com/t3xEUGFCwP
-
-
FINAL FINAL ADDENDUM: It's been pointed out to me by multiple helpful persons that Craven was only the director, not the writer, so much of what I've attributed to Craven here is really down to Kevin Williamson. My bad! I stand by what I've said - I've just used the wrong name.
3 replies 2 retweets 50 likesShow this threadThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.