>There are certain RULES that one must abide by in order to successfully survive a horror movie
>killing off the best character in the sequel
>nobody likes the decision so you do a hammy shoe-in taped video for the third film
>>70677924
>The way he get killed in the sequel
>mfw
never read from the book of the dead, not even as a joke
>>70678134
Okay
>>70677889
All the sequels to this movie sucked
But this movie was GOAT
WhY?
>>70678298
It was original. Which is saying something on many levels for Horror movie genre.
Youngfags will deny this, saying that it's over done with so many spooky movies parodies, it seems like a hacked idea ripped off from the future going back in retrograde.
There'snever beena horror movie where the killers did it because they were bored.
The final scene was banned several times until the producer called up the review board and told them it was a comedy movie.
>>70679826
B-b-but there's a bunch of movies where the killers did it because "they were home" or "they were deranged"
but not like how this movie did it. It predates the Columbine massacre.
I haven't watched any of the modern ghost horror movies (2spooky4me). Are there any rules for them - besides leaving a haunted house?
>>70678298
It was the OG "parody" for horror movies. It took all the cliches of horror and used them to its advantage while not being cynical about it.
Also the reveal of there being 2 ghostfaces was fucking great and is one of the best movie twists.
Horror films that can use the tropes of the horror genre well while not going into Scary Movie territory of parody are a true gem, its a shame there are so little of them.
>>70677924
>attempting to bring Randy-like characters in Part 4
https://youtu.be/0FQcw4Mjrig
>>70679962
>cinema club
>they only watch movies
