Rue Morgue Podcast

Episode 164: THE VERDICT – SCREAM

on June 14, 2014 | 10 Comments

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

On this epic double episode, we reveal the verdict in the case of…

THE HORROR COURT VS. WES CRAVEN’S SCREAM

Is it GUILTY or NOT GUILTY? Tune in and find out.

:- FDBK

p.s. To download Alexandra’s Black Museum lectures, visit the website:
http://theblackmuseum.com/?page_id=851

WORLD MAP OF THE RUE MORGUE PODCAST LISTENERS

If you’d like to be added, write to us at letters @ ruemorgueradio.com, let us know your general location and what name you want to use.

To download the episode, click HERE
(or ‘Right Click’ to save to your hard drive).

To subscribe to us in iTunes, use the following URL (and leave a review!):
http://www.ruemorgueradio.com/RMpodcast/rss.xml

100 Essential Alternative Horror Films according to listeners of the Rue Morgue Podcast:
http://the-mortuary.com/showthread.php?t=33455

Winston’s Musical Meltdown Massacre – Request Thread:
http://the-mortuary.com/showthread.php?t=33475

For video editions of the Rue Morgue Podcast, check out the Dystopia Films YouTube Page:
http://www.youtube.com/user/DystopiaFilms

The Rue Morgue Podcast on Chonebook:
https://www.facebook.com/RueMorguePodcast

The Ludovico Film Institute Vol. XXVI – John Waters
http://the-mortuary.com/showthread.php?t=33752

Write to us at letters @ ruemorgueradio.com

Tags: Alexandra West, Faculty of Horror, Scream

Responses to Episode 164: THE VERDICT – SCREAM

  1. ROBERT BLACK says:

    The pokaroo of horror,.. I’ll take it. Yeah okay,”pithy ego” may have been a tad condescending,sorry.I was referring to Stuart’s slightly bombastic acerbic and yes,ego driven nature so it wasn’t incorrect.The least you can do when responding is to get the names of the debate team correct. You both did an excellent job of expressing your point of view.

  2. ROBERT BLACK says:

    On second thought maybe snuffalapopgus is more appropriate as I have the matching appendage.

  3. Diana says:

    So in the end Feedback admits to some of the critiques offered by many members of the jury — it just wasn’t made for him and that’s why he didn’t like Scream! And throughout the actual trial (at least to this listener) that’s just what he said. And it’s a natural reaction! For me (also not the demographic) I had a target audience member with whom to watch it … and didn’t she grow up to be articulate so … Alex/Andrea/Ashley … Congratulations! And Feedback … I wasn’t “offended”; I just didn’t agree with the premise of your arguments and I think Alex defended the film (and me) just fine! So please don’t write back … I enjoyed listening to the Verdict! Cheers.

  4. Andrea says:

    Hi guys,

    Congratulations to my co-host Alexandra for her victory! Defending Scream is no small feat but she pulled it off with panache!

    One thing I’ve learned by doing the Faculty of Horror with her is that research, discussion and analysis often breeds fondness: we’ve done episodes on movies we haven’t especially liked and then walked away with a new appreciation for them. Like Mike Tank and my acolyte/roommate Ryan, I was torn between agreeing with Feedback’s opinion of the film while acknowledging that Alex made far superior points. Is it a GOOD film? No. Is it a significant film in horror? Yes. Clearly, because you guys were able to unpack it enough to spend hours discussing it! There’s value in that, even if I’d be happy to never see the film again. I’ve never been shit-hot on slashers at all, to be honest. Just not my thing.

    Anyway, kudos to you both! That was an entertaining fight.

    • FDBK says:

      Is this the real Andrea? You’re gonna confuse people….

      But, yes. I would agree that Scream is a significant film in the genre. It ‘commercially’ revitalized the genre (if not artistically) and certainly had a measurable impact, influence and a legacy (though a dubious one at that). I’d never argue that it ‘wasn’t’ a significant film.

      And while Sammy made his feelings all too clear, where did Mike Tank make the claim that Alex made far superior points? Is this true?

      Et tu, Tank?

      Anyway, glad you enjoyed the show, Alex! Your partner Andrea certainly acquitted herself in fine style and it was a sincere pleasure to listen to her master debate.

      • Mike Tank says:

        I thought that BOTH sides made extremely compelling arguments which were articulately expressed with crystal clear clarity and passion, making it difficult for those of us who weren’t biased and didn’t really have a dog in this fight (i.e., horror fans like me who held neither great admiration nor seething hatred for the film) to decide which side to take.

        *FACTUAL FLUBS GUY ALERT!* But let the record show, Your Honor, that, point in fact… and with all due respect to Ms. Ashley Alexander WestBat III… I never said that the defense’s arguments were “superior” to those of the prosecution. I think my exact words were that she “made some great points”.

        That’s all. Now, if you don’t mind, I’d like to see the bailiff, pay my fines, and go back to not having to think about Jamie Kennedy, Skeet Ulrich or Matthew Lillard ever again.*

        *Although I do have a soft spot for the preposterous 1995 cyber-thriller HACKERS, in which Lillard’s character repeatedly shouts the immortal mantra “HACK THE PLANET!” Words to live by.

        • FDBK says:

          I reckon the dubious claim was a heady mix of wishful thinking and wonky sentence structure on Hellbat’s part. Nevermind, Andrea. Technical difficulties aside, it was still a decent attempt at being a sassy gloater!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>