Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Scary Movie 3

This is topic Scary Movie 3 in forum Film Handlers' Movie Reviews at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=4;t=000669

Posted by Evans A Criswell (Member # 381) on 10-24-2003, 11:33 PM:

Attendance: 2003/10/24 19:05, Regal Hollywood 18, Huntsville, AL, Auditorium 10, Flat

I went into this not expexting much, but it had a lot of funny things and it was better than I expected. It's basically a sequence of scenes, each with some sort of joke in it. Other movies are parodied, as with the first two of these movies.

To me, the first Scary Movie was the best, but both the second one and this one were a lot of fun. The audience surely liked this one. I haven't been in a movie where the audience laughed this much in a while.

This was in one of the larger auditoriums at this theatre and it probably sold two thirds of the seats. Two other prints were playing in two other auditoriums. This particular print had a defective reel 1, with the color becoming yellowish every few seconds. The constant fluctuation of color was quite bad, especially near the left edge of the image and the audio was affected by the problem. When the movie started, there was an effect put into the movie simulating video tape type of video distortion and I thought the color problem was an effect in the movie, so I didn't realize it was a defective print until the audio was affected.

This is the kind of movie most of you film-techers will not like. It's for people who just want to laugh at a dumb comedy for 90 minutes. No more, no less. There's lots of ridiculous physical comedy, gross-out, and sex jokes. One I liked was at the wreck scene, with the doughnut and the hot dog.

I was shocked to see that, unlike the first two Scary Movie movies, there was no "sperm geyser" in this one. I kept expecting it.

I never saw "The Ring", but after seeing this movie, I feel like I know enough about it to not need to see it.

I don't think this movie would be as enjoyable with a small audience. The crowd laughing at lots of things really livened the movie up and made it work. If you see it, see it on a busy night.

Posted by Don Anderson (Member # 397) on 10-25-2003, 04:23 PM:

I think that it is safe to say that the Zucker brothers humor has become stale. Although, there were some funny parts in the film, it's just re-hashed humor, and the trailer again, showed most of that humor. Anyone that hasn't seen The Ring or Signs will probably be lost. Average age of viewers on Friday night was around 13-15 years of age. I'm shocked that it didn't get an R rating for the Pamela Anderson boob scenes! And whats with the half a reel of end credits??????

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 10-25-2003, 06:38 PM:

I'm shocked that they didn't make it rated R on purpose, since this is supposed to be the big comeback year for R movies. (and since the first two were R.) No dicks-through-the-head on this one, apparently.

Posted by Evans A Criswell (Member # 381) on 10-25-2003, 06:38 PM:

About the half a reel of end credits -- about halfway through them -- it said "We're about halfway through this thing." Did anyone catch that? I stayed through the credits because I was expecting some kind of little joke at the end, but there was none.

I like to wait until everyone leaves and then go and stand about 20 feet in front of the screen during the credits. Credits are a good time to check for precise focus over the whole screen and check for shutter ghosting.

Posted by Jason Black (Member # 684) on 10-25-2003, 11:52 PM:

The PG13 rating on this films has helped us in the field as far as ID checks and kids sneaking in... Plus, I think it helped generate a little more money by being 13.

Tonights business was off by about 15% from last night, but the film still nearly doubled it's weekend competitor, Radio.

I found the movie a little boring with lots of quick, witty scenes mixed in.

The one question I have after seeing this film.. Are Pamela Lee's boobs really that big? Sweet Jesus... they're like pontoons... I'd still [Razz]

'em, but that's another story... [Big Grin]

Posted by Dean Kollet (Member # 1789) on 10-26-2003, 01:44 PM:

Agreed, it was a dumb movie...but it had its funny moments. We sold this movie out on our 2 big houses (465 seats) and our medium house (265) friday night all night, but I'm in a college town, and it was FAMU's homecoming, so there were a lot of people in the city. Worth watching for free....

1.5 out of 5 stars

Posted by Robert D. LaValley (Member # 1867) on 10-26-2003, 05:22 PM:

Airplane all over again... As everyone has stated it has a couple of funny moments.. I think the actor that plays the kid "Cody" stole the whole show. His facial reactions was the best. As the above stated, worth seeing for free, not much more.. Attendance was ALOT better then I have seen in the past ones for this series becuase of the rating, and most of the kids watching it weren't born at the time airplane came out so they wouldn't know the similariies... They should have spoofed more movies. Alot more.

Posted by Don Anderson (Member # 397) on 10-27-2003, 01:31 AM:

It would have not grossed 47 million if it was rated R. Smart thinking on the Zucker Brothers. Evans, yes I did see the line in the credits about being half over. But, I have to disagree about checking the credits for focusing. I never set up the focus using the credits as a focus point. Some credits are nice and crisp, while others are overburned ( I guess thats the word I'm looking for). But, you are right about the ghosting. I had a few people walk out 3/4 way through the film, saying ...."why would anyone one pay to see this s#@!. But, hmmmmm, they did pay to see it [Wink]

What's really sad, is the sequel to be made. Scary Movie 4. Maybe, it will get a PG rating and pull in 69 million on opening weekend!

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 10-27-2003, 01:11 PM:

quote:
But, you are right about the ghosting. I had a few people walk out 3/4 way through the film, saying ...."why would anyone one pay to see this s#@!. But, hmmmmm, they did pay to see it

Of course, travel ghost (the shutter not completely blocking the light during film pulldown) is most visible on white titles against a black background, like closing credits. It's usually more visible on the right hand side of the image. If you see travel ghosting, by all means adjust the shutter timing or consider changing the shutter to a larger blade. Be sure you do not have excessive "play" in the gear train between the intermittent drive and the shutter shaft. If I see travel ghost anywhere, I bring it to the attention of the theatre so they can fix it.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 10-27-2003, 01:25 PM:

Please open up new threads in FHF for technical discussions, linking back to the originating movie review thread. [Smile]

Posted by Daniel Wright (Member # 1983) on 10-28-2003, 08:53 AM:

I have seen the movie twice already. Both times the auditorium(about 200 seats) was packed with kids under 18. If the movie had been rated R it would not have done the buisness it has.

Posted by Evans A Criswell (Member # 381) on 10-28-2003, 01:37 PM:

I thought the film was rated R like the first two, but noticed how many kids in the 12-14 age group there were in the auditoriums. I went to a 7:05 show on opening night and I'd say 20 to 30 percent of the audience were these 12-14 aged kids. It was also very obvious to me that the 12-year-olds have been exposed to lots more things that I was at that age. None of the jokes went over their heads like they would have mine at age 12. I guess I led a very sheltered life until I moved to Huntsville.

Posted by Michael Brown (Member # 890) on 02-06-2004, 09:01 PM:

Odeon Leeds/Bradford, Thur 5th Jan, 18:00 Screen 6, Flat, SR*D

A pretty good movie but with one main weakness - It was just far to short. Running at a little over an hour and 20 minutes it's like a TV show and not a movie. It was too short to allow me decide if I liked it or not.

It's like good chocolate cake, but the serving is just too small.

Posted by Evans A Criswell (Member # 381) on 02-06-2004, 11:27 PM:

I guess I'm getting old, but I actually like for movies to not be so long. This movie seemed about the right length for the type of comedy it was.