Scream (1996 film)/Headscratchers

Scream

 * Why does Ghostface say that Casey got the second question on the phone wrong? He asked who the killer of Friday the Thirteenth was, she said Jason.
 * I think they meant the killer from the first movie not the entire series. The killer from that movie was
 * It was a trick question. Ghostface never specified which Friday the 13th, which was the whole point. In the 1st one then there's Jason.
 * Yeah, it was definitely a trick question. Casey was screwed no matter what she said. I'm paraphrasing here, but at the end
 * Does Ghostface ever ask quizzes about horror movies in any of the other movies?
 * Also, logically speaking, none of the other killers could actually know about the trivia.
 * Was there ever any reason for Ghostface to kill Casey? The other characters he killed were linked to his motive or were in his way. It just seems to be a random kill.
 * Why did the police not do some tests on the mask, once they go it? There could have been some fingerprints on it or there might have been some DNA on the inside where it touched the killer's face.
 * The traces would have been very faint, and a lot of small-town police departments don't have very big forensics budgets, especially back then.
 * At the end, why didn't after polishing off Sidney and her father? It would have been a lot easier and less risky.
 * They wanted Sidney to watch?, maybe he wanted to make her suffer by drawing out the process and show her exactly how he was going to get away with it before he killed her.
 * How, exactly, could the killers expect to get away with their plan? Billy would have a lot of explaining to do - like why was his shirt covered in red tinted corn syrup and why was the corn syrup also all over the master bedroom in a way that would make it obvious that somebody faked a killing. With semen and other samples on the bed, it goes without saying that the police would very quickly figure out that Sydney had sex with him that night in that bed and that shortly after, he pretended to be killed. To top it off, he also had gunshot residue on his hands, and Sydney's father - the man supposed to be framed for the murders - would show obvious signs of being tied up for a couple days not the least of which would be the unmistakable marring of his face and wrists from the duct tape.
 * How, exactly, could the killers expect to get away with their plan? Billy would have a lot of explaining to do - like why was his shirt covered in red tinted corn syrup and why was the corn syrup also all over the master bedroom in a way that would make it obvious that somebody faked a killing. With semen and other samples on the bed, it goes without saying that the police would very quickly figure out that Sydney had sex with him that night in that bed and that shortly after, he pretended to be killed. To top it off, he also had gunshot residue on his hands, and Sydney's father - the man supposed to be framed for the murders - would show obvious signs of being tied up for a couple days not the least of which would be the unmistakable marring of his face and wrists from the duct tape.

Scream 2

 * Why does Sidney have a grudge against Cotton for something he didn't do?
 * Mainly because he was trying to pressure her into doing a interview.
 * He did admit that Maureen was having an affair with him. Sidney likely would have disliked him no matter what out of loyalty to her father.
 * Does Too Soon not exist in the Scream universe? You would think that Stab would get a serious case of Dude Not Funny, with the short time frame and especially given the fact it was a crowd-pleasing slasher flick based off of a real-life tragedy. Sure the whole thing was basically a commentary on the screwed-up bloodlust of pop culture, but it's still incredibly disturbing.
 * Sidney automatically recognises Mrs Loomis, despite the makeover. Gail, who is a reporter, which presumably means she's supposed to have an eye for details, doesn't. Is that realistic?
 * Being a reporter doesn't mean you have a photographic memory. Reporters are typically more concerned with retaining information rather than faces.

Scream 3

 * Jay and Silent Bob's cameo. It mostly appears as a throwaway gag but when them existing within the Screamverse, it begs the question, how much of The View Askew Niverse films are canon? It just boggles the mind.
 * I think they were just filming a Stab movie near some movie in The View Askew Niverse.
 * Yes, but that still raises too many questions.
 * What the hell was with  being the killer? Gale finds him in the basement, and after checking his body pretty thoroughly she declares him dead, and they never explain how he was able to STOP HIS FREAKING PULSE.
 * Considering,   could have access to various  . Or Gale could have been too frantic and just didn't notice correctly...
 * So... how did get Sidney's phone number anyway? The only ones who used Dewey's phone where  and.

Scream 4

 * Ghostface During the murders that take place at Jill's house one of the killers is seen at the Stab movie marathon and the other killer is said to be with someone else. After the murders, Sidney immediately leaves for Kirby's house where both killers already are. There's a significant amount of time before Sidney shows up, even though the killer would conceivably left around the same time, so how did the killer get to Kirby's house so fast? And who killed  ?
 * While there's been a theory of a third killer, ..
 * But if Sidney and the killer leave Jill's house at roughly around the same time, why does it take Sidney so much longer to get to Kirby's house?
 * I definitely buy the 3rd killer idea though. I mean, to kill Besides, I just don't buy that
 * I agree, but maybe.
 * Even if so, it stil doesn't explain got home and went up stairs.  Then, just before  gets butchered,  I'd buy a prankster except they say something like "He's like a ghost," which implies it's actually Ghostface.
 * could've just been "He's like a ghost" was just to throw you off.
 * I buy that, but also the same thing happened in the first Scream when Sidney is attacked by someone (possibly Stu) in Ghostface attire in the bathroom. A lot of Scream is based off of misdirection really.
 * I'm pretty sure the bathroom attack was a prankster. Stu was with Tatum and Billy was just outside the bathroom. Besides, we saw a ton of people running around and it's not like he evaded police officers unlike in Scream 4
 * In Scream 4, it is shown that the fictional movie-within-a-movie Stab 3 ended up being completed. How did the studio manage to finish the movie when most of the cast, ?
 * They started from scratch. Stab is a Cash Cow Franchise in the Scream universe, so it's not like a little killing spree is gonna stop them -- since when has Hollywood been more concerned with good taste than box office receipts? Hell, the bloodbath surrounding the production probably turned it into a bigger hit than it would've been otherwise, judging by how it got four sequels in the following decade while, back in the real world, it took eleven years to make another Scream movie.
 * In Scream 4, they mention that only the first three films were based on fact. They started from scratch, using the events of Scream 3 as the basis for Stab 3. The "return to Woodsboro" plot originally planned for Stab 3 was abandoned in favor of the more interesting story that actually happened.
 * It is shown that Stab 6 actually takes place inside Stab 7 (the characters in Stab 7 are seen watching it). Does this mean that Stab 7 is actually the sixth Stab movie? Or was there a seperate Stab 6?
 * The marathon was said to include "all seven" Stab movies, so presumably Stab 6 exists. The movies apparently got increasingly weird as time went on, so perhaps Stab 7 was just bizarrely meta.
 * I get that Stab 7 opening with the beginning of Stab 6 was a twist to throw off viewers of Scream 4, but how would that work within the Scream universe? If anybody had seen Stab 6, they'd instantly recognize those events once Stab 7 started. Thus, it's less a twist and more just a really confusing prank to make people think they're watching Stab 6 again.
 * Imagine this, you've seen Stab 6, and you watch Stab 7. The opening is either (A) the opening from Stab 6, which, if it was me, would make me take out the DVD and make sure it was the right one or (B) a different opening that claims to be Stab 6, which, because you've already seen it, you know to be fake, thus ruining the twist. Either way it doesn't work.
 * How on earth could  For someone trying to be the Magnificent Bastard, they sure clutched the Idiot Ball harder than any of the previous killers.
 * How did they manage to have a final showdown in an ICU without anyone noticing? An ICU is staffed around the clock, with regular checks on patients. And they weren't exactly quiet.
 * A deleted scene reveals that they were in a basement meeting during those scenes.
 * A deleted scene reveals that they were in a basement meeting during those scenes.

General
""You're forgetting one thing about ... I fucking killed him.""
 * The shooting the killer in the head thing bugs me. I have no problem with a character killing in self-defence. The intent there isn't to kill but to protect their own life with their attacker's death being a consequence of that. However, if the killer is unarmed and weak enough that they can be restrained, then, the response should be to wait until medical help and the police show up. Shooting an unarmed individual who has recently been unconscious, has lost a significant amount of blood, and who may or may not have internal injuries doesn't fall under the category of self-defense due to the fact less extreme options are available. 'This person killed my loved ones and tried to kill me,' are not acceptable moral nor legal justifications for taking an at-the-moment defenceless person's life. Sidney, Dewey, and whoever else shot the still alive killers are murders themselves.
 * The only kill you could possibly be referring to is .   were all shot in the head when they were attacking Sidney, Dewey and Gail. Sidney was confident that   would return for a "final scare", just as Billy and Mickey did. Yes, the right thing to do would be to wait for the police to get there and deal with it. But the woman a psychotic murderer who'd killed , but was also responsible for planning the deaths of   and had planned to kill her and frame her for the murders. The bitch may have been defenseless, but getting shot in the head when she was probably dead anyway does not put her in the category of "sympathetic mass-murderer".
 * And as for "Sidney's a murderer" thing, that's the point.