MovieChat Forums > Scream (1996) Discussion > Stu Was The Sole Killer?!

Stu Was The Sole Killer?!

posted 4 years ago by LockardTheGOAT (342)
31 replies | jump to latest

What do you think of the theory that while Billy killed Maureen (as Stu watched), it was Stu that actually committed all of the murders as Ghostface? Like, imagine Billy's role was akin to Manson's involvement in the Tate-LaBianca murders, where he masterminded everything, chose the victims and arranged how everything would go, but left the dirty work itself to his patsies (in this case, Stu.)

Just go back and re-watch: Stu has the motive to kill Casey and Steve. He runs right back to the school right before Himbry is murdered. Ghostface goes inside the house after Tatum is murdered (makes no sense for Billy to do that.) Kenny is obviously murdered by Stu, since Billy faked his death just minutes prior.

What do you think?

[–] JohnMcCock (136) 4 years ago

JohnMcCock thinks this fits the category of "seing what's not there".

[–] LockardTheGOAT (342) 4 years ago

I'm not saying the latter makes it obvious he's the killer, it's just additional stuff I'm mentioning to correlate the theory in ways that make it more plausible.

I just think it's a decent bit of reasoning, especially as it means at least one of them would have a moderately high body count, since having to share between only six victims means neither guy likely killed many people.

[–] NormaAndNorman (3900) 4 years ago

Seems to me Ghostface always looked tall, like Stu. There is a major height difference between Stu and Billy.

[–] Stratego (29237) 4 years ago

More likely that Billy killed Tatum as Stu was busy hosting the party and (un)locked the door on the inside. Billy also most likely stabbed Dewey since Stu was checking on Gale.

[–] LockardTheGOAT (342) 4 years ago

That's logical, but I think Stu killed Tatum. Why else would Ghostface go inside the house after killing Tatum if he was Billy? That makes no sense

[–] Stratego (29237) 4 years ago

To hide the costume and knife Stu had to use later.

[–] LockardTheGOAT (342) 4 years ago

Eh, he didn't have to go inside the house to do that. He could have left them right there, granted so could Stu, but at least Stu had a party to return to. What if Billy had gotten caught by one of the partiers? At least Stu could have played it off as a prank a lot easier than Billy could have.

[–] Stratego (29237) 4 years ago

Why would he leave it in the garage if Stu later needed it inside the house?

No, Stu was most likely keeping an eye on the partiers. No one would be able to do that if he was the killer. Killing off your girlfriend can not be easily played off. There was also some kind off washroom with a door between the kitchen and the garage, so Billy was more safe than you think.

[–] LockardTheGOAT (342) 4 years ago

Uh, Stu could have later just walked to the garage to retrieve it. I mean, the garage is PART of the house. It's not like it's some other far out location

Stu could have easily sparred himself a couple minutes to kill his girlfriend without anyone noticing. It would hardly be the biggest leap in logic that the movie took. The general behavior of Ghostface in that scene definitely fits Stu's personality more than Billy's IMO.

[–] Stratego (29237) 4 years ago

That argument applies to both theories. If it is Stu then why didn't he just undress and leave the knife in the garage? Less risk of being seen by anybody else.

There is no specific behavior of Ghostface in any scene that points to certain character. Ghostface is just Ghostface.

I do agree that Stu has more of a motive to kill Tatum as he's more of a thrill killer than Billy, but in this case it makes more sense Stu was keeping an eye on the party while Billy took out Tatum.

[–] LockardTheGOAT (342) 4 years ago

I already addressed that two replies ago lol

[–] Stratego (29237) 4 years ago

No, you mentioned in your last reply that Stu could have "easily sparred himself a couple minutes to kill his girlfriend without anyone noticing" with the argument that the movie takes more than one "leap in logic". My argument is, why go with that explanation if you can go with the theory that makes more sense because it's way less risky?

[–] LockardTheGOAT (342) 4 years ago

LOL. I meant my own two replies, silly. Here's what I wrote: "Eh, he didn't have to go inside the house to do that. He could have left them right there, granted so could Stu, but at least Stu had a party to return to. What if Billy had gotten caught by one of the partiers? At least Stu could have played it off as a prank a lot easier than Billy could have"

As for why go with my explanation over your's? Well, because my explanation is the more rational one, I think. Stu sneaking into the garage to kill Tatum is less risky than Billy going inside the house wearing a Ghostface costume with a knife in his hand. Admittedly, it's what I prefer to believe anyways, but still

[–] Stratego (29237) 4 years ago

And I was saying that I was replying to your last reply, not the replies before that. Why go with a leap in logic to explain away that Stu decides to murder his girlfriend in a couple of minutes with no one on the lookout?

So no, I don't agree your explanation is "more rational". Stu had no idea how long the attack would last or if someone would decide to snoop around in the garage. Billy could undress and leave the costume and knife in the washroom (or whatever it was) while Stu closed the door and kept an eye on everyone from the kitchen.

And something else I mentioned before, who locked and unlocked the door on the otherside if the killer was Stu?

[–] LockardTheGOAT (342) 4 years ago

It's not really a leap in logic, though. Stu would only need a couple minutes to do the deed, plus he could have told everyone, "Excuse me while I go grab some beers for all of us" and no one would question his absence or go snooping in the garage.

As for who locked and unlocked the door, that's probably just typical movie inconsistencies. They obviously didn't want us thinking there were two killers on our first viewing, so I don't think that should be taken to mean anything.

[–] Stratego (29237) 4 years ago

He has no idea how long it would take to murder Tatum and there were lots of drunk teens in the house who might've decided to look for beer on their own.

Well, if you dismiss everything just as movie inconsistencies that don't mean anything, then Ghostface going inside the house has no meaning except for making it more scary that the killer is now inside the house. I'm sure that scene wasn't supposed to suggest that the killer necessarily had to have been someone at the party.

Now you're free to believe it's more logical Stu is the killer since neither theory could be considered 'wrong', but you asked for our opinion and I just disagree.

[–] LockardTheGOAT (342) 4 years ago

lol How long does it take to stab someone to death? Let alone some tiny girl. Plus the fact that the killer was willing to press the garage door button and let the mechanics of that do the job for him might indicate he just wanted her dead ASAP. It'd be quicker than running over and stabbing her.

[–] Stratego (29237) 4 years ago

Wt...? Don't you remember the scene??? Tatum puts up a hell of a fight. And the garage door death wasn't quick at all and made a lot of noise. She was just steps away, running over and stabbing her would actually have been quicker. But Ghostface clearly enjoyed doing something different.

[–] LockardTheGOAT (342) 4 years ago

He couldn't have known that, though... He probably thought she'd go down easily

[–] Stratego (29237) 4 years ago

He had no guarantee. It was especially risky with all those drunk teens around. Their previous attacks were way less risky.

[–] LockardTheGOAT (342) 4 years ago

There's never a guarantee with anything. But Stu would have had enough of one (at least in his mind) to go ahead with trying to kill her himself if he wanted. These guys took a lot of risks throughout their entire killing spree, this one doesn't strike me as a particular improbable one

[–] Stratego (29237) 4 years ago

Not impossible perhaps, but still less like likely. It would definitely be more risky than their previous attacks and I don't see why they would choose to do that at that point. And I still think the locked door is a problem that shouldn't just be dismissed.

And there's also the look Billy gives Stu when he arrives at the party.

[–] LockardTheGOAT (342) 4 years ago

Your making way too much of it than there needs to be. And it was nowhere close to being the riskiest thing they did. These guys became sloppier and sloppier as the movie went along, so...

As for "the look", that could just be his way of saying, "tonight's the night." As in everything they've done and planned for over the past year is all coming to a head tonight. If Billy actually killed Tatum and left the costume and knife in another room, he and Stu would have already exchanged looks, so why would be flex his eyebrows at him at the door for any reason?

[–] Stratego (29237) 4 years ago

Why would it mean they exchanged looks before??? It wasn't necessary for Stu to stay with Billy after he unlocked the door. In fact, he had to keep an eye on the party to keep people from going to the garage and the washroom while Billy was still there.

They didn't become sloppy until the actual finale when they were improvising.

You're making too much of Ghostface's mannerisms, him going back inside the house and Stu's supposed motive. You're speculating just as much as I do, because the movie never makes clear who the killer is.

Look, we're going in circles. It's clear you REALLY like to believe Stu killed Tatum, which is fine. But I don't understand why you wanted to hear other people's opinion.

[–] ADBruno1985 (3303) 4 years ago

It's worth mentioning (and I don't think anyone did) that when Billy first appears quite shortly thereafter, it is from the outside of the front door. That would put weight on Stu having killed Tatum. Unless Billy sneaked back out of the house again and then went to the front door. Other than that I've always assumed it was Billy though.

[–] Stratego (29237) 4 years ago

Also interesting is the look Billy gives to Stu when he arrives at the party, as if to say "Job's done".

[–] Sandman81 (1501) 4 years ago

Casey and Steve was definitely a two man job. Just carrying Steve to the house would require two guys, then stringing Casey up as quickly as they did.

[–] LockardTheGOAT (342) 4 years ago

I agree they were both there, but Stu could have still been the one to carry out the actual murders

[–] Castortroy82 (61) 3 years ago

You're a fucking idiot if you think Stu was the one that killed Tatum, when I first saw this movie after it came out I knew it was Billy...how thickheaded do you have to be. The movie itself made it obvious to the viewers.

[–] CaldoTheKid (306) 4 years ago

I always took it as Billy killed the principal because we saw Stu inviting the guests to his party but we don't know where Billy is.

[–] MovieChatUser497 (18943) 3 years ago

Pretty sure it had to be Billy who killed Tatum considering Stu was inside during the time entertaining guests.