ChildCare Action Project: Christian Analysis of American Culture (CAP)


Click on CAPCon Alert
image for explanation
Entertainment Media Analysis Report
A service to parents and grandparents

Scream 3 (2000), (R)
CAP Score: 10
CAP Influence Density: 2.78
AD Space Available

Become a CAPtain

with your donation!

The foul language eliminator

Removes profanity from
movies and TV shows

A Christian Family

Internet Network Cooperative

Switch to LifeLine

for Christian
long distance service

The Family Friendly

Internet Service

A Christ Centered
Christians Online
Community Web Site


Christian Media News

A Singles
Christian Network

Click here to vote
for this site!

Visit this CBX member
Christian Banner eXchange

ALERT: To fully understand this report you should first visit the topics
suggested by the CAP Table of Contents.


*Scream 3* (R) -- "shhhing"

*Scream 3* was a good for one thing at least -- it enabled me to have an opportunity to further explain the amazing utility of the CAP analysis model. Please let me do so before going into the particulars of *Scream 3*. If you are not interested in the functionality of the CAP Entertainment Media Analysis Model, just move to the second paragraph below.

Christians who have 'suffered the slings and arrows' of *South Park: BLU* seem to agree that it is the, or nearly the quintessential demon of the influence of Satan in the entertainment industry -- it is the standard of trash movies. On the surface, if only the CAP Final Score is used to make a decision about the acceptability of a movie, *South Park* would seem not as bad as *Scream 3* since *South Park* earned a CAP Final Score of 29 while *Scream 3* earned only 10. But how could this be? *South Park* was *clearly* much more invasive to wholesome ethics and values. Without going into the mathematics of this seeming paradox, understand that just because a CAP Thermometer shows a score of zero does not mean the actual score in that Investigation Area *is* zero -- it could be much, much less than zero. Some movies, *South Park* included, have earned Investigation Area scores of much lower than MINUS 500. But a score less than zero is meaningless in a data display. That is where the CAP Influence Density is valuable.

While the CAP Final Score and the CAP Thermometers have been proven to be reliable comparative tools, the CAP ID combined with them is a much more complete measure. The CAP Final Score and the CAP Thermometers give you one set of parameters as comparison tools but the CAP ID uses a completely different set of mathematical operations to give you another parameter: the "viscosity" or "thickness" of influence as another comparison tool. *South Park* with a CAP ID of 10.65 was almost 4 times as thick with trash as *Scream 3* with a CAP ID of 2.78. If you now ask "What difference does it make. Both movies are unfit since to begin with the Final Scores are much less than the threshold for R-rated movies" I'll say "You are right. I just like to give you 111% so that the 90% you retain will be the 100% you need." :o)

Seems to me the CAP analysis model is working fine. Makes sense considering Who designed it.

*Scream 3* was nothing more than an offspring of the two previous slasher flicks but with a little more quality. The knifing dude followed the script of a movie within the movie called "Stab 3" and killed the stars of the movie in the order they are killed in "Stab 3." Once that pattern was figured out, it would seem easy to lay trap for the killer by setting up an ambush around the next victim in accordance with the script of the movie. This would have worked and would have saved a lot of lives but there were three versions of the script, each with a different order of killing.

But that is just it -- killing. Killing by knife is the main (for the lack of a better expression) thrust in the movie. There were also 41 uses of God's name in vain, 11 times with and 30 times without the four letter expletive plus 101 uses of the three/four letter word vocabulary in 106 minutes. You do the math. And yes, there were a lot of kids well under 17 in the audience. Some as young as 7 or 8. I wonder how many of them will be able to leave all of their childhood behind when it comes time to put away childish things? If the behavior in movies does not influence viewers, why then is there and why has there been such a push to get cigarette and liquor out of TV commercials?

And yes, there was a lot of sexual programming as well. Revealing clothing, excessive cleavage, admissions of immoral sexual activity, adults in underwear, and more. I suppose it goes without saying, *Scream 3* was a very violent movie. At least 11 deaths, lots of knife attacks with slicings each with the "shhhing" of a steel blade, beatings, and lots of blood. Booze, drunkenness, and smoking nearly drowned the Drugs/Alcohol score. Note that all of the Investigation Area scores were below the threshold for R-rated programming in movies of 1996 and before.

So many of our visitors seem to be relying only on this Summary/Commentary for a full assessment of this movie. This is not possible. For the best representation of the CAP Entertainment Media Analysis Model applied to this movie, visit the Findings/Scoring section below.

FINDINGS / SCORING: Screram 3 (2000) CAP Thermometers

NOTE: Multiple occurrences of each item described below may be likely.

Wanton Violence/Crime (W):
  • reckless driving to rescue
  • knife attacks, several very graphic
  • knife threats
  • threatening phone calls
  • pooling of blood about victims
  • fights
  • firearms and gunfire to kill
  • a mannequin beheaded
  • threats to kill
  • dead bodies
  • attempted murder

    Impudence/Hate (I)(1):
  • 29 uses of the most foul of the foul words
  • 38 uses of the three/four letter word vocabulary

    Sex/Homosexuality (S):
  • sex talk, some vulgar
  • woman in shower
  • woman in towel only
  • adults in underwear
  • provocative and revealing dress, excessive cleavage
  • gamming (maximizing exposure of underside of upper leg while sitting)
  • admissions of immoral sex
  • vulgar accusation
  • story telling of immoral sex

    Drugs/Alcohol (D):
  • booze
  • drinking
  • drunkenness
  • smoking

    Offense to God (O)(2):
  • 41 uses of God's name in vain, 11 with and 30 without the four letter expletive

    Murder/Suicide (M)(3):
  • at least 10 murders plus a defense killing

  • (1) As noted in CAP Special Report-001, "Investigation Area and Scoring Trend," of the six CAP Investigation Areas, Impudence/Hate was the strongest presence in all four movie classifications. It has a strong revelation about the entertainment media.

    (2) The use of the three/four letter word vocabulary without God's name in vain is incorporated into the Impudence/Hate Investigation Area. The use of God's name with or without the four letter expletive is incorporated into the Offense to God Investigation Area. There is no duplication.

    (3) Only portrayal of successful murder or suicide are incorporated into Murder/Suicide. Portrayal of attempts to commit murder or suicide and deaths by police action or war are incorporated into Wanton Violence/Crime.

    The ChildCare Action Project (CAP) is a nonprofit Christian ministry. We rely on public support. If you wish to contribute to the CAP, please send your donations to

    ChildCare Action Project
    Post Office Box 177
    Granbury, TX 76048-0177

    Your gifts are tax deductible in accordance with Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Service Tax Codes.

    Please feel free to write to us.

    You are welcome to
    Go back to the CAP Reports Page
    Top of the CAP Home Page
    CAP Table of Contents

    or leave me an email message or comment at

    Thank you for visiting us and may God bless you. Prayerfully, we will provide you with some of the most revealing commentary and investigative reporting you have ever read.

    In the name of Jesus:
    Lord, Master, Teacher, Savior, God.

    Thomas A. Carder
    ChildCare Action Project: Christian Analysis of American Culture (CAP)

    Copyright ChildCare Action Project (CAP)

    Click Here For