Scream 4

Roro4Brit

Reallllly looking forward to this. I love the scream franchise.

If I could have it my way, this should be a scary mo fo of a movie, great acting/direction with some very new rules and some good laughs.

I think they should call it quits after this - hopefully the can redeem from Scream 3 and bow out with grace.

AidoK82

Anyone reckon they'll kill off Sidney, Gale or Dewey- or all three- this time around?

AidoK82

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WsYE0oSHRVU (the trailer: not fantastic quality, but you can still make out most of it)

Basq

AidoK82 wrote: »

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WsYE0oSHRVU (the trailer: not fantastic quality, but you can still make out most of it)

Thanks.. but will wait for official.

Loughc

AidoK82 wrote: »

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WsYE0oSHRVU (the trailer: not fantastic quality, but you can still make out most of it)

Thanks for that! It looks great, but then again isn't that the point of a trailer! lol

Earthhorse

The first Scream was great. Really clever, suspenseful and enjoyable. But the sequels, as pointed out already, were everything it parodied in the original. Won't be waiting for this with baited breath.

JP Liz V1

If this is the last film they should make Sidney the killer

Basq

JP Liz V1 wrote: »

If this is the last film they should make Sidney the killer

That'd be so hackenyed and obvious that I'd expect better than that..

.. but it is Craven so actually, no I wouldn't!

Frisbee

basquille wrote: »

They got a cracking cast for it including Hayden Panettiere, Rory Culkin, Marley Shelton, Mary McDonnell, Adam Brody, Kristen Bell and Anna Paquin.

Great work out of the casting crew.

Basq

And the official trailer..

johnny_ultimate

Wow, they all have funky haircuts in that trailer (especially Culkin and that annoying one from Heroes). Pretty par for the course horror trailer really!

Having watched the trilogy over the last week, it definitely provided diminish returns from film to film. The self awareness that was witty and clever in the first was cloying by the third. I'm curious to see how a decade long break, and the return of Williamson, throws up.

I must say, though, this is one franchise that definitely casts absurdly attractive people. Anna Paquin, Neve Campbell and Kristen Bell!

PrettyBoy

Reeaaaallly looking forward to this...like most I wouldn't be mad about the second and third films but I think this has a lot of potential, the first one is a classic and it's been 10 years, it's not as if sequels are being thrown out every 10-12 months (a la "Saw")

Loughc

PrettyBoy wrote: »

Reeaaaallly looking forward to this...like most I wouldn't be mad about the second and third films but I think this has a lot of potential, the first one is a classic and it's been 10 years, it's not as if sequels are being thrown out every 10-12 months (a la "Saw")

Good point, and by the sounds of the trailer, there are new rules in place, so it does look like they are trying to re-invent the slasher genre again, which can only be a good thing as its after getting stale again!!

JP Liz V1

Teaser shown at the Scream Awards

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_wJOxyQpJM

Basq

JP Liz V1 wrote: »

Teaser shown at the Scream Awards

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_wJOxyQpJM

That's the same as the official one..

.. but if you have a thing for vomit-inducing movement, then go ahead by all means!

Dublindude69

Ugh, another horror slasher movie? How many are they going to make? I even read this is supposed to start up a new trilogy. Lets see that happen when this makes like, nothing at the box office, they could have made something good but no, another slasher flick.
What ever happened to Terminator 5? Wasn't the 4th one also supposed to spawn a new trilogy? Why not make more Terminator and less slashers? Or even more Die Hard or Indiana Jones.

DazMarz

Dublindude69 wrote: »

What ever happened to Terminator 5? Wasn't the 4th one also supposed to spawn a new trilogy? Why not make more Terminator and less slashers? Or even more Indiana Jones.

For God's sake!

The mere fact that the 'Terminator' series should have stopped with the brilliant T2: Judgement Day...

That Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (while a half enjoyable little romp, sort of) was an insult to the earlier Indy films???

Those two facts above and more are the reasons why. Scream in the new decade could be very interesting. I'll be interested to see how Craven handles this, with technological advances in telecommunications and so on (meaning that the killer will have an iPhone or an Android, surely) providing endless possibilities for fun for Ghostface.

Also, this will make at least $100m in the domestic box office as people will really want to go and see this, no matter what the critics say. I know I'll be going to see it anyway, cos I love the Scream franchise.

Dublindude69

But they're slasher movies, no one wants to even see one of those.

mdwexford

You are wrong.

Lol at more Terminator or Indiana Jones movies.

Dublindude69

So you are saying You'd rather another Scream then Terminator? You'd rather 6 Screams then 6 Terminators?

mdwexford

Dublindude69 wrote: »

So you are saying You'd rather another Scream then Terminator? You'd rather 6 Screams then 6 Terminators?

The last two Terminators have been poor, id rather see no more tbh.

mdwexford

mdwexford wrote: »

The last two Terminators have been poor, id rather see no more tbh.

Dublindude69 is just trolling, he has repeatedly started threads about how much he loves horror films yet he still spends his time arguing otherwise in numerous threads.

I just watched the trailer and all I can say is meh. It looks like it could be a decent enough DVD watch but it's trying far too hard to be hip. Rather than a sequel it seems more like a loose remake with two Randy's for the price of one. The most disappointing aspect of the trailer was the moment when the film geek says something along the line of the deaths needing to be bigger and better only for the trailer to cut to a rather boring falling onto a van death.

Dublindude69

Deleted User wrote: »

Dublindude69 is just trolling, he has repeatedly started threads about how much he loves horror films yet he still spends his time arguing otherwise in numerous threads.

Lies. I haven't started a single thread proclaiming any love for horror. Darko is just upset I'm Tallons number 1 guy

Dublindude, there are numerous posts from you on this forum about how much you love horror films aswell as numerous threads, mostly locked where you talk about how awesome films such as Mega Piranha and Inside look

If you have something positive to contribute to the forum then please by all means do, but if all you can offer is attempts at trolling then please stick to afterhours.

Dublindude69

Deleted User wrote: »

Dublindude, there are numerous posts from you on this forum about how much you love horror films aswell as numerous threads, mostly locked where you talk about how awesome films such as Mega Piranha and Inside look

If you have something positive to contribute to the forum then please by all means do, but if all you can offer is attempts at trolling then please stick to afterhours.

There are horror movies and then there are slasher movies. Slashers are a black stain on horror movies. They are a sub genre that forever cheapened horror.

Dublindude69

Dublindude69 wrote: »

There are horror movies and then there are slasher movies. Slashers are a black stain on horror movies. They are a sub genre that forever cheapened horror.

You're talkiing absolute rubbishm the slasher movie is a subgenre of horror. to try to argue otherwise is ridiculous. It's also important to note that some of the most influential and best horror films are slasher films, Halloween, Black Christmas, aswell as many of the films of Bava, Argento, etc, etc.

Sad Professor

Dublindude69, stop posting crap.

Darko, if you think someone is a troll report them and let a mod deal with it.

Back on topic please.

Dublindude69

Ugh, been seeing posters and stuff for this all over cineworld

krudler

Dublindude69 wrote: »

Ugh, been seeing posters and stuff for this all over cineworld

Shocking that a new movie in one of the biggest horror franchises of all time is getting advertising isnt it?

Basq

Think it's out in the US in a fortnight..

.. might actually sit down and play recap with the trilogy this week.

johnny_ultimate

Basq wrote: »

Think it's out in the US in a fortnight..

.. might actually sit down and play recap with the trilogy this week.

Trilogy order:

Scream 1
Scream 2
Scream 1

dr.bollocko

:pac:

krudler

Empire magazines poster for it is way cooler than the studio effort:



nothing wrong with the actual poster mind, but the one above is just class

Jesus Wept

I'll watch it, not offended by it like many of you.

candy-gal1

I actually cant wait for this tbh, it will be the first scream movie il be actually old enough to see in the cinema lol

krudler

candy-gal1 wrote: »

I actually cant wait for this tbh, it will be the first scream movie il be actually old enough to see in the cinema lol

I was working in a cinema when Scream 3 came out and had the Ghostface costume from the previous Halloween, mentioned it to my manager and she let me wear it and hide up the back of the cinema until the movie started then ran around scaring people during the opening scene, was a great laugh

razorblunt

candy-gal1 wrote: »

I actually cant wait for this tbh, it will be the first scream movie il be actually old enough to see in the cinema lol

That is my exact reasoning for seeing it, would have waited for the DVD otherwise!

iguana

The logline, new decade, new rules, brings out the pedant in me. The Scream movies are just so quintessentially of the 90s they are so clearly from 2 decades ago rather than one.

(I know the last one was released in 2000 but only just so it was written and filmed in 99. It still feels 90s and it was stupid to boot.)

InchicoreDude

I was working in a cinema when Scream 3 came out and had the Ghostface costume from the previous Halloween, mentioned it to my manager and she let me wear it and hide up the back of the cinema until the movie started then ran around scaring people during the opening scene, was a great laugh

Wow, thats cool, What cinema was this in?

johnny_ultimate

And the reviews are filtering in: http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/scream-4/#!reviews=all

Mixed so far, but only a few have weighed in. TBH I'm still surprised how quick this one snuck up, haven't seen much publicity for it!

Basq

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Mixed so far, but only a few have weighed in. TBH I'm still surprised how quick this one snuck up, haven't seen much publicity for it!

I'll be staying away from message boards as it's supposed to have a "shocking" ending.. how "shocking" it'll be is debatable.

I'll probably go see it if it evens out at fresh (above 70%) at RottenTomatoes come Friday.

Scream 1 was fresh (82%).
Scream 2 was fresh (81%... bit generous. It was good but not that good!).
Scream 3 was rotten (38%.. and well-deserved).

If it's middling-low reviews, I won't bother.

johnny_ultimate

Yeah unfortunately 2 and 3 were pretty much just "Hmm, I wonder what random side character with be Ghost Face this time!".

We'll see. I'm not entirely optimistic, but at the very least hopefully it will be self aware popcorn fun.

jimcoolding

I love these movies. So cheesy but so fun.

Loomis

Basq wrote: »

.....

Remember a scene in the third film (I think) where there's a black guy running down the stairs and the "Ghost Face" is chasing him and he shouts a "whoaaaa sh*t!" - remember it sounding abnormally funny / dubbed.

Still looking forward to seeing what Craven will do.. is Kevin Williamson still writing it? I presume so!

Tyson; he says "Oh you mother****a." Kinda funny, but out of place (but in keeping with part 3) as dialogue goes in the franchise.

Really looking forward to this. Loved the original, still do, found the second to be almost as good and part 3 was only ok but that movie was doomed from the get-go.

After seeing and hearing comments from the cast this does sound like it's back to the original (Williamson had intended part 3 to be a 'return to Woodsboro' story but this was completely changed so he gets to do it now) in terms of quality and I honestly don't think they would have agreed to do it if it wasn't good, especially Neve Campbell who swore she'd never do another. I don't think any of them were happy with part 3, Craven notably saying it became more like a Scooby-Doo type of mystery as opposed to the first two. This movie wasn't without it's problems though. Here's a post from another forum which goes into more detail on the issues around part 4 for anyone interested:

They had asked Kevin Williamson to write a new one for years but he didn't want to, nor did the cast or Wes Craven want to. Years after part 3 Craven asked him would it be possible and he said no. To do just one would be difficult since the first three were a trilogy set up from the start. So he had a think about it and came up with the overall story for a new trilogy. He pitched the ideas to the Weinsteins and they loved it. Williamson has allegedly signed a contract to write 4 and 5, 5 being dependent on the success of 4, but nothing concrete is known about part 6.

The problem is that when he finished writing 4 last year he allegedly had a hissy fit. He removed all ties to the movie including removing the tag 'writer of scream 4' from his Twitter bio and deleting all posts he'd made on Twitter mentioning his work while writing the script. There was a slight delay in the start of production and people speculate it's down to the Weinsteins dictating the changes to the script, Williamson throwing a wobbler and having to get Ehren Kreuger in to do some re-writes. Kreuger is the one who wrote part 3 based on a 30 page outline by Williamson who couldn't write it at the time due to other obligations. So hardcore fans were going mental since most hold Krueger responsible for part 3 being easily the worst of the franchise. To be honest, yes it's obvious Williamson didn't write part 3, but he can't be blamed for it solely. That movie had lots of problems.

Since Williamson distanced himself from the movie he had absolutely no comment on it, no interviews and refused to take part in 2 documentaries which are coming out soon about the movie. The documentaries really sound interesting and have been worked on for the past year. The guys behind one of them have done some critically acclaimed documentaries on other horror series. Very recently, Williamson said on his Twitter that it was nice talking with Craven. Craven responded in like. It's the first hint that things, if they soured, are being patched up. My take on it would be Craven spoke with Williamson and reassured him that his script is mostly still there and the movie is up there with the original in terms of quality. Craven has always said that while small rewrites were done this is common with any movie. And those rewrites were minor dialogue rather than entire scenes and maintains the movie is still Williamson's story and script. All the cast, notably Campbell who said she'd never do another one, have said the script is great and easily the closest to the original. It's gotten good reviews in pre-screenings from the press and genuinely looks like it will be very good. Whether Williamson is forced into promoting this or indeed writing the next one will be interesting to see. But the sheer fact it's his script for this movie makes the expectation go up notably over part 3. I see this easily making enough money to make part 5 but if Williamson isn't the one writing it, I'd rather it didn't happen to be honest.

Since I wrote that more information has come out about the alleged bust-up. Williamson said he and the Weinstein's had a difference of artistic opinion, they "had a huge fight but hugged it out" and they're fine. But when asked had he spoken to the Weinsteins since he said no.
The Weinsteins say it had nothing to do with a difference of opinion and was down to deadlines not being met. So, even though they've finally come out to try and clarify things, it's no clearer at all.

Disappointed this is only 16 here cause it means there's more chance of annoying teenagers (also under 16) being in the cinema. I wanted to go to the midnight showing in Vue tomorrow but couldn't book online so had to settle for 9:30 in Blanch as that's their latest showing. Really looking forward to it now but it's been hard the last couple of weeks avoiding a myriad of spoilers which have surfaced. Why you'd want to ruin a 'who-done-it' movie for yourself I'll never know.

Basq

Mr. Anderson wrote: »

Tyson; he says "Oh you mother****a." Kinda funny, but out of place (but in keeping with part 3) as dialogue goes in the franchise.

That was it..!

45 seconds in..

(spoilers I suppose)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5yE1JggCzCE

Loomis

Some were saying they haven't seen or heard much about the movie so maybe it's not being promoted much. It's all over Twitter. Wes Craven, Emma Roberts, David Arquette, Anthony Anderson, Alison Brie, Lucy Hale, Shenae Grimes (I might have forgotten some) all have official accounts and have been tweeting about the movie for months.
Anthony Anderson gave away tickets to the premier the other day, Wes has given away signed posters, masks, soundtracks for months as well as premier tickets recently and RJ Torbert (who runs the company Funworld who supply TWC with the masks/costumes for the movie) has given away prizes for months also. They've been very generous it has to be said.

Would kill for a signed mask by Craven.

BBC showed Scream last night. Dialogue is still so good and some of the scenes are just brilliant. Anyone else watch it?

Loomis

Mondo Tees Adds Wes Craven to Their Director’s Series



Awesome looking.

Otis Driftwood

iguana wrote: »

The logline, new decade, new rules, brings out the pedant in me. The Scream movies are just so quintessentially of the 90s they are so clearly from 2 decades ago rather than one.

(I know the last one was released in 2000 but only just so it was written and filmed in 99. It still feels 90s and it was stupid to boot.)

To be an even bigger pedant,if it says new decade then why isnt it correct?

Its a different decade from the last one whether you consider it a 90's movie or a 00's movie so........

iguana

Otis Driftwood wrote: »

To be an even bigger pedant,if it says new decade then why isnt it correct?

Its a different decade from the last one whether you consider it a 90's movie or a 00's movie so........

Because new decade implies the next decade, not some random other decade at some point.

I guess it's that I was a teenager when the first 2 came out and in my 30s now that makes it such a stupid logline to me.