Scream 4

krudler

iguana wrote: »

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.

but it doesnt say "next decade", its says "new decade" and Scream 3 came out in 2000, that was last decade, wheres the issue?

iguana

krudler wrote: »

but it doesnt say "next decade", its says "new decade" and Scream 3 came out in 2000, that was last decade, wheres the issue?

Because the movies all scream 90s. Everything about them is 90s. The clothes, the dialogue, the attitude, the unimportance of the internet. (Scream 3 was made in the 90s, the star of that movie was the mobile phone, fgs.)

Also Sydney was a teenager in the first ones and is in her 30s now. We've bypassed her 20s, it's clearly 2 decades on. Gail and Dewey were mid 20s in the first one and 40s now, bypassing their 30s.

"New decade, new rules" definitely implies that was the last one this is the new one and there has not been a whole other decade in between, because by definition new implies that there was a last. Different decade might have worked better.

Anyway, as I said at the start, it's just me being pedantic.

eire126

Hey so is there anyonne from cork on this? Just wondering is this being shown in mahon point....its not on the listings?

Magic Eight Ball

Scream 3 was dumb.. harmless fun but dumb. Scream 4 is just ****ing moronic!
The franchise is tired and drawn out and pretty predictable at this stage.
The social media/blogging and live stream theme had potential but was under developed.

I don't know if anyone will agree with me but I think they pushed some of the comic relief moments over the line.
I felt like I was watching 'Scary Movie' when

the black cop delivered the "**** Bruce Willis" line before dying.

Disappointed..

candy-gal1

Lol, a bit to say this now but i thought it was really great tbh
Cheesy cheese moments at the beginning but once it was into it, i felt like i was watching the first one, almost lol

8/10 from me!

Hande hoche!

Just back from seeing this. Would agree with the above poster. Found it very enjoyable and had a few jumpy moments. It helped the viewing experience that after the first victim got knifed some guy in a scream costume ran around the cinema.

Wolflikeme

candy-gal1 wrote: »

Lol, a bit to say this now but i thought it was really great tbh
Cheesy cheese moments at the beginning but once it was into it, i felt like i was watching the first one, almost lol

8/10 from me!

Cool! I was hoping someone would say something like that! I can't wait to see it!!

Dman001

I'm going into this film expecting a cheesy, over the top, predictable, cliched film, just like the first 3. But I enjoyed the first 3, so I expect to enjoy this one too.

SuperDude87

Im really excited to see this movie, although I won't be able to see it until next week at the earliest. Here in France that's dangerous as new releases sometimes only stay out for a week!!!!

Do I run that risk or go see it on my own like a loner...?

Phony Scott

Magic Eight Ball wrote: »

I don't know if anyone will agree with me but I think they pushed some of the comic relief moments over the line.

I felt like I was watching 'Scary Movie' when

the black cop delivered the "**** Bruce Willis" line before dying.

Man oh man that was horribly bad. Easily the dumbest moment of the series. I don't know if it quite qualifies for tokenism, but it sure pushes the boat out.

As for the rest, I though it was miles better than 3, which was awful, that's not to say this film doesn't have huge problems.

The opening five minutes were extremely tongue in cheek and I laughed out loud. Very funny. The re-introduction of the characters was handled well, but after that, things went rapidly down hill. The kills were unoriginal, lacked any real tension and the pay-offs were poor. I was bored.

The person/red herring you were supposed to think was the killer was too obvious and I managed to at least guess who was behind it all very early on. It's a little too easy. That said, the last fifteen minutes were great fun and I hadn't a clue were the film would end. I huge shame the entire film couldn't be like those last fifteen minutes. 6/10.

Mr E

At least we know why the ending was shocking.

Not a bad movie, but I found myself looking at my watch more than I should have. The last 20 minutes were good fun though.

OutlawPete

Seen this tonight also.

Was good fun, wouldn't have enjoyed it half as much with the atmosphere though - not a DVD movie so catch it in the cinema if you want to see it at all. Very cheesey (thank God) and story is decent enough to keep your attention. No real scary moments and I didn't jump but lots around me were, so I am just a little jaded at this stage (or spoiled after the Screen showing all classic horrors not so long back) either way, it's worth seeing and most certainly better than Scream 3.

Magic Eight Ball

Ok my biggest problem is that, to me, it focuses more on the comedy versus the horror and, therefore, works far better as a dark comedy/horror-comedy versus a horror film with comedy in it.

I don’t consider the first Scream an out and out horror myself but this film does have tone issues, it just seemed to fall into comedy more than suspense, and there weren’t a lot of scares, and the kills aren’t as inventive as the first. (or second)

+ The much more interesting ending would definitely

been had the killer gotten away with it completely.

I heard that was the original plan. It would have set up a great Scream 5 where

the audience knows the killer, but none of the other character have a clue.

Would have been really interesting.

krudler

Magic Eight Ball wrote: »

+ The much more interesting ending would definitely

been had the killer gotten away with it completely.

I heard that was the original plan. It would have set up a great Scream 5 where

the audience knows the killer, but none of the other character have a clue.

Would have been really interesting.

Towards the end I was thinking

yes, finally a slasher movie with a somewhat original end, the killer gets away! but no...instead we get a crappy death and a stupid one liner,bah

The two best characters in the movie were Kirby and Sidney's publicist (whatsername from Mad Men) the only two semi interesting characters, although the fact Hayden Patenniere (sp) is fooking gorgeous helps, short hair and all

OutlawPete

krudler wrote: »

The two best characters in the movie were Kirby and Sidney's publicist (whatsername from Mad Men) the only two semi interesting characters, although the fact Hayden Patenniere (sp) is fooking gorgeous helps, short hair and all

Oh agreed, damn fine and the movie would have been a whole less colourful without her for damn sure

Handsome Bob

Yeah was coming in here just to say how fine Hayden looked. :pac:

Decent film anyway, I thought I had it figured out but the fact that

Jill was thrown into the mix was a bit of curve ball. I would have thought that the other film nerd guy was in on the act. Yeah I know he was stabbed but wasn't one of the lads from the 1st film stabbed as well?

krudler

cant have enough Hayden, nommmmm

azezil

Not even remotely scarey, I thought it was obvious who the killers were right from the start but it is a funny movie to watch, especially if you've a friend who quite literally jumps out of is seat in fright

OutlawPete

I was in the states recently and bought one of those star maps and so thought I'd pop round and say hello to her. Didn't go to plan, she talks about it here

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rzQN74oh6W0

Another Scream 4 promotion interview:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RGLoHCIh8mY

allanb49

Saw it last night and enjoyed it, Its now more of a parody than Screm 1 was, thought doing the remake sthick was fun and was genuinly enjoyable.

DazMarz

Highly enjoyable little romp. It's not gonna win any Oscars or anything, but it was highly enjoyable and never takes itself seriously. Very neatly takes the piss out of everything connected to both itself and the horror genre in general.

And it is also a neat little critique of modern internet/Facebook/Twitter society where people are famous for simply being famous. We do live in a world of vapid and pointless celebrities and this film makes no bones about pointing that out!

I also loved the part where two characters (not sure if they're from Scream or Stab) tells us how there is something much more menacing in a horror movie antagonist who is human and knife wielding. There is something more realistic about a person with a knife who snaps than a monster or zombies or aliens. And I think it is true... who knows which one of us might snap at any time???

johnny_ultimate

I liked it, probably the second best of the lot. Shame the hour in the middle was so dull, because the "meta" beginning and end are terrific fun. Uneven, but enjoyable.

Renn

That was horrendous. But then again these films just show you what is needed to be done to actually make something worthwhile.

Not one of those actors would be out of place in The Room.

Dublindude69

Bah! Everytime I try to make fun of my friend about endless sequels he just brings up this movie and says the jokes been done :mad:
I asked him is he going to see Scream 5 and he laughed and asked is that the one with the time travel :mad:

stealinhorses

I thought the movie was very good.
The first act was incredibly enjoyable, but then it slowed down for about an hour or so, and had some boring moments.
I liked the ironic references and the kills were much bloodier than in previous installments, which made it a bit more fun than usual.
Other than that, a solid film I would recommend to anybody, 8/10.

Dublindude69

Dublindude69 wrote: »

Bah! Everytime I try to make fun of my friend about endless sequels he just brings up this movie and says the jokes been done :mad:
I asked him is he going to see Scream 5 and he laughed and asked is that the one with the time travel :mad:

A strong candidate for worst post ever I imagine.

Mellor

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.

New and next are different words.
Bit of a pedantic failure there

DazMarz wrote: »

Highly enjoyable little romp. It's not gonna win any Oscars or anything, but it was highly enjoyable and never takes itself seriously. Very neatly takes the piss out of everything connected to both itself and the horror genre in general.

I thought that was very poorly done.
The self-referencing at the start (movie with-in a movie) went too far, it was funny but they should of had credits to separate it from the movie rather than integrate it to the first "real" kills.
THe reference could of been ok if they were sutle, but there was just so many of them they they were annoying. The constant talking about the "rules" of a slasher movie. They were a clever devie in scream one as two of the main characters were movie buffs. But with every character openly speaking as if the killer was making a movie was ridic.

It would of been so much easier to make it better too.

Sidney (Neve Cambell) actually dies. Jill survives. would of been a decent twist. Instead, Sidney survives, as does gail, and dewey. FFS its ok to kill one of them.
Less of the giveaway dialog. Jill speaking to Sidney about how she "might not of been brave enough" was ridic. Mr Craven, there is 0% chance they somebody notices this on a second viewing and thinks it was clever, every sees it the first time and thinks. "It's her obviously"
The horror movie obsessed geek is the second killer. Really :rolleyes: We didn't see that coming, especially after he was tied to the chair
It would of been more ofa twist if the angry boyfriend had of turned out to be the killer so blatent were the "its him, just like in scream 1 moments"

Basically, its was one of the most obvious films of all time.

NunianVonFuch

Mellor wrote: »

THe reference could of been ok if they were sutle, but there was just so many of them they they were annoying. The constant talking about the "rules" of a slasher movie. They were a clever devie in scream one as two of the main characters were movie buffs. But with every character openly speaking as if the killer was making a movie was ridic.

Bit confused.

The killer was making a movie about it. They even suggested it as a strong possibility pretty early on, before confirming around halfway in the party scene. He was also recreating the events of the original murders, which were also the events of the original Stab, which was a movie.

Mellor wrote: »

It would of been so much easier to make it better too.

Sidney (Neve Cambell) actually dies. Jill survives. would of been a decent twist. Instead, Sidney survives, as does gail, and dewey. FFS its ok to kill one of them.

First part of what you say, yes I agree and was a bit disappointed they didn't do that. But for the last part they were taking the piss, just making a complete joke of it/or making a stand depending on your interpretation of

"Don't **** with the originals!"

Mellor wrote: »

Less of the giveaway dialog. Jill speaking to Sidney about how she "might not of been brave enough" was ridic. Mr Craven, there is 0% chance they somebody notices this on a second viewing and thinks it was clever, every sees it the first time and thinks. "It's her obviously"
The horror movie obsessed geek is the second killer. Really :rolleyes: We didn't see that coming, especially after he was tied to the chair
It would of been more ofa twist if the angry boyfriend had of turned out to be the killer so blatent were the "its him, just like in scream 1 moments"
[/SPOILER]

Basically, its was one of the most obvious films of all time.

I definitely didn't spot it at all. Thought it was quite

clever with the chair, as the original scene is one of the iconic moments in the first Scream. I'd ruled out the geek cos he brings up the filming bit which incriminates himself.

. Though spotting the twist before it comes usually ruins a film for me as well, it's nowhere near as obvious as other films of this nature. Like Identity. Look at the poster. Read the title again. Guess the twist!

Mellor

NunianVonFuch wrote: »

Bit confused.

The killer was making a movie about it. They even suggested it as a strong possibility pretty early on, before confirming around halfway in the party scene. He was also recreating the events of the original murders, which were also the events of the original Stab, which was a movie.

I know they suggested it early on, but everyone suddenly knowing it was ture was stupid.

The killer was the one who suggested it remember. That part is fine as he wanted publicity. But characters constantly saying "we're in a movie, better not do this" was stupid. The two cops being a perfect example. It joke as a joke in the original, but pointing out every single cliche was terrible ("oh **** am I next" - cos i didn't get a call, have big tits, said i'll be right back :rolleyes:) He was re-creating the film, so kills at a party, girl on the phine etc, but he isn't everywhere at once. I just feel it slipped from the characters knowing he was re-creating the movie to knowing they were in a movie

MJRS

I enjoyed it, mainly because it's switch-off-your-brain fun. I think people who didn't enjoy it refused to do just that! Not that there's anything wrong with holding things to a higher standard, but to me it was never going to have a hole-free plot and win awards for the acting.. I was surprised by how many times I laughed out loud, I never once felt scared unfortunately. I guess that's not really the point of the Scream franchise anymore, and probably wasn't the point in the first place! A healthy 6/10 for me.

Mellor

my brain was switch off watching it. I wasn't thinking any of those things during it, but the minute I walk out I thought, "meh, that was crap"

MJRS

Mellor wrote: »

my brain was switch off watching it. I wasn't thinking any of those things during it, but the minute I walk out I thought, "meh, that was crap"

I wasn't directing my post at you or anyone in particular, just some general thoughts..

Magic Eight Ball

The end of Scream 4 left nowhere for 5 and 6 to go that the earlier films haven't already done.

But in regards to the original planned ending..

The more I think about it the appeal of Scream is completely based on guessing who the killer is. If we know who it is, how would future movies be different from slashers like Halloween or Friday the 13th?

+ Do you really want more movies with Jill as the killer? She's hardly a Jason or Michael.

Creatively this franchise is dead.

I have absolutly no interest in Scream 4, while I love the original and 2 and 3 are easy to watch nonsense, 4 has absolutly no appeal to me at all. I was looking forward to it for awhile but after the abomination that was My Soul to Take and the interviews in which the cast and crew stated the film would be the most comedic entry to date I just gave up any hope of it being good.

Shame that it has recieed such a wide release while far superior looking fare is struggling to get wide distribution, Stake Land looks absolutly fantastic and has recieved great reviews but we will most likely see it hitting DVD in a year or so.

Renn

It's not far from Scary Movie tbh.

Renn

Renn wrote: »

It's not far from Scary Movie tbh.

Everything I've read and seen regarding it makes me wonder if it wasn't at some time Scary Movie 5 till someone decided "hey throw in some violence and get those guys from Scream back and we got a winner".

skylight1987

Scream 4 is good ,really enjoyed it .The older characters look so old next to the pretty young ones though. I loved Hayen Panettiere she was fab in this movie and stunning on the big screen

Creamy Goodness

I felt sorry for the person who bought me my ticket. it was just more of the same, shoddy acting, shoddy storyline, plot about as predictable as the sun setting. not that i expected anymore from scream 4

unreggd

I liked it

I was tryin to think of who the other long lost child would be and what their motives would be

Gail was great too :P

bellaslave

loved it!

Basq

Saw it last weekend and was wholly unimpressed.

Watched the trilogy the week before it leading up to it, and was just left cold by Scream 4.

Scream 1 is still very enjoyable. Scream 2 is good fun. Scream 3 is silly over-the-top and just awful. But Scream 4 just felt it was trying to be smarter than it was, and felt very uneven.

The

opening was enjoyable

though.

I'd put it ahead of Scream 3, but not by much.

jaykhunter

Basq wrote: »

Watched the trilogy the week before it leading up to it, and was just left cold by Scream 4....I'd put it ahead of Scream 3, but not by much.

Jaysus, well it's not getting my ~8 euros then! Thanks

Just watched it and to call it the most disappointing film of the year would be an understatement. It was a thinly veiled remake of the original without a hint of wit or irony. The killers were obvious from early on and there wasn't a single original kill or moment in the film. Every good slasher film has to have that moment which lives on, but even now 10 minutes after the film ended I'm having trouble trying to remember the kills. They were bland, generic and there was never a sense of terror. Great slasher films like Black Christmas, Halloween and My Bloody Valentine (remake) successfully create tension and build suspense whereas Scream 4 never once comes close to being suspenseful.

At close to 2 hours it's at least 45 minutes too long, the middle hour has to rank up there as one of the most mundane hours in slasher film history. It just drags on and on with the plot going nowhere and features some truly abysmal attempts at humour, the comedic cops seem to have get lost on their way to the set of Scary Movie 5.

If Kevin Williamson really wanted to make a post modern horror film then he should set the entire film during the day and all outdoors. It would certainly make a nice change from the franchises repeated moments of the killer popping out of the shadows and chasing the victim around the house for a bit before killing them.