Scream 4. Here it comes!

Wes Craven told attendees that he recently had breakfast with Neve Campbell, who said she had recently spoken with the Weinsteins about coming back for Scream 4. Campbell apparently is seriously considering playing Sidney Prescott again in the highly-profitable franchise.

http://comingsoon.net/news/topnews.php?id=11016


Poor Neve, she must be broke.

You know, a lot of people are going to trash the premise for this movie by saying that the series should have been left as a trilogy, but I'm going to give it a chance.

I mean, after all, this series was always about riffing on horror movies, and, as we all know, one of the hallmarks of the genre is the fact that it's never really over. How many movies have been labelled as "the last one" in a horror series, only to have a sequel?

The Nightmare on Elm Street and Friday the 13th series have each done this (with the latter having two "final" entries).

Even worse was reading news a third installment of the "I Know What You Did Last Summer" series. I bet it will be one of those direct-to-video sequels with no real connection to the first two.

Neve must die in Scream 4.

I think Randy should come back(faked his death) and team up with Dewey to kill Sydney.

Now that would be cool

Since the subject of the Scream movies has come up...

Is there any information anywhere about where Kevin Williamson was planning to go with his Scream 3 script? I find it hard to believe his ideas were any worse than those that ended up on-screen, and would love to know how he was planning on tying the whole series together.

Hmmm. I really like the first, second was ok, third blew. Too large of main cast members and no one died.

Guess I could give 4 a try, if it does come out.

* Script "4th wall conversations" should include sequels after the supposed end of a series, lots of material to discuss wittly there.

* Sydney should be killed off about 1/3rd through the film.

HUGE fan of the Scream Trilogy here!
This is great news but only if Courtney and David are in on it too. It just wouldn't be the same without those two. It's been a while since we had a good horror/slasher movie. These days it's only ghost/haunting movies like The Grudge, The Ring, Cursed...enough already!! I wanna see some good old blood shed. lol

Yeah, I really only want to see this done if everyone from the original is involved, including Wes Craven and Kevin Williamson. I don't know how likely that is, but my interest will be much diminished without their involvement.

I'm a huge fan of the first two films, so I figure, why not release another? The series certainly has the potential to re-invent itself.

I thought the first film worked well as a stand-alone incident and it felt like a new take on an old theme. But two more times after that (and now a third) is pushing it.

But certainly not pushing it as much as the HALLOWEEN, F13 and NIGHTMARE series.


The first two were great but the third was a horrid way to end the series so I say bring on the 4th film.

Amen, Michael.

...which doesn't make a lot of sense. With the sequel taking place a TWO YEARS after Julie and the gangs initial run in with the fisherman, it's already incorrectly titled. Should have been "I Still Know What You Did 2 Summers Ago", with the 3rd titled as "I Kind of Remember What You Did 3 Summers Back".

Either way, horrible idea for the IKWYDLS franchise. As for "Scream", I'm a huge fan, and after having seen "Red Eye", I think that Craven could come up with his own coherent script, and maybe make more than one sleeper hit every 5 years. Although, "Scream" stepping into "Hellraiser" territory isn't all that exciting.

I don't think they need to kill Sydney. They need to either kill off Courtney Cox/David Arquette and/or make them the new killer.

All the killers in the previous films were connected somehow. They're starting to run out of connections.

The original idea was for Scream 3 to go back to Woodsboro High. And a series of copycat killings was taking place there. The killer would have been Dewey, who'd set it all up from the beginning. This was dropped when it leaked on the internet (unfortunate, because it makes a lot more sense than what happened with part 3). They also dropped the High School concept after Columbine. I guess deaths taking place in and of itself is okay, so long as the setting is different. (reminds me of the MPAA, horrific violence is okay for people 17 and older... just cut out .248 seconds of the neck sliding down the pole and we'll allow it...)

A better title for "I know 3" would be "I Will Always Know..."

The Scream series definitely has potential. If they did it right it would certainly be amazing. I'd say let Kevin Williamson write it... but seeing what happened to CURSED when DIMENSION messed with that, as well as The Faculty and Teaching Mrs. Tingle... they just LOVE to take his stuff and mess with it. Hell, even Dawson's Creek turned to crap when they took the concept he created and went in their own direction (he left after season 2's finale).

Considering next Fall is the 10th Anniversary of SCREAM... I could see a new film as being hyped. Just don't let the Weinstein brothers have creative control over it...

I don't agree. Because what I meant is that the whole point of SCREAM was that it was a "mystery" -- the question was: 'just WHO were the killer/killers'? Once the mystery was solved the first time, and the culprit(s) revealed, the same formula became repeated ad nauseum, and then the filmmakers just had to throw anyone into the costume to repeat the same routine as SCREAM 1 (and the "culprit(s)" revealed in PART 2 was really reaching, IMO). It's the kind of isolated incident that only occurs once; to repeat it again with different people holding similar grudges and doing the same things in the same masks is pushing it. At least with Michael Myers, Jason and Freddy, it's always Michael Myers, Jason and Freddy!

Wow, it's hard to believe it's been that long. With the changes it made to the horror genre/lexicon, it really seems quite modern.

...and it's starting to make me feel old

Not always though.

"Throwing everyone in the mix" could wear some the wrong way but this idea was certainly due to Hitchcock who "cheated" several times. The mystery aspect was good in all three films so I don't have a problem there either.

THIS is funny. I just got my R4 anamorphic SCREAM yesterday from Australia, (which looks FAB, btw.) and last nite I watched "Behind the Scream" a decent doc. about the "TRILOGY". Where EVERYONE said it was always meant to be a "TRILOGY" Kinda funny, if U ask me.
What sucks is that SCREAM was a genuinely scary, good rollercoaster ride but after the "Scary Movie" type riffs, it doesn't work for me anymore. damn!

d

Craven and the cast members have always said this but....

1. When it comes to horror films, if it makes money a sequel will follow.

2. When an actor/director aren't cutting it, return to something that will make money and put you back in the spotlight.

Neve Campbell once said she'd NEVER appear nude. When the cash runs out..... SCREAM 4 follows.

Its all about the money people. If the Weinsteins are bringing it up the reason is this... They split with Disney so there on there own now, New company etc. They have a film series that has done very well and horrow movies are cheap (by hollywood standards) to make. So they can Spend 12 - 25 million and put it in US theaters and with the Scream name attached it will pull in around 100 million at the box office. Thats a pretty good profit to start there new company off with...

I liked Scream 1 & 2. Didn't care for 3. Thought it was lame. I am not so much against a 4th one. What I am against is this. I just hope it doesn't revive those horrifying horror/comedy like movies of the late 90's. As a fan of serious horror for the most part, it was just a bad time for me. All the teens quoting the movies and the lines was just mind boggling when I was in High School. I felt like bringing Gin & Tonic to class to get through it. It's just a period I hope never comes back.

Anyways, let's drift back to the 70's/80's for a second.

Halloween? There should have never been a sequel period. Michael was best left off as a mysterious character who just vanished and stalked without cause. Laurie was in the wrong place at the wrong time. It just add's so much more to it overall. This series was so simplistic to begin with and the sequels just turned it into a family drama.

What killed the Friday the 13th series IMO? It was once a highly profitable series if you consider inflation. Especially the first 4.

It began at part 5. Coming off the heels of The Final Chapter (which was billed and marketed as the Final movie very heavily) only one year later. The fake Jason clone didn't help either. I was very, very young at the time, but still remember a tad of it. This irked people at the time. Starting at Part 6, you drift into highly screwball ideas. Part 6 is appreciated now by fans, at the time of it's release people hated it. Thats why it had a good opening and then drifted out quickly. Movies drift out quickly now, but many didn't in the 80's. The whole financial box office worked differently. Even fans of the series at that time hated it. The movie was ahead of it's time and actually has more in common with mid 90's horror. Basically, it should have come out in 1996.

What really killed it ultimately? 7-10 and the really stupid ideas. It's funny to watch a series go from being a psychotically brutal series (which was shunned for being so) from 80-84 to a complete parody of itself by 89-93. Jason X was the topper and made things even worse for the character. Whoever gave that a greenlight thinking it would help the character was just a pure moron. I mean it was a Mad TV spoof in 94.

Studios never understood it, but fans/mainstream of the 80's just didn't want Jason brought out of a camp site. If you were to bring him out, at least bring him out into something interesting. Manhattan might have worked if the movie was actually given a budget to be shot there. A lot of things you can do in a big city. The movies made profit's of many, many, many millions. Let's give a budget of more than $10 for a movie entitled Jason take Manhattan. It could have been a fun rollar coaster ride if done correctly.

Freddy vs Jason is an entirely different story altogether. I hated the movie, but they did use both characters natual locations at least.

The series should have ended at 4. Make something like Part 6 in the mid 90's. It would have worked then. April Fool's Day being the other 86 Horror Film that felt more suited to the 90's. Then just do one every 10 years or so. FVJ could have been the one for the 2000's. You wouldn't have worn the character out.

What killed Freddy for the mainstream? 1989 and the release of NOES 5 followed by the horrifying (not in a good way) Freddy's Dead. Enough said. I saw both theatrically and hated both even at the time when I was 11. Along with most everyone else. Elm Street 4 doesn't hold up very well nowadays, but was fun in 1988. Though I was a kid, but people seemed to enjoy it back then.

If there was to be another Freddy/Jason crossover, it might work and would probably make money. I just hope that they would actually use the strengths of the series instead of the negatives like FVJ did. Number 1, the characters were just awful. Some of the worst in any horror film or otherwise I have ever seen IMO.

Use the interesting Freddy Dream sequences of the Elm Street series crossed with the vicious conventional deaths (ax, spear, pitchfork, etc) of the earlier F13 movies. It's what I wanted out of the movie and didnt get. That and human characters I would call mediocre at least. Lori was no Elm Street 1 Nancy. I didnt give one damn about her or her story. Oh Yeah. If your listening New Line. If you do make a new movie of either character or both, please leave Will and Lori out of it. They don't allow the heavy vodka intake I would need at the movie theater to endure their appearences again.

wow, that's gotta be desperation...

Thanks for that. It sounds much more interesting than the revelation of "yet another random killer with an alleged connection". Although I do think, in theory, the setting of the third film on a movie set makes more sense for the series than the idea you pointed to, but they just did the movie-set thing really badly.

If they do decide to do a Scream 4 I hope they go with a concept that made the first one unique (horror movie based on the cliches of other horror movies).

This time they should come up with a story line to chastise the redundant, and unnecessary sequels (as noted above about Friday the 13th should have stopped after 4, but is now up to 10).

Ryan,

I recall fans loving FRIDAY 6 when it came out (I was 24 at the time). It was a real crowd pleaser in the theatre, and diehard fans were truly glad to see the "real" Jason back.

Joe,

Part 4 was a Box Office Blockbuster in 84. Part 5 made about half of what Part 4 did theatrically. WHen your box office is cut in half between movies, that shows a pretty large degrade in interest. Part 6 made a little less than Part 5. Copycat Jason made more money than the return of the return of the real Jason. Thats just sad.

7 made even less. 8-X were all theatrical flops. Not bombs because of their budget levels, but flops all the same.

They all made money in the long run.

Freddy lost half of his revenue between Part 4 and 5 as well. Elm Street 4 was a blockbuster in 88. Part 5 was considered a flop in 89 compared to Part 4. Even Elm Street 2 was a success. 1-4 all were.

Rocky? Same thing. Massive financial drop between 4 and 5.

Halloween? Same thing. Part 4 was considered a success and 5 was considered a flop. Though neither groos was spectacular.

People just don't seem to like that Number 5.

Freddy vs Jason pulled them out of the slumps and was a hit (because of it's crossover appeal). It's the first hit Jason had since 84 and Freddy since 88. Though Freddy's Dead did fairly well.

So, I figure a movie series has about 4 movies in it before people wear out on it (not counting anniversary movies every 10-20 years).

So, yes. A Scream 4 would likely be a hit. Especially since it would be an anniversary movie. Just don't go for that number 5.

I hear what you're saying about the box office $$, Ryan, but I'm saying that it seemed to me that the diehard fans ate up Part 6 after the disappointing and bogus "New Beginning".

Yah, but 7 and 8 did pretty well. Brought the franchise out of the gutter after the bomb that part 6 was.



BTW, I like both.