SCRE4M

[Dean Winchester]

"Hello, Sidneyyyy"

Who's excited? I'm excited ;D

[Johno]

Me too ;D

[Rouge Capot]

So I hadn't seen the first two in my life, but being alone this weekend I decided to crack on Scream 3 in an attempt to be brave (plus it was on Comedy Central, so I thought it'd be rather tame) something about the film is quite hooking, I really liked how things linked together, though I thought the reveal was a bit random in a double red herring sort of way. At point it felt a bit campy and Scooby Doo-ish (usually whenever Jennifer was on screen) but her death and the whole fax machine was brilliant. David Arquette really annoyed me in it though, he seemed a bit wooden at times. Oh and I was so glad Angelina got killed, I mean they tried to set her up as the killer so much that I thought with Arquette's acting, it may actually turn out to be the shittest surprise ever.

Should probably watch the first two though cos half the Sydney stuff was guess work.

[Johno]

Glad you liked the third one (which is easily my least favorite of the triolgy), I hope you get to see the first two, because if you liked the third, you'll love them.

Oh btw it looks like they're making new Ghostface masks.



Will they make it into the film? It'd be kinda cool if he switched masks throughout the film to throw the victims off if it's the real killer or not. I wouldn't mind, as long as the original mask gets the most screentime ;D

[indy42 - THE FILMMAKER]

Jul 25, 2010 13:01:15 GMT -5 Rouge Capot said:

So I hadn't seen the first two in my life, but being alone this weekend I decided to crack on Scream 3 in an attempt to be brave (plus it was on Comedy Central, so I thought it'd be rather tame) something about the film is quite hooking, I really liked how things linked together, though I thought the reveal was a bit random in a double red herring sort of way. At point it felt a bit campy and Scooby Doo-ish (usually whenever Jennifer was on screen) but her death and the whole fax machine was brilliant. David Arquette really annoyed me in it though, he seemed a bit wooden at times. Oh and I was so glad Angelina got killed, I mean they tried to set her up as the killer so much that I thought with Arquette's acting, it may actually turn out to be the shittuckytest surprise ever.

Should probably watch the first two though cos half the Sydney stuff was guess work.

Oh, you definitely should. Both me and Johno think the third sucks compared to the first two - so see them.

[Johno]

AMAZING fan poster. Figured I'd share it ;D

I mean, it looks so real This was when Lake Bell was attached to the film btw, her character is now being played by Marley Shelton...

[Dean Winchester]

that's epic

[Sam Winchester]

Whoa - I seriously thought it was a legit, too.

[Dominick]

I wanat to see this. ;D

[Johno]

First behind-the-scenes look at GHOSTFACE on the set of 'SCREAM 4'! ;D

[Dean Winchester]

ARGHH! HE'S GONNA' KILL THE CAMERA-WOMAN!...or long haired man

[Johno]

Another epic fan poster by the same guy... I can actually credit him this time since I've got a link now. He's on deviantart and his name is themadbutcher. FANTASTIC poster...

[Johno]

^The official, high quality, theatrical trailer. ;D

SO. PUMPED.

[Johno]

So -- two days.

Official reviews are out.

TV spots are everywhere.

AND I'M MORE PUMPED THAN EVER.

[indy42 - THE FILMMAKER]

*high fives Johno*

I've been offline a lot recently due to being on vacation in Florida, but I do want to check in to say OOOOOOOOHHHHH YEEAAAAHHHH.

I loaded Screams 1-3 and have been watching them on a loop for the past few days. ( well, not so much Scream 3 but whatev )

[Johno]

OK -- I've seen it. To sum up my thoughts, I loved it, but can't help but feel disappointed at points. It was good, but I felt it could've been better. High expectations may be to blame, or maybe simply some sloppy moviemaking/editing.

SPOILER: Click to show

The opening scene was lame. Too much time was spent in the movies, and I felt no emotion toward the deaths of the real girls. I really liked Lucy Hale, but I feel Aimee Teegarden's acting was really poor. I wanted more of Britt Robertson, that innocent look she has really had me feeling bad for her. The opening scene was reshot, and I wish the original opening stayed in the film... It involved Robertson and Teegarden getting killed, but Robertson was the main victim and they were posed as Casey and Steve (both gutted - Marnie hung on a ceiling fan and Jenny tied to a chair nearby). I could tell there were quite a few bad continuity errors due to the original opening being cut, including lines concerning the "pattern of the original movie". I saw no pattern with the original film's deaths, but if their bodies were posed to be like Casey/Steve, it would've made more sense.

The new teens were all good characters, but I felt Erik Knudsen's Robbie was just irritating. Not a lot of development from Marielle Jaffe's Olivia or Nico Tortorella's Trevor, but their deaths both were so f'ing painful it made me care about them. By far, Kirby played by Hayden Panettiere was the standout teen character. I really was rooting for her and Charlie, played by Rory Culkin throughout the movie. They felt desensitized and not very caring about the murders going on throughout the entire movie. That was the point, though. This is a look back at the decade and how different teenagers are. It's true. Something bad happens, and most of the time we either a) don't give a crap or b) joke about it. Which is pretty sad, but it's true.

The cops were all complete doofuses. Marley Shelton was subtlely creepy and hilarious as Judy Hicks, I felt her character was reminiscent of Scream 3's ridiculous Jennifer Jolie, but on a smaller level. I was glad to see her survive, I liked her character and her "ass-tasting lemon squares". Anthony Anderson was funny, I loved his interactions with Adam Brody's bland character. Their death scene was brutal, but I felt Anderson's reaction to it was simply ridiculous.

The most important thing -- the original trilogy. Neve Campbell is phenomenal - as usual - in the role of Sidney Prescott, but I felt Dewey and Gale were very reminiscent of their comical Scream 3 cardboard cutouts. I did love the Gale/Judy Hicks scenes though, they played well off each other without going overboard. There wasn't much development for any of the original characters except Gale - I felt her character really was a lot different, but still the same. Determined to get back in the game. I loved that none of them died - it showed they weren't going to fall into cliches like that. The whole point of this movie was to show that you can't "f**k with the original" and I think it worked well.

The ending was PHENOMONAL. Rory Culkin and Emma Roberts were simply astounding in their roles, especially Emma, who played the ingenue Jill Roberts, Sidney's innocent-looking cousin. It all played out perfectly, and I felt the last 20 minutes is really worth the price of admission. Everything is so intense and just WOW. The hospital showdown - while extremely unrealistic - was so intense. Jill's self-mutilation scene - and her 'execution' of ex-boyfriend Trevor - was extremely devious. She's my favorite Scream killer, atm. So ruthless and just an evil little devil whore and her motive was truly an awesome reflection on the "instant fame" of today's stars. She's like the evil Rebecca Black.

Overall, I feel that as an ending to the series, Scream 4 was amazing and made up for the lackluster Scream 3. However, I felt there was too much humor that sometimes the audience didn't know how to react to the more serious scenes. I came in to the movie expecting the opening to a new trilogy, and found myself thinking - maybe it was all a hoax. We're looking at the new characters to see who will be the "new trio" and at the end of it, the only people left standing are the original characters (plus Judy Hicks). It had a strong message to it and I really loved it by the time the ending rolled around. As it opened, I felt extermely disappointed, but by the end I forgave its shortcomings. A fun thriller, one of the best movie experiences I had in a theater, but I can't help feeling that there is so much more left to see.

At least 8 scenes were left on the cutting room floor according to Wes Craven, and I think that extra bulk may have helped put more beef to the movie. It felt like it was too fast of pace at points, and I didn't get to know the characters that well. Overall, I enjoyed the film. Had a really fun time and I reccomend it just for the ending and the strong performances.

In closing, there was quite a lack of character development and quite a few pacing issues, but to be honest, it didn't matter to me. As a fan, the movie's message was that all that matters is our trio - Sidney, Gale, and Dewey - and that reboots are steaming piles of shi|t. Scream 4 is the anti-reboot and I wouldn't have it any other way.

Grade. A- (8.8/10)

My ranking of the movies:
Scream: 9/10 (A)
Scream 2: 9/10 (A)
Scream 4: 8.8/10 (A-)
Scream 3: 5/10 (D)

[Sam Winchester]

Very good review, Johno!

[Johno]

Thanks! If you're looking for an entertaining, fun flick it's perfect!

You could tell there were quite a few problems in production, though. It was blatantly obvious due to the choppy pacing. Hopefully there's an extended cut DVD with all the removed scenes, I want to see the original opening and the fountain scene for sure.

[indy42 - THE FILMMAKER]

Haven't seen it yet, but....

SPOILER: Click to show

Kirby Reed Lives!!!!

In other news, is the "second trilogy" concept dead in the water due to Weinstein involvement/final scene in Hospital?

[Johno]

About Kirby and her fate...

SPOILER: Click to show

I definitely think there's a possibility she's alive. While it's a small possibility, if there's a "Scream 5" I think her 'death' was left ambiguous enough where she can come back. It'd be far-fetched, but having Kirby live and being the new focus along with Judy Hicks and a new cast would be the only way a second trilogy would work, IMHO.

Another killer after Sidney and the original trio would be overkill, no pun intended. Especially since all the psycho's in the world should know by now that the BITCH CAN'T DIE! lol.

About a 'second trilogy'. HUGE spoilers:

SPOILER: Click to show

I honestly don't know. I don't think the point of this film WAS to set up a new trilogy, I think that was all a big lie to throw us off. All the new kids are dead.

It was a proper ending to the series, imo, and this ending made up for Scream 3 and its disappointing wrap-up - this more like Williamson's take on how it SHOULD have ended, this was his original idea for the third film (bring it back to Woodsboro, introduce a new cast of teens).

The ending was totally insane and a great look back at the decade. Wicked stuff, really great message imo. And the hospital stuff was unrealistic, but badass. It's a horror film, I don't look for realism anyway haha.

If there is a '5' and '6' the only way I could see it working is if they "ressurect" Kirby and have the focus on her, a new cast, and Judy Hicks. If there's another movie focusing on the trio, I think I'd have to ignore it.

That is, UNLESS, Kevin Williamson's back and the stupid-ass Weinstein's don't f**k with his script again. They should just let him work his magic.