Sound Off: Wes Craven's New 'Scream 4'- So What Did You Think?

April 15, 2011

Wes Craven's Scream 4

Now that you've seen it, what did you think? "Do you like scary movies?" That's how it all began back in 1996 when Drew Barrymore picked up the phone before becoming the first victim of the iconic Ghostface Killer. Arriving in theaters this weekend is Scream 4, again written and directed by Kevin Williamson and Wes Craven, the team behind the first three. Its been 11 years since the last Scream, but they even got David Arquette, Neve Campbell and Courteney Cox back again. So how is it? Does it live up to the other movies? How is the end? If you've seen it, write a comment and let us know what you thought of Scream 4!

Note: I have not seen Scream 4 yet, as I'm not a fan of the franchise, but wanted to open up the discussion anyway. This is the only big movie opening this weekend that's actually worth discussing considering the legacy the series has. So if you've seen it already and have something to say, make sure to chime in below!

What did you think of Scream 4? A boring, unoriginal horror rehash or a genius new sequel?
We will remove any comments that indicate you have not seen the movie, as this area is meant to discuss the film only once you have seen it and can talk about your thoughts. Please keep the comments civilized!

Find more posts: Discuss, Opinions, Sound Off



The first Scream is a delicious Horror/Comedy and this new one fell extremely short...the Ghostface reveal was very...well not that surprising...and I really couldn't take who Ghostface was seriously. It was great seeing Campbell, Arquette, and Cox back as the trio that prevails again...6/10.

Anonymous on Apr 16, 2011


Interestingly, the photo you have accompanying that page is not in the movie. That person dies in a different way in the version I saw. I guess there's plenty of alternative versions by the sounds of all the re-writing that took place. Hopefully they'll be a lot of deleted scenes on the DVD. I thought it was ok, but not great. A missed opportunity. An average Scream movie is still better than most other horrors I see. Too many characters, not enough imagination. Most of the new teen characters were very weak, with very little screen time. The regulars did well. Better than Indy 4 or Die Hard 4. Fun but should have been a lot better. That's my 2 cents.

SV7 on Apr 16, 2011


Yea that's weird, this is an official press photo released by the studio. How odd, that's kind of crazy, thanks for the review!

Alex Billington on Apr 16, 2011


I can tell who that is just because of the thick legs. Haven't seen this and aren't sure if I will but I'm glad Claire from Heroes is in it (Hayden Panitierre).

Judasbarronx1 on Apr 16, 2011


Im a big fan of 1 and 2. 4 is not as good, but it's better than 3. this is a strangest scream. It's very jokey, but I found it pretty interesting and severe when it wanted to be. The opening was great, the deaths are up to snuff, and I genuinely thought the killer reveal was the best since one. Unexpectedly great stuff with the killer post-reveal. I liked being in woodsborough again, and it returning to teens. Still, it can't help but feel a little stale, while trying hard to be hip, but failing sometimes. Good movie, and I'll be excited if 5 comes out- with Cravin, williamson, and the remaining cast intact. 7.5/10

lane on Apr 16, 2011


This was at least on par with Scream 1. Here is a movie that came out at the exact right time and acts as a delightful commentary on the reboot/relaunch/remake age of horror. Torture porn was dismissed in the opening lines of the movie, and rightly so. What we're left with is a fantastic homage both to itself, and to the movies whose reputations have been tarnished by their remakes and reboots. If the next wave of horror movies takes any lesson from Craven and Williamson here, the genre might actually gain back the respect it deserves.

ESB on Apr 16, 2011


Absolutely loved it. I agree with ESB that it was on par with the first one as far as its timeliness and commentary. I also felt that the motivation behind the murders was a very clever and a sad commentary on our society today but thats for a different discussion. The opening is fantastic and so is the ending and the film is certainly the most brutal of the four, although I was confused as to why that scene pictured above and a couple other shots from the trailer weren't in the final cut. Hopefully this one does for horror what the first one did in '96

Anonymous on Apr 16, 2011


As a fan of the original series, I was quite satisfied. In fact, I would go as far to rank it as my second favourite film of the series (behind the first). On a side note, where in the movie to that picture come from? I didn't remember any scene like that.

Sean Kelly on Apr 16, 2011


This is definitely a new type of Scream trilogy. Although the trio (Gale, Dewey and Sidney) return, they are not the center of attention as before; neither does Williamson spend much time building on their relationships like in the previous three films. These pivotal characters, who had always been at the crux of the series, seemed almost out of place and tossed to the sidelines. To me, this was disheartening since they were the ones who "made" the Scream films come alive. There is also a lack of the suspense element that was spotlighted in the original three; it seemed primarily replaced by both meta humor (quite funny, by the way and ingenious when a film can make fun of itself) and disturbing psychology. Again, this is unfortunate as the building up of scenes like the reveal of the killer, and to me, more importantly, the excitement and thrill the audience felt whenever Dewey and Gale were reintroduced at the beginning of each film, was lost. It seemed as though no one cared too much for the characters who had started it all. The evil nature that is eventually revealed was quite dismaying in a way Craven had never portrayed, and the "good feeling" that we were always left with in the end was supplanted by this feeling of dread--indeed, a dark fall into a more horrific genre void of any victory over evil. Overall, a very original script with surprising moments, to be sure, and some good new talent. Nevertheless, for the reasons mentioned above, I truly felt saddened and disappointed with the choices that were made.

K. on Apr 16, 2011


Scream 3 cops a lot of flak but it's quite good and I'd argue better than number 4. The way the killer in part 3 ties into the original Scream's killers is damn cool. It makes you re-examine the original and it works perfectly. Also there's lots of cool stuff on the movie set. Sidney being pursued around the set of her old house and Parker Posey as Gale are the highlights for me. I think its characters are more fleshed out in the short time we're around them compared to 4 where there are sooooo many characters that no one ends up having any. Literally the only times I was actually a bit tense was when the old regulars were in danger, because I liked them and I didn't want them to die. I think the regulars did a great job, although poor David Arquette didn't seem to do much except drive around talking on the phone, putting his sirens on and then doing u-turns.

SV7 on Apr 16, 2011


I loved the scene between Nev and the female cop that happened on the stairs: the way the lighting turned her into a silhouette that you could just make out; and the look in her eyes when she finally walked out of the darkness. It was a genuinely creepy scene, and I wish there were more scenes that played with lighting in that way.

Chris on Apr 16, 2011


No imagination, poor acting and a weak reveal. (The film should have taken a leaf from Saw's book. It references the movie a lot) The movie was funny though. The Wayan brothers would be proud with this Homage to Scary Movie.

Link1983 on Apr 16, 2011


it referenced Saw... in one scene

lane on Apr 16, 2011


I think what worked for the original Scream was the fact that you actually cared about the characters. You wanted Sidney to survive. I think thats what made the original a great horror movie. I think that is the problem with the genre in general. Deaths in a horror movie would be so much more if you cared about the person who was getting slashed. In most horror movies there is no connection so that's why you never care who bites it next. While the main cast from the original 3 weren't focused on as much in this movie, they were still the only ones you wanted to see survive.

N. Williams on Apr 16, 2011


Big fan of the original, sequels were ok. This was a disappointment for me in the suspense/horror department. Felt like I was watching a Scary Movie film at times with all the laughs and obvious unintentional laughs at the attempt of horror on screen. It had a lot of potential but as a big fan of the series maybe expectations were too high. Felt like it could've been lonnger to help with character development. The characters that I was attempting to like bite the dust, so quick and without remorse really. From trailers and tvspots you can see where a few good scenes/lines left out. Didn't have much of a story either where in previous entry's the originals try to figure out a pattern or are trying to unlock Sid's mom past. The beginning tried too hard to be original and totally forgot about the tension and suspense the previous ones had. Felt bad for the character of Marnie who from the trailer had a lot more going on but got taken out to add in the additional shots filmed a couple months ago. The ending randomly turns into the Black Christmas remake (from a couple years ago, when you see the film you'll understand). Don't really see how this could be a beginning of a new trilogy, felt like the final nail into the coffin before turning into a remake territory, ala Halloween:Resurrection. Too Much going on, probably too much interference from the studio too.

Yo on Apr 16, 2011


Weak stuff. The opening movie within a movie within a movie, much like the rest of the film, is too satisfied with itself. Yes, you can ironically riff on torture porn, we get it. Now, tell us a good story and bring something fresh to the proceedings. The Scream franchise is now reduced to a scare-free installment that thinks it's cutting edge to mention Twitter and Web cams.

Christian Toto on Apr 17, 2011


best one since the origninal... i like how is resembled the first one in a lot of ways... the ending was a bit of a surprise cuz you couldnt guess the second killer until they revealed it... if they dont ever make another one then im happy with the way it ended....

Nickyboy0404 on Apr 17, 2011


cant wait for the dvd too many scene that they showed on the trailer that wasnt in the movie.....

Nickyboy0404 on Apr 17, 2011


Scream 4 was just another generic and derivative horror movie. This film series was already repetitious and monotonous. Nothing but a cash grab. And suckers gladly ponied up to watch it. Why do they insist on continuing this tired old franchise?? It’s the same old story over and over. Write something new Hollywood! Wonder when they’ll announce Scream 5 and that it will feature the entire casts of Glee, Gossip Girl, Jersey Shore, One Tree Hill and The Only Way Is Essex. Should be a cinch! More cash!

Fernanda on Apr 17, 2011


You didn't even see it, so what are you talking about?!

Jason Martin on Apr 17, 2011


and thats the point of scream... joke within a joke..

Joeymolina on Apr 18, 2011


and surprisingly as i sat in the theater there was hardly anyone there..

Joeymolina on Apr 18, 2011


Look I am a massive fan of the series. 1 and 2 were awsome, even 3 was ok by my book, but 4 was basicaly a new movie. It was what it wanted to be, and it was great at that, but as a "scream" movie? meh. I loved the movie in it, not so much the sequel.

Jimmi123 on Apr 18, 2011


it lived up to my expectations... i first watched scream 1 when i was 10... and continued following it up until scream 3. all of them were different, yet managed to keep a storyline going... i dont understand the previous post that mentions that the audience didnt care much for sidney and crew... I ONLY WANTED SIDNEY, DEWEY AND GALE TO LIVE. so... and i was surprised by emma roberts, great role! the culkin boy was a good touch and even hayden played her part well...

Joeymolina on Apr 18, 2011


Scream 4? I thought I was watching Scary Movie 5! I'm a huge fan of this series, especially the first two and I was rooting for this one too, but it just wasn't scary enough. I know these movies make fun of themselves as they're expected to, but don't they want us to take them a little serious? If this makes enough money for the Weinsteins to be hungry for a Scream 5, please, let's not have characters saying, "fuck Bruce Willis" and "I'm gay if that helps!" after getting stabbed... LET'S GET BACK TO MAKING 'SCREAM' SCARY AGAIN!!!!!!!!

ghostface on Apr 18, 2011


I liked it. It took an original and put in the perspective of a new generation of horror/thriller movies. With all the crap out there like twilight they had to make it fit so people would go see it. I think they did a nice job with this movie. I didn't mind paying $11 because I did enjoy it. Emma Roberts was a nice surprise. The high school movie club was a nice retake on Jamie Kennedy's video store nerd and horror theme expert. Just give this movie a try.

Tyban on Apr 18, 2011


This movie was exactly what it was supposed to be. I took my girl to see it and it reminded me of a time before Saw changed the landscape of horror films. Its been a long time since I went to see a slasher film with a little thought put into making it. The true shame of this movie is that I don't really think many people will give it a chance.

.............. on Apr 18, 2011


First off I had to say from the begging I had some suspision who the killer was but I kept conflicting between Hayden Pattieres character and Emmy Roberts. I actually was expecting Neve Campbell' character to die. Honestly, I don't think that is a step in the right direction but it would have been a twist that made everyone sad. In the end I did like the direction the movie went in. I felt that a dramatized teen whom wanted fame dispite the what she needed to get it was extremely beneficial to the plot line. The best thing about this movie was that you were never really sure who the killer was or could be and that is a plus in my books. I usually can instantly figure out who the killer was shockingly this time I failed. The only character who really lacked any real acting talent was Emmy Roberts. She really did not play crazy too well. I've seen crazy played better by different actors. She really needed to do more research on people with that personality disorder. Hayden Pattiare was phenomonal as always and Neve well she is extremely talented. Neve has always played good in horror even going back as far as the craft. I just wish Neve would appear in more movies because she beautiful. Anyways, I give this movie a thumbs up better than most of the garbage out there like Paranormal Activity. It is deffently a step in the right direction in the series. Not the most best out of the series but deffently more twist and turns with unexpected twists would be appreciated. I would give this movie a 8/10. We need to be more creative though. Start thinking outside the line a develop story lines that are strange but logical.

Michael12488 on Apr 30, 2011

New comments are no longer allowed on this post.



Subscribe to our feed or daily newsletter:

Follow Alex's main account on Twitter:

For only the latest posts - follow this:

Add our posts to your Feedlyclick here

Get all the news sent on Telegram Telegram