Headlines


Official: Wes Craven Back for Scream 4





It seemed as if we'd be stuck on 'maybe' forever, but finally the official word has come to pass. The man who started it all will be back to begin anew, and Ghostface fans now have reason to cheer!

According to Variety and later confirmed by Craven himself via his Twitter account (Follow @wescraven), Dimension Films has greenlit Scream 4 to shoot this spring with a release date of April 15, 2011 -- more than a decade after the release of Scream 3.

Wes Craven will direct working from a script by Kevin Williamson, and Neve Campbell, David Arquette, and Courteney Cox Arquette will reprise their roles along with a group of younger actors or as we like to call them ... fresh meat.

Thank the gods.

Scream 4 Synopsis
The horror series that reignited the genre and grossed more than $500 million worldwide is back! From Kevin Williamson, creator of the original Scream trilogy, the new film sees the return of cast members Neve Campbell, Courteney Cox, and David Arquette along with a group of new stars, who can all hopefully stay alive long enough to figure out the new rules to this one-of-a-kind horror franchise!

Official: Wes Craven Back for Scream 4

- Uncle Creepy

VISIT THE EVILSHOP @ AMAZON!
Got news? Click here to submit it!
Discuss your favorite scary movie in the Dread Central forums!


-->




NEXT STORY

Sirand's picture

Whatever they do will be better than Scream 3... and I know Wes wouldn't be lured back just for the sake of doing another. Some of the things I've heard about the script have really peaked my interest.

Time will tell.


Submitted by Sirand on Tue, 03/23/2010 - 12:32pm.
Terminal's picture

They said almost the same thing about Zombie. Let's face it, Craven has sold himself like a two cent whore for the last decade and this is no exception.
----------
"We are bad guys. That means we've got more to do other than bullying companies. It's fun to lead a bad man's life."


Submitted by Terminal on Tue, 03/23/2010 - 4:21pm.

Huh? Sold out like a two-cent whore? He's released a grand total of 2 movies since 2000. I'll grant that Cursed sucked, but I thought Redeye was pretty fantastic, and that was a deliberate attempt by Craven to move away from his normal body of work. His most recent, My Soul to Take, is directed from his own script. If anyone is the opposite of "selling out" right now, it's Craven.


Submitted by hegemon13 on Tue, 03/23/2010 - 5:56pm.
Vanvance1's picture

You liked Red Eye? That was the dumbest movie I'd seen since The Phantom Menace! Later Twilight topped both (okay, maybe tied with Menace) but Red Eye wasn't far behind.

Also, Cursed did stink. Maybe Craven has shot his cinematic load. He's done some great work in the past but some artists do burn out or lose their inspirations and energy.


Submitted by Vanvance1 on Wed, 03/24/2010 - 1:40am.
Terminal's picture

He's allowed all of his movies to be remade, he's failed to deliver a competent movie in years, and he co-wrote that monstrosity Hills 2 in 2007. A two cent whore.
----------
"We are bad guys. That means we've got more to do other than bullying companies. It's fun to lead a bad man's life."


Submitted by Terminal on Tue, 03/23/2010 - 6:11pm.
LifeMi's picture

Why am I not surprised you're bashing Craven again? Yes he's allowing remakes of a lot of his films but there's a reason; a lot of his originals weren't that good and could use a remake. I never saw Red Eye or Cursed, but I intend to see My Soul To Take and I think Scream 4 could be good.


Submitted by LifeMi on Tue, 03/23/2010 - 6:40pm.
Terminal's picture

"Why am I not surprised you're bashing Craven again? "

Because you know me. You love me. We're bosom buddies.

"Yes he's allowing remakes of a lot of his films but there's a reason; a lot of his originals weren't that good and could use a remake."

And this is the great Wes Craven everyone highly regards? A man who'd easily sell his films as a form of admittance that they were never very good in the first place? Wow, that really sells me on Craven! Sign me up for Scream 4 baby!

----------
"We are bad guys. That means we've got more to do other than bullying companies. It's fun to lead a bad man's life."


Submitted by Terminal on Tue, 03/23/2010 - 7:09pm.
LifeMi's picture

First of all, I don't think everyone highly regards Wes Craven (Floydian Trip, for example) but those do have a pretty darn good reason for it. He has made some really unique and interesting films over the years. Sure, he's admitting his earlier films weren't that good in the first place but that's what I like about him. Craven isn't afraid to admit that he's made mistakes and is willing to give young filmmakers a chance to do one better on him. I will always admire him for that. And yes, you can sign me up for Scream 4. 1 and 2 were solid and I hope 4 can be just as good.

P.S.: Scream 3 sucked sweaty gerbil balls.


Submitted by LifeMi on Wed, 03/24/2010 - 12:15am.
Terminal's picture

So in other words you admire a man who is basically saying "My movies sucked admittedly, so I'll sell them to anyone willing to buy them and let them be remade by better filmmakers"? How does that earn any respect? I just don't see the logic there. Sounds like the words of a Craven apologist to me, personally. But whatever floats your boat.

And I think the Scream series has aged very poorly over the years. All of Craven's films eventually age like soft cheese in a luke warm fridge.
----------
"We are bad guys. That means we've got more to do other than bullying companies. It's fun to lead a bad man's life."


Submitted by Terminal on Wed, 03/24/2010 - 12:22am.
LifeMi's picture

You're twisting my words around, bosom buddy.
He's accepting that his earlier efforts could've been better and is willing to let someone else take a shot at making it better. I can't think of too many filmmakers who would do that and it is because of this that I respect Craven. I'm not an apologist because of all of his films, the only ones I think are genuinely good are Scream 1, Scream 2, Swamp Thing, and A Nightmare on Elm Street. I don't necessarily think the Scream series has aged poorly, but that's just me.


Submitted by LifeMi on Wed, 03/24/2010 - 12:43am.
Terminal's picture

LifeMi I get to be Tom Hanks. You're Peter Scolari, hehe.

But seriously, I find something very wrong with a director whose work has been revered and is willing to sell them so quickly and admit they weren't very good in the first place. Someone like that does not deserve my praise.

----------
"We are bad guys. That means we've got more to do other than bullying companies. It's fun to lead a bad man's life."


Submitted by Terminal on Wed, 03/24/2010 - 8:13am.
Rob's picture

Am I the only one who wished the third one ended with us finding out that Cotton and Sydney were the killers? Cotton was sick of everyone accusing him (killing Sydney's mom in Scream 1, and then being the killer in Scream 2) and just said 'fuck it' and then Sydney is just crazy and bitter by that point. And then they kill everyone and win. The end. Of course this could be because the Non-Scott Speedman guy from Felicity was the weakest of the series' villains IMO.


Submitted by Rob on Tue, 03/23/2010 - 11:49am.
Vanvance1's picture

Waste of time.

I sense a couple of desperate brothers that need to make a few bucks off the horror fans so they can make more academy award aimed drivel.


Submitted by Vanvance1 on Tue, 03/23/2010 - 3:01am.
Terminal's picture

I agree. It is a waste of time, but it will be a fun car wreck to witness.

----------
"We are bad guys. That means we've got more to do other than bullying companies. It's fun to lead a bad man's life."


Submitted by Terminal on Tue, 03/23/2010 - 3:22am.
Terminal's picture

If Jamie Kennedy is brought back I'm going on my own killing spree.
----------
"We are bad guys. That means we've got more to do other than bullying companies. It's fun to lead a bad man's life."


Submitted by Terminal on Tue, 03/23/2010 - 2:52am.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.