Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Spacebump
Dec 24, 2003

Dallas Mavericks: Generations
It is inevitable we get a scream with Barrera as one of the killers. When that happens, she should take down any OG character left to really rile up the fanbase.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

R. Guyovich
Dec 25, 1991

haven't liked her in anything i've seen her in so far, unfortunately. weakest performer in in the heights, which was already not very good

fart blood
Sep 13, 2008

by VideoGames

Spacebump posted:

It is inevitable we get a scream with Barrera as one of the killers. When that happens, she should take down any OG character left to really rile up the fanbase.

That would be an awful plot development if she were one of the killers later on.

Spacebump
Dec 24, 2003

Dallas Mavericks: Generations

fart blood posted:

That would be an awful plot development if she were one of the killers later on.

Kind of feels like they have been setting it up for two movies. They almost had the killer "win" Scream IV and be the star of V. It just seems inevitable .

VROOM VROOM
Jun 8, 2005
An entire movie showing Sam being framed as the killer, and then it shows that she's actually killing people

In the end we find out that Sidney (and, in classic Scream fashion, her offscreen husband who ends up being one of the movie's side characters) engineered the whole thing

Sam and Tara kill them

Everybody watching the movie gets pissed off for various reasons

A post-credits scene shows Sidney's toddler picking up a knife

fin

Spacebump
Dec 24, 2003

Dallas Mavericks: Generations

VROOM VROOM posted:

An entire movie showing Sam being framed as the killer, and then it shows that she's actually killing people

In the end we find out that Sidney (and, in classic Scream fashion, her offscreen husband who ends up being one of the movie's side characters) engineered the whole thing

Sam and Tara kill them

Everybody watching the movie gets pissed off for various reasons

A post-credits scene shows Sidney's toddler picking up a knife

fin

Also, Kirby dies.

fart blood
Sep 13, 2008

by VideoGames

Spacebump posted:

Kind of feels like they have been setting it up for two movies. They almost had the killer "win" Scream IV and be the star of V. It just seems inevitable .

The original scream IV idea was also a bad idea. So was the “Stu survived” idea from 3. There’s a reason the ideas were jettisoned.

Making Sam the killer eventually just undoes her entire story, which is “I’m not my father.” The whole “my dad was a killer so that means I might be too” aspect is the worst part of her character anyway. Basically it means the filmmakers want us to root for her for 2-3 movies just to yank the rug from under the story and make her the bad guy. It’s bad storytelling.

And that’s not even getting into the bad taste of the implication that people with mental health problems eventually become serial killers. I don’t think they want that smoke.

Spacebump
Dec 24, 2003

Dallas Mavericks: Generations

fart blood posted:

The original scream IV idea was also a bad idea. So was the “Stu survived” idea from 3. There’s a reason the ideas were jettisoned.

Making Sam the killer eventually just undoes her entire story, which is “I’m not my father.” The whole “my dad was a killer so that means I might be too” aspect is the worst part of her character anyway. Basically it means the filmmakers want us to root for her for 2-3 movies just to yank the rug from under the story and make her the bad guy. It’s bad storytelling.

And that’s not even getting into the bad taste of the implication that people with mental health problems eventually become serial killers. I don’t think they want that smoke.

I love the franchise but it isn't above bad storytelling. The most recent film basically ended with "Guess what Mindy, Chad, Kirby, and Gale weren't murdered after all." The last 10 minutes or so undercut the stakes of like 90% of the film. On one level that works because of the franchise theme in VI. On another level, it is classic franchise style bad storytelling. Can't have any legacy characters the audience likes die, gotta keep the franchise going.

fart blood
Sep 13, 2008

by VideoGames

Spacebump posted:

I love the franchise but it isn't above bad storytelling. The most recent film basically ended with "Guess what Mindy, Chad, Kirby, and Gale weren't murdered after all." The last 10 minutes or so undercut the stakes of like 90% of the film. On one level that works because of the franchise theme in VI. On another level, it is classic franchise style bad storytelling. Can't have any legacy characters the audience likes die, gotta keep the franchise going.

Oh the Scream franchise has tons of plot holes, no argument there. poo poo, Scream 6 is one giant plot hole after another, frankly. (I still liked it, but man there’s so many unanswered questions throughout that plot.) But it’s just that ultimately the Scream movies get happy endings. RS feels that way, Williamson feels that way, Wes felt that way. The only one that got an iffy ending was 4 and you can still call it happyish, at least.

ruddiger
Jun 3, 2004

Scream 7 should start with an entirely new cast and it’s mentioned offhandedly that there’s been 2 or 3 ghostface attacks in the interim and everyone’s been killed off during those.

Open Source Idiom
Jan 4, 2013

Spacebump posted:

It is inevitable we get a scream with Barrera as one of the killers. When that happens, she should take down any OG character left to really rile up the fanbase.

My read, based on VI, is they're pulling a reversal of this -- Ortega becomes the killer because she's not actually handling her poo poo, while Barrera confronts her darkness and emerges the hero of the piece despite it all. It's the dark ironic turn of the "let me go" imagery which the film smacks you over the head with. She's letting her younger sister look after herself, and make her own choices, come what may.

It also puts the weight of the script on the stronger actor ngl.

fart blood
Sep 13, 2008

by VideoGames
They’re not making a multi-time survivor a Ghostface.

ElectricSheep
Jan 14, 2006

she had tiny Italian boobs.
Well that's my story.

fart blood posted:

They’re not making a multi-time survivor a Ghostface.

Saw already did it (well, one-time survivor but who's counting)

dr_rat
Jun 4, 2001

ElectricSheep posted:

Saw already did it (well, one-time survivor but who's counting)

Probably someone on the [url=https://sawfilms.fandom.com/wiki/Saw]saw wiki[/url] I would assume.

I didn't check cos god knows how confusing the wiki most be with what a convoluted mess that franchises is.

SidneyIsTheKiller
Jul 16, 2019

I did fall asleep reading a particularly erotic chapter
in my grandmother's journal.

She wrote very detailed descriptions of her experiences...
I feel like nu-Scream is rather obviously building up to an ending where Sam and Tara's mom is the killer, who manages to turn Sam to the dark side and try to kill Tara, but after an intense chase/fight Tara finally manages to get Sam to snap out of it due to the power of sisterly love or whatever.

I don't actually think they'll do that because it's a little too obvious (especially if it's gonna try to echo Scream 3 and finales), but it's the most natural conclusion. They'll make it look like they're going there but then put some twist on it and then at the last minute PSYCHE actually we are doing the obvious natural ending lol didn't see that coming, didya? In classic Scream fashion.

fart blood
Sep 13, 2008

by VideoGames

ElectricSheep posted:

Saw already did it (well, one-time survivor but who's counting)

None of the survivors ever becoming ghostface make any sense. Gale, Tara, Kirby, etc.

fart blood
Sep 13, 2008

by VideoGames
Double post, sorry.

I notice online a lot of Scream fans want the series to take more risks and do something crazy, but slasher franchises historically have never handled taking risks very well. Every time a slasher franchise takes risks, that's when it starts falling apart.

Nightmare On Elm Street had some ridiculous movies at the end -- not counting the awesome New Nightmare -- and the (failed) reboot tried to go back to basics.

Friday the 13th did some crazy poo poo like having a telepathic final girl, going to Manhattan, going to space, doing a possession angle, etc. And the (failed) reboot had to retcon half the movies and act like anything after Part 2 never happened.

Halloween had so much ridiculous poo poo and timeline nonsense with the Rob Zombie remakes and the new trilogy that came out recently that like 70% of its films are retconned out of existence. Jamie Lloyd? Who? Huh? Halloween's franchise is so hosed up that Laurie Strode's death was retconned twice.

That's why I'd prefer if Scream just didn't do that. I've been watching Scream from the beginning. Scream 1 is one of my favorite movies ever. The rest range from "ok" to "very good". It's a consistent series, albeit formulaic. If they try risky poo poo like "making Gale/Tara/Sidney the killer" or whatever, it's gonna be stupid and it will all unravel and then they'll have to retcon half their franchise. The reboot with part 5 didn't have to forget any of the movies existed (though I wish Roman got a little more love.) And I think the filmmakers know this and that's why they play it safe a lot.

it's gonna get stale -- you can argue it already is stale, actually -- but that's okay, they'll just ice the franchise for a while and then bring it back again, good as new later on.

Darko
Dec 23, 2004

Fridays reboot didn't fail. It was basically just a remake of 1-4 in one movie (so it got to where the original switched to a new killer and took it back) and was successful.

They had issues with the rights, was the problem, so the snowy sequel never happened and we're getting a TV show instead.

fart blood
Sep 13, 2008

by VideoGames

Darko posted:

Fridays reboot didn't fail. It was basically just a remake of 1-4 in one movie (so it got to where the original switched to a new killer and took it back) and was successful.

They had issues with the rights, was the problem, so the snowy sequel never happened and we're getting a TV show instead.

Oh I know I should've clarified that the failed reboot wasn't because it was bad. I actually really liked the Friday reboot. The point still stands though that it acts like the more ridiculous stuff and the Tommy Jarvis stuff didn't happen.

The Nightmare reboot on the other hand...oof.

Darko
Dec 23, 2004

fart blood posted:

Oh I know I should've clarified that the failed reboot wasn't because it was bad. I actually really liked the Friday reboot.

The Nightmare reboot on the other hand...oof.

Youre good, didnt think you were bashing it - I was just clearing up that it was so successful that we got the Nightmare reboot because of it. Only reason we didn't keep getting movies is because they screwed up the rights.

The Nightmare reboot is the worst movie in either franchise. This is a franchise that has NOES5.

fart blood
Sep 13, 2008

by VideoGames

Darko posted:

The Nightmare reboot is the worst movie in either franchise. This is a franchise that has NOES5.

You forgot Freddy's Dead, which is somehow worse than Dream Child. I didn't think it'd be possible but they managed to do it.

Darko
Dec 23, 2004

fart blood posted:

You forgot Freddy's Dead, which is somehow worse than Dream Child. I didn't think it'd be possible but they managed to do it.

Freddy's Dead is looneytuooms stupid fever dream dumb. Dream Child is just boring, dull, and bad and shot ridiculously. I prefer stupid bad to boring bad, but thats just me.

Still neither is as bad as the reboot. That's boring, dumb, and a waste of a premise, which is the worst affront you can do.

dr_rat
Jun 4, 2001

fart blood posted:

Friday the 13th did some crazy poo poo like having a telepathic final girl, going to Manhattan, going to space, doing a possession angle, etc. And the (failed) reboot had to retcon half the movies and act like anything after Part 2 never happened.

So you're saying you don't want scream 7 - Scream goes to space? BOO!!!

Darko posted:

The Nightmare reboot is the worst movie in either franchise. This is a franchise that has NOES5.

It was sad seeing how badly the nightmare reboot screwed it up. Even though there's always going to be a bit of a hurdle to get over for any nightmare movie that doesn't have Robert Englund, due to his iconic performance, it's still a horror series with a very simple and pretty unique premise which you can do a lot of interesting stuff with and shouldn't of been that hard to get right. Just find a director who's good at surreal horror and let them go wild basically.

Darko
Dec 23, 2004

dr_rat posted:

So you're saying you don't want scream 7 - Scream goes to space? BOO!!!

It was sad seeing how badly the nightmare reboot screwed it up. Even though there's always going to be a bit of a hurdle to get over for any nightmare movie that doesn't have Robert Englund, due to his iconic performance, it's still a horror series with a very simple and pretty unique premise which you can do a lot of interesting stuff with and shouldn't of been that hard to get right. Just find a director who's good at surreal horror and let them go wild basically.

You also have CG, meaning you can dive into dreams way more than you ever could on a budget, and they don't even have to look photoreaalistic because they're dreams! You can do anything!

But no, instead they just do the first movie, but worse, including replacing good practical effect scenes like wall claws with bad CG. And then anything interesting like micro-sleeps or Freddy being falsely accused added was ignored or made even worse by making him an actual guaranteed pedo.

What a bad, bad movie.

ruddiger
Jun 3, 2004

Freddy's Dead has that Iggy Pop song over that awesome credits montage so it automatically puts it over NOES5 and the reboot.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p-bxiCp6rJ0

Darko
Dec 23, 2004

ruddiger posted:

Freddy's Dead has that Iggy Pop song over that awesome credits montage so it automatically puts it over NOES5 and the reboot.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p-bxiCp6rJ0

A friend of mine did the second or third song in the credits and I constantly make fun of him for it (although I wish I had a song in a NOES movie!).

fart blood
Sep 13, 2008

by VideoGames

Darko posted:

Freddy's Dead is looneytuooms stupid fever dream dumb. Dream Child is just boring, dull, and bad and shot ridiculously. I prefer stupid bad to boring bad, but thats just me.

To each their own. Both are of course awful.

A lot of my friends hated Dream Master but I kind of have a soft spot for it.

dr_rat
Jun 4, 2001

Darko posted:

You also have CG, meaning you can dive into dreams way more than you ever could on a budget, and they don't even have to look photoreaalistic because they're dreams! You can do anything!

But no, instead they just do the first movie, but worse, including replacing good practical effect scenes like wall claws with bad CG. And then anything interesting like micro-sleeps...

Yep, micro-sleeps is legitimately really interesting idea for the freddy movies as everyone's been tired and knows what it's like trying to stay awake while drifting off. Fits perfectly into the franchise and was so much they could of done with it but... yeah nothing.


And yeah the replacing practical effects with CGI thing reminds of the thing prequel where they actually made some really great looking practical effects for the film then apparently the produces made them cover them with cheap CGI.

CGI can be used well, but not like that, not like that!

fart blood
Sep 13, 2008

by VideoGames

dr_rat posted:

Yep, micro-sleeps is legitimately really interesting idea for the freddy movies as everyone's been tired and knows what it's like trying to stay awake while drifting off. Fits perfectly into the franchise and was so much they could of done with it but... yeah nothing.


And yeah the replacing practical effects with CGI thing reminds of the thing prequel where they actually made some really great looking practical effects for the film then apparently the produces made them cover them with cheap CGI.

CGI can be used well, but not like that, not like that!

Scream 4 used CGI blood and knives too, IIRC.

I don’t get it. Practical effects are part of the beauty of horror. And it ages a lot better IMHO.

mutantIke
Oct 24, 2022

Born in '04
Certified Zoomer
I'm just glad everybody loves New Nightmare. That movie rocks

fart blood
Sep 13, 2008

by VideoGames

mutantIke posted:

I'm just glad everybody loves New Nightmare. That movie rocks

I know someone who doesn’t. She’s not my friend though. But yeah it rocks. It’s a shame it was kind of a flop.

Dawgstar
Jul 15, 2017

mutantIke posted:

I'm just glad everybody loves New Nightmare. That movie rocks

It did walk so Scream could run. (The run is with arms flailing wildly and maybe slamming into a fridge door.)

fart blood
Sep 13, 2008

by VideoGames

Dawgstar posted:

It did walk so Scream could run. (The run is with arms flailing wildly and maybe slamming into a fridge door.)

And tripping over a couch.

weekly font
Dec 1, 2004


Everytime I try to fly I fall
Without my wings
I feel so small
Guess I need you baby...



I would be happy seeing a one-shot Scream that was completely disconnected from the main characters (fine they can have a zoom call cameo who cares). It would allow you to have a cast with no plot armor and make it actually difficult to know who or why the killer could be. I don’t need supernatural or space, just give me the same feeling of tension the first Scream did.

clown shoes
Jul 17, 2004

Nothing but clowns down here.
With the franchise still going strong (stronger than ever?), a completely fresh reboot seems unlikely anytime soon, but I would really love a Scream movie in which "Stab" doesn't exist in the universe.

Snooze Cruise
Feb 16, 2013

hey look,
a post
Do they get their own Stab in the tv show eventually?

fart blood
Sep 13, 2008

by VideoGames

clown shoes posted:

With the franchise still going strong (stronger than ever?), a completely fresh reboot seems unlikely anytime soon, but I would really love a Scream movie in which "Stab" doesn't exist in the universe.

The beauty of Scream is the movies all happened and you don’t even have to do a reboot; just make a new movie with a new cast that occasionally references the previous ones if you wanna. That’s pretty much what 5 was anyway. Just do that without the legacy cameos.

Alhazred
Feb 16, 2011




SidneyIsTheKiller posted:

e "maybe Sam will become a psycho killer just like her dad!"

Maybe? She executed cop dad and while making a quip, she's pretty psycho already.

fart blood
Sep 13, 2008

by VideoGames
Sam will not be ghostface.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

zer0spunk
Nov 6, 2000

devil never even lived

fart blood posted:

Sam will not be ghostface.

You might be giving this franchise more credit than it deserves.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply