Let's remake 1996 Scream but for the zoom generation

There's no conceivable way that 5 can be ranked above 3. 5 is an abject piece of shit. In terms of sequels, it's up there with the worst ever in the horror genre.

>In terms of sequels, it's up there with the worst ever in the horror genre
Not even close what the fuck are you talking about? It was a pretty clever take on toxic obsessive fandom. What do you even hate about it? Don't even mention mixed characters or whatever woke agenda you think the movie has because nothing is shoehorned in.

Scream 5's pedestrian take on toxic fandom is just "inB4ing" people hating on the movie for how shit it is. The movie is complete shit almost across the board. Arquette had a good performance, everything else is shit.

You still haven't said what you disliked about it. "It's shit" is not an argument.

I did, you just don't want to hear it. I dislike everything about it except for Arquette's performance.

>the movie is shit
>why?
>because I hate everything it's shit
>ok but why?
>I just told you why
ok retard

I agree with 1 being the best. 2 & 4 can honestly be switched or kept as is. I really enjoyed 4. 3 is easily better than 5 though. The real takeaway is that without Williamson, Scream movies suffer greatly.

If it bothers you so much, why don't you go on some long gay spiel about why you think it's "clever"?

I didn't make a thread about how clever I thought it was. You made a thread wining about how shit it is. I wanted to understand why you dislike it but clearly you're a mental midget.

Scream is a good movie, but what kind of retard thought it would make a good series?

Attached: 85021BD4-3798-4CAC-B620-8D212E3D9518.jpg (750x994, 409.13K)

I can understand swapping 3 and 5. For me, the whole Roman was behind everything angle was dumb as fuck and ruined the entire movie.

I didn't make a thread about how shit it was. You made a post saying it was clever. You probably posted the thread too you gaywad.

Killing off Dewey, who is the best character other than Randy, really put me off of 5. They needed that all-female power moment and sacrifice him for it. Fuck that.

Of course the killer is on the poster, literally every character in the movie is on it

OH MY HECKING GOD, I LOVE BABADOOK

Attached: lkl.png (1240x675, 1.55M)

Scream 1: 9/10, redefined the genre though a little too much tongue and cheek self-aware shit

Scream 2: 7/10. killers were interesting but not nearly as iconic and Billy and Stu. Bit of a retread.

Scream 3: retread of a retread with a horribly acted killer. Not even worth rating. No memorable kills. Not worth watching again.

Scream 4: 6/10 - it was funny but my god the kills were lame and there was just no well crafted horror to it.

Scream 5: it could have been great if Stu played a bigger part with her daughters mental illness. It honestly could have been surprising and as great as the first If Stu’s daughter was the mastermind but they cheaped out at the last minute and went with sequels potential. Still, some fantastically shot kill scenes that were the best of the entire series. Those kills werent so scary but they were so brutal and artistic in a way that makes Hostel look fake and gay. The kills and the acting of Arquette make it a 7/10 but it could have been higher if the girl actually went batshit with her father’s mental illness. Would have been a poignant ending. She should have killed everyone in the house. It would have been the perfect ending.

>hoping they would bring back Matthew Lillard somehow
Opinion discarded. There is no way to bring Stu back without it being the biggest, dumbest asspull ever. I can't understand how anyone can actually fucking want Stu back. It would make no goddamn sense whatsoever.

It did start the subgenre that has been overdone and paint-by-numbers for a few years now.

I actually thought the movie would end with a twist like the two sisters getting in the ambulance together then Billy's daughter goes apeshit, kills her sister and reveals she was actually the third killer or something. But nope. What the hell was even the point of seeing ghost Billy?

Whoops, I meant Billy, not Stu. I did like Billy’s cameo, too. There was a lot there they could have done but they went with the self-aware sequel installment route.

this fucking woke bitch was fucking awful
>DURRR LE QUIRKY FUNNY SARCASTIC HORROR CYNIC HUEHUEHUE

what a piece of shit

Attached: lkl.png (662x380, 460.54K)

Fan service

You can blame the bad kills in 3 to Columbine. It forced numerous rewrites because they wanted to play it safe. Not having Williamson also hurt.

>Fan service
Fan service would have been Stu. He's the fan favourite.

Attached: stu.jpg (500x378, 26.35K)

Fun fact: The gaywads who made this movie post threads about it to defend it and try to drum up excitement for their next shitty sequel.

Scream literally has the highest batting average of every slasher film. Every Scream besides 3 is pretty good to great - virtually every other franchise has 1 good movie and then an endless succession of dogshit sequels

>movie that grossed $140+ million needs to drum up sequel excitement on Yea Forums
This is your mind on schizophrenia

They unironically do. They were trying to shill this movie hardcore when it came out in January.

What if James A Janisse is the killer in Scream 6?

Attached: external-content.duckduckgo.com.jpg (399x399, 13.96K)

>new zoomer cast are insufferable
>zoomers are a diverse cast of homosexuals, asians, black people and effeminate white males
>killers are almost as bad as emma roberts and charlie in 4
>dewey's death scene was FUCKING RETARDED
>"jordan peele rules"
>all the black people survive
>the randy stand in is even more obnoxious and reddit than kirby
>haha we're mocking fans who get mad at shitty sequels so that means you're not allowed to criticize this shit movie otherwise you're just as pathetic as the people we mock!
Scream is just not franchise material. Oh no, someone else is taking up the Ghostface persona, gee who is it this time? Who the fuck cares? Especially five times in a row. Oh, it's gonna be some zoomers from the zoomer cast, who the fuck cares? Making the killer one of the main trio would have people accuse them of trying too hard for shock value. The perfect middle ground would've been to bring back Stu as the killer, whether as a literal undead supernatural zombified Stu or as a safer "he totally survived the TV bro", but Scream is far too up it's own ass and pretentious about how "prestigious" it is for the slasher genre to do anything fun. FUCK this movie and FUCK this series.

If this had any balls (it doesn't, Scream is just as pozzed as every other franchise) Ghostface would have an exchange with a black character trying to bring up the (non-existent) horror "trope" of people of black people dying in horror movies and Ghostface clarifying PC Hollywood goes out their way to make sure black people get special treatment and treats them like royalty. Ghostface would then kill the black character in the most painful grotesque way possible. Ghostface could have a cool zinger to say it's actually progressive and brave to kill black characters nowadays (which is true). But Scream no longer has an edge or bite to it. Ghostface is now a pussy, he has to be nice to the black people and not go at them so hard.

they mention Yea Forums in the movie

Gardener is killer !

And...?

That's most of the major movies these days. Bots are fucking everywhere on Yea Forums. You think those Red Panda movie threads are organic? Bots out the ass.

i hate euphoria threads, but hunter should be the villain for scream 6

Attached: everything-you-need-to-know-about-hunter-schafer-1560787004-view-0.jpg (460x374, 29.89K)

>shills still haven't come up with a line of deflection they think is more effective than "take your meds" and "shizo"

Stu > Jill > Billy > Richie > Amber > Mickey > Charlie > Debbie > Roman

they browse here

The Scream 5 cast were repulsive enough to look at, we don't need a tranny eldritch abomination thrown into the mix.

While I disagree with most of what you said, the main problem with the Scream movies is that there's no repeat killer and the new cast either all dies or disappears. All they need to do is have a new survivor or two and a killer that doesn't die at the end.

I feel like the ending was just a way to write Neve Campbell off and make Billy's daughter the new protagonist of the series going forward. I fucking hope not though.

>cringe richie and cringe amber up that high
Cringe.
Stu > Mickey and Mrs Loomis > Roman > Billy > Charlie and Emma Roberts > Scream 5 zoom zooms

I'd unironically watch a Sleepaway Camp remake with that dude as the killer/main "girl".

Yea Forums has 20 million + unique visitors every month user it's not some secret underground club. Of course the writers will be aware of it.

Cringe Emma was top tier killer

>Kincaid won the Sidneybowl

Attached: mark.jpg (640x480, 18.23K)

I thought they set it up pretty well. The whole time I thought his daughter was going to go on a killing spree and knife everyone to death. She didn’t even have to be involved with the previous murders. I was actually expecting her to get triggered and kill everyone in the room. It looked that way when she was stabbing the shit out of the fanboy but she just stopped and the movie wrapped up with a sequel in mind. Weak ending. Could have been great.

The whole franchise is either trash or mediocre beyond the original. Scream 2 is definitely trash. Bargain bin scripts. And don't tell me I'm supposed to like it because it's "sooo schlocky"

Scream 2 is by far the best one after the original

And of course it will be a target for shills, shill.

Scream 2 had well acted killers and some neat kills. It’s a retread though and not up to the original. There was a really shitty scene there when Neve is being spooked by this cast of masked people in a play. Thad scene was horrifically gay and Jaime Kennedy’s death was bullshit but otherwise a solid movie.

op is the producer

Attached: jasmin-savoy-brown-mc-main-220112-03-cb3950.jpg (2143x1200, 1.07M)

the boyfriend being bad was so obvious
shit movie