Cannes Film Festival 2013

A look at the state of horror as 'Scream 4' starts production

How will Wes Craven and Kevin Williamson adapt?

<p>Neve Campbell and Nancy O'Dell on the set of 'Scream 4,' which began principle photography today for a 2011 release.</p>

Neve Campbell and Nancy O'Dell on the set of 'Scream 4,' which began principle photography today for a 2011 release.

Credit: Nancy O'Dell

This morning, cameras rolled on "Scream 4," with Wes Craven once again directing from a script by Kevin Williamson.

From 1996 to 2000, the first "Scream" films helped define horror at a time when it was at a commercial low.  By paying homage to the slasher films of the '80s and then investing them with a decidedly '90s feel, Williamson and Craven managed to bring the entire genre roaring back to life in terms of box-office.  Williamson's influence on the teen genre basically created an entire market, beyond horror even, but "Scream" was ground zero for that.

It is not uncommon for a film to become a phenomenon based on one great idea or one great scene or one great action gag, and in the case of "Scream," it's all about that opening scene.  The winky knowing dialogue, the deconstruction of the genre, the idea of killing Barrymore early... it sent shock waves through its audience.  I'm not saying that's the only thing people liked about the film, but after that opening, there was so much good will built up that the audience would have gone almost anywhere with Craven and Williamson.

I can't really call myself a fan of the series.  I admire the commercial machinery of the first film, but I didn't buy it.  I respect that there is an audience that used "Scream" as a gateway to horror, that suddenly had an appetite for being scared in the theater.  I think a lot of truly terrible films were made in the wake of "Scream," including the "Scream" sequels.  But there have been a lot of kinks and twists in horror since 2000, and obviously the remake frenzy has set in.  Even if I don't love "Scream," I love that it was an original film that was Williamson's way of nodding to films he loved rather than just straight-up remaking them.

The first image from the set leaked today courtesy of Nancy O'Dell, who appeared in the third film as a reporter, and who I guess appears again in the new one.  Ryan Rotten over at Shock Till You Drop made the catch on this one.  The general assumption is that Neve Campbell is returning to the series as Sidney Prescott so that she can die in the opening scene of the film.  I'm not sure I buy that, though.  It seems so obvious that there's no surprise involved if they do that.  The new film features Hayden Panettiere, Emma Roberts, Lauren Graham, Rory Culkin, and Anthony Anderson as new characters in addition to Courtney Cox and David Arquette, who return from the original trilogy.

What I really hope "Scream 4" manages to do is kick the genre in the face.  Because it needs it.

I love horror.  My produced film work so far is exclusively horror.  The next thing I hope to see filmed is horror.  I believe in horror.  I think it's one of the great versatile storytelling genres, and that you can talk about any idea, any theme, any problem, any issue... all you have to do is tap into the fears inherent to whatever it is and deal with it through horror.

I also believe that 99% of what is made in the horror genre is garbage because it is made by cynical people who have no idea what makes the genre great, and who treat it like a cheap way to strip money from the wallets of dumb teenagers.

Craven and Williamson are both guys who I have some faith in.  I hope that they understand that returning to this franchise eleven years later means all eyes will be on them, and they have an opportunity here to make a film that serves as a colonic on all the lousy movies that have made it such a chore to be a horror fan lately.  I'm not sure they can do it... frankly, I'm not sure anyone can do it... but for "Scream 4" to be a truly worthy sequel to the original film and not just a cash-in on a familiar title, it needs to do something radical.

It's a pretty high bar they've got to reach, but they set it themselves.

We'll see if they pull it off April 15, 2011, when "Scream 4" arrives in theaters.

Can't get enough of Motion/Captured? Don't miss a post with daily HitFix Blog Alerts. Sign up now.

Don't miss out. Add Motion/Captured to your iGoogle, My Yahoo or My MSN experience by clicking here.

Not part of the HitFix Nation yet? Take 90 seconds and sign up today.

Become a fan of HitFix on Facebook.

You can e-mail me at drew@hitfix.com or follow me on Twitter, where I'm DrewAtHitFix.

Comments

  • Option 1

    Comment instantly as a guest Guest
  • Option 2

    Connect
  • Option 3

    Login or create a HitFix account Login Signup


  • I really want this to be good but I too have serious doubts. Not only because Craven and Williamson are very hit-n-miss, but because I remember another trilogy that breathed life into a genre and how it tried to do the same thing again years later. I think we all remember how that turned out...

    Still, I like the 3 surviving original characters from Scream enough to be genuinely curious as to what they're up to all these years later. Hopefully they don't find out about the killer's midichlorian count in Scream: The Phantom Menace.

    June 28, 2010 at 5:11PM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    Dillon

    If you think modern horror sucks, then you're looking in the wrong places. In my opinion France currently dominates horror, but most people in here America just watch remakes of foreign horror and bad slasher flicks. If you're afraid of subtitles... well maybe that will add to the horror :)

    June 28, 2010 at 5:33PM EST Reply to Comment
    • All_purpose_icon_talkback_profile

      drew You may not really know me if you're leaving a comment like that. I'd invite you to check out my history of reviewing horror from around the world, in many cases years before it arrives here. But no matter how much I like "Martyrs", it hasn't had any significant impact on what gets made unfortunately. Instead, it is still largely remakes and PG-13 crap. Yes, there are exceptions. That's understood. But the exceptions rarely register in the mainstream.

      June 28, 2010 at 6:19PM EST
    • I take back everything I said! I was pretty much directly referring to Martyrs (and Inside and Frontiere(s)). I agree with you totally. I had just come across this piece and misread what you said as a sentiment (that I've heard all over the place) that there's no good modern horror and that the best horror films were done in the 70's and 80's. Thanks for correcting me, we're on the exact same wavelength.

      June 29, 2010 at 12:05AM EST
  • Default-avatar

    Sean

    "From 1996 to 2000, the first 'Scream' films helped define horror at a time when it was at a commercial low."

    YES! Then the horror movie genre went into the much darker torture-porn territory with films like "Saw," etc.

    June 28, 2010 at 5:48PM EST Reply to Comment
    • The darker hard R-rated horror (never a fan of the torture porn label) was more a reaction to the mild pg-13 horror that was popular in the marketplace following the success of the ring. I think Rob Zombie's House Of 1000 Corpses was the first movie to really break through in that area, and was the first movie to attempt to bring back visceral 70's-style horror.

      June 28, 2010 at 6:57PM EST
  • Default-avatar

    Finn

    This morning in Los Angeles, cameras rolled on "Scream 4,"

    I stopped reading there because cameras started rolling in Michigan. Not Los Angeles.

    June 30, 2010 at 9:17PM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    Mr. Pit

    Um... Scream 4 isn't shooting in LA, it is filming in Michigan.

    July 1, 2010 at 1:45AM EST Reply to Comment

Get Instant Alerts on Motion/Captured

Latest Posts
More Posts
Recent Activity on Facebook
Most Popular on Facebook
Top Stories From Around the Web