Dieci anni sono passati e Sidney Prescott, che si è riuscita a riprendersi grazie in parte alla sua scrittura, riceve la visita dall'assassino.Dieci anni sono passati e Sidney Prescott, che si è riuscita a riprendersi grazie in parte alla sua scrittura, riceve la visita dall'assassino.Dieci anni sono passati e Sidney Prescott, che si è riuscita a riprendersi grazie in parte alla sua scrittura, riceve la visita dall'assassino.
- Premi
- 1 vittoria e 6 candidature totali
Roger Jackson
- The Voice
- (voce)
Shenae Grimes-Beech
- Trudie
- (as Shenae Grimes)
Britt Robertson
- Marnie Cooper
- (as Brittany Robertson)
Recensioni in evidenza
I'm 23 years old. 12 years ago, I watched the original "Scream" (1996) and it was the first horror movie I enjoyed. It was a landmark in the puberty years of many movie-buffs-to-be who grew up in the late 1990's (good times!). SCREAM 2 & 3 were released in 1997 and 2000, respectively, and although entertaining, didn't hold a candle to the original (which is fine, most sequels don't). "Scream 3", in particular, lacked Kevin Williamson behind the script, and not even Wes Craven could turn what Ehren Kruger wrote into gold (meaning, a good flick; it did make a lot of money, though, and Parker Posey made it hilarious at moments).
So, eleven years later, a new SCREAM movie comes out, reuniting the original director, writer and the three survivors of the franchise, heroine Sidney Prescott (my first movie crush, Neve Campbell, still naturally beautiful and always a competent actress), Dewey (David Arquette) and Gale (Courteney Cox). Die hard fans, like me, have been waiting for this for a decade, and it paid off. Actually, it works so well because it was made 11 years after the last installment. The movie is far from perfect, obviously, but stands as the best of the sequels; "Scream 2" was above the average but came way too soon, and the third one was a wasted opportunity.
The tongue-in-cheek humor works for the most part, and Williamson knows how to parody a trend that he (re)created himself, including the ridiculousness of torture porn from the likes of SAW and its annual sequels - "movies with no character development, in which you don't care who lives or dies". That is the strongest link in this franchise: we've come to care about Sidney, Dewey and Gale, making the SCREAM movies work equally as slashers and satires. Whether or not SCREAM 5 & 6 will be made, it all depends on how much money this will make; I'm satisfied with this 4th chapter, although I won't deny I will still see another one if Craven, Williamson, and Campbell are involved. That said, it was a nostalgic flick that made me feel like I'm a preteen again. It may be a "new generation with new rules", but the iPhone generation oughtta know: "The first rule of remakes: you don't f*** with the original". Bravo, Sidney!
So, eleven years later, a new SCREAM movie comes out, reuniting the original director, writer and the three survivors of the franchise, heroine Sidney Prescott (my first movie crush, Neve Campbell, still naturally beautiful and always a competent actress), Dewey (David Arquette) and Gale (Courteney Cox). Die hard fans, like me, have been waiting for this for a decade, and it paid off. Actually, it works so well because it was made 11 years after the last installment. The movie is far from perfect, obviously, but stands as the best of the sequels; "Scream 2" was above the average but came way too soon, and the third one was a wasted opportunity.
The tongue-in-cheek humor works for the most part, and Williamson knows how to parody a trend that he (re)created himself, including the ridiculousness of torture porn from the likes of SAW and its annual sequels - "movies with no character development, in which you don't care who lives or dies". That is the strongest link in this franchise: we've come to care about Sidney, Dewey and Gale, making the SCREAM movies work equally as slashers and satires. Whether or not SCREAM 5 & 6 will be made, it all depends on how much money this will make; I'm satisfied with this 4th chapter, although I won't deny I will still see another one if Craven, Williamson, and Campbell are involved. That said, it was a nostalgic flick that made me feel like I'm a preteen again. It may be a "new generation with new rules", but the iPhone generation oughtta know: "The first rule of remakes: you don't f*** with the original". Bravo, Sidney!
Before I begin with the negative I want to point out that I really enjoyed this movie. As slasher movies go this one is pretty solid. However compared to the first two movies in the series it is a bit underwhelming. There weren't as many surprises as one would expect from a movie like this. The killings and chase sequences lacked the the thrills that makes the viewer jump up.This could be because we don't really care for the characters as we barely know them. The whole interaction between the characters was very limited and felt rushed.The deaths were basic stabbing stuff. Not once did you actually thought OMG,horrible! Don't know about you but you have to have at least one scene like that.Also I think Wes Craven was so right to fear that after the Scary movie series that Ghost Face would not be effective any more. And he is right. Every time Ghost Face appeared you just couldn't take it very seriously. Speaking of which. While there were some funny moments it wasn't nearly as sharp as the comedy used in Scream 1. Still I did like the ending very much.Even if more red herrings could made the ending have more impact.Overall Scream 4 still manages to be entertaining and enjoyable as long as you realize it isn't as strong as the first two Scream movies in the series.
I couldn't believe my eyes when I saw that Scream 5 was in the pipeline, it instantly prompted me to revisit the films. This film could have easily been a disaster, but in all reality, it's a pretty fun watch.
I'm not sure there's much here for the casual viewer, it is one to please fans of the originals, and of course there is a new set of rules. I can't say I warmed hugely to any of the new cast, the joy comes from the original lineup.
The start was very imaginative, and good fun, the ending definitely came out of left field, but it grabs your attention. Lots of scares and thrills.
Here's to Scream 5.
7/10.
I'm not sure there's much here for the casual viewer, it is one to please fans of the originals, and of course there is a new set of rules. I can't say I warmed hugely to any of the new cast, the joy comes from the original lineup.
The start was very imaginative, and good fun, the ending definitely came out of left field, but it grabs your attention. Lots of scares and thrills.
Here's to Scream 5.
7/10.
If you liked the first 3 movies you will like this one too. It has the same feel as the other Scream movies, but i don't want to spoil any story so i won't say anything about that.
I am a fan of the scream movies but not a HUGE fan that is why i would rate it an 8. Story wise (like every horror movie) it could sometimes be a bit better, but I found this story better then the typical horror movie. The kills were more realistic and the gore levels were appropriate in the scenes in my opinion.
If your a fan of horror movies i would really recommend it though. And if your a fan of Scream movies go see it!
I am a fan of the scream movies but not a HUGE fan that is why i would rate it an 8. Story wise (like every horror movie) it could sometimes be a bit better, but I found this story better then the typical horror movie. The kills were more realistic and the gore levels were appropriate in the scenes in my opinion.
If your a fan of horror movies i would really recommend it though. And if your a fan of Scream movies go see it!
THIS REVIEW IS SPOILER FREE: READ ON FOR MY REVIEW ON SCREAM 4 (2011) I was pleasantly surprised. This was a great movie, especially for fans of the original. It makes up for the awfulness of Scream 3, and includes many very talented new actors and actresses. I was very surprised to walk into the screening theater and see a fantastic horror film. As soon as the Dimension logo appeared on screen, my heart began to race. The opening scene was brutal and hilarious, and it was great to see all of the original characters back on the screen again. I found the Wes Craven cameo, and was laughing as I spotted it out. This movie was great to watch, even though there were some things that needed to be fixed. Very minor problems though. There were some parts in the dialogue that seemed unrealistic (Ehren Kruger re-writes), but it wasn't a huge deal. Also, the ending was kinda long, but it was also very suspenseful. I would most definitely recommend this to a friend in search of a good horror movie.
Lo sapevi?
- QuizLast film directed by Wes Craven before he died from brain cancer on August 30, 2015, at the age of seventy-six.
- Blooper(at around 36 mins) When Sidney runs to Olivia's house she walks into the blood splattered room. Sidney runs her hand down the blood covered door frame. None of the blood smudges or goes onto her hand. If the murder had just happened the blood would have went onto her hand, and smeared down the door frame.
- Citazioni
Sidney Prescott: You forgot the first rule of remakes, Jill. Don't fuck with the original!
- Curiosità sui creditiWhen the end credits start, there are 2-second long clips of the characters with the actor's name corresponding.
- Versioni alternativeThe UK version contains re-dubbed/additional dialogue compared to the US version. Both cuts are identical in terms of visual content, but there are approximately 30 aural differences between the two.
- ConnessioniFeatured in Scream Awards 2010 (2010)
- Colonne sonoreSomething To Die For
Written by Jesper Anderberg, Felix Rodriguez, Fredrik Blond, Maja Ivarsson, Johan Bengtsson
Performed by The Sounds
Courtesy of Arnioki Records
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
Dettagli
- Data di uscita
- Paese di origine
- Siti ufficiali
- Lingua
- Celebre anche come
- Project Z
- Luoghi delle riprese
- 1005 Lincoln Avenue, Ann Arbor, Michigan, Stati Uniti(Roberts residence)
- Aziende produttrici
- Vedi altri crediti dell’azienda su IMDbPro
Botteghino
- Budget
- 40.000.000 USD (previsto)
- Lordo Stati Uniti e Canada
- 38.180.928 USD
- Fine settimana di apertura Stati Uniti e Canada
- 18.692.090 USD
- 17 apr 2011
- Lordo in tutto il mondo
- 97.231.420 USD
- Tempo di esecuzione
- 1h 51min(111 min)
- Colore
- Mix di suoni
- Proporzioni
- 2.39 : 1
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti