Scream 4 loses bigtime to Rio, do people still care about horror?

rio1
This past weekend at the box office was a veritable bloodbath not in the literal sense but speaking of the carob syrup variety. Scream 4, which was expected to be at least as successful as its predecessors, fell upon its own knife (and certainly wasn’t helped by David Arquette and Courteney Cox’s boner-related TMI) to draw only $19.3 million from audiences. The newest kid’s film, Rio, easily took first place with $40 million even though Hop (which nabbed third place) is still out there in circulation as well.

scream2
Of the remaining holdovers, the inspirational sports drama, Soul Surfer, grabbed fourth place; the Cate Blanchett sci-fi revenge flick, Hanna, took fifth; and Arthur slid way down to sixth place (because nobody likes poor live-action Russell Brand). On a more impressive note, The Conspirator (which Kaiser has already noted was pretty damn good) debuted with $3.9 million to land in ninth place; but don’t be fooled by the low place rank because that movie was only showing on about 700 screens as opposed to the 3800 and 3200 screens upon which Rio and Scream opened, respectively speaking. Of course, the film industry is now aghast at Scream‘s poor turnout, and the analysis of why this happened has commenced with fury:

Before Scream 4 was released this weekend, tracking indicated an opening in the mid- to high $20sM for this 4th film in the Scream franchise which comes 11 years after the 3rd film. But after Friday’s so-so debut and Saturday’s declining grosses, it won’t make even the lower end of predictions. The Miramax/Dimension/Weinstein Co’s 15-year-old Scream franchise kept the formula that made it so popular in the first place — including producer/director Wes Craven, screenwriter Kevin Williamson who bailed mid-production because of Weinstein meddling, and orignal castmembers Courteney Cox, David Arquette, and Neve Campbell — then added Hayden Panettiere and Emma Roberts (Julia’s niece and Eric’s daughter). Maybe the entire concept should have been reworked. The result is that Scream as a franchise has little life left in it even though the Weinsteins kept insisting that it had a lot.

[From Deadline]

It must be noted that the above tracking figures do seriously downplay the situation in favor of the Weinsteins. Box Office Mojo’s derby predictions were for Scream 4 to rake in $40.6, and that obviously didn’t happen by a long shot. Of course, one wonders why the Weinsteins bothered to release a horror movie in April when much of the target audience (teens and young adults) are preoccupied with seasonal activities such as prom and finals. There’s also the complicating fact that Scream actually saw a dropoff between Friday ($8.3 million) and Saturday ($6.7 million), which is actually the direct opposite of what happens with the horror genre (it’s a phenomenon that I’ve previously written about ad nauseum over at Pajiba if you’re interested). The thing about horror movies is that word of mouth matters so much during opening weekend, and a steep dropoff between Friday and Saturday could mean that audiences were disappointed in the movie and told other people not to go see it. Or, in the alternative, maybe very few people wanted to watch Scream 4 in the first place.

Photos via AllMoviePhoto

rio2

scream1

rio3

scream3

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

36 Responses to “Scream 4 loses bigtime to Rio, do people still care about horror?”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. carrie says:

    i saw SCREAM4,the 10 first minutes are good(the movie in the movie in the movie)and the end on celebrity is so true but SCREAM4 is SCREAM 2 basically and it’s a cynic movie

    I am very happy YOUR HIGHNESS is a huge bomb

  2. EarthWindFire82 says:

    Scream 4 lost big time because it SUCKED big time.

    Just my opinion…

  3. Ashley Decker says:

    People still care about horror. I listed several reasons why Scream 4 was a bust. For one thing, 11 years in between sequels is a long time. The younger generation that was toddlers when the original came out aren’t impressed with a
    “who done it” slasher story anymore. They are the “torture porn” generation who grew up with “Saw” and “Hostel.” The “Scream” movies are very tame in comparison.

    We now live in the age of the Internet. The identity of the killer/killers and the deaths were leaked onto the Net and Youtube months before the opening. One of the great things about this franchise is the mystery of the killer. Take that away and you stand to lose a chunk of your audience.

    3) The horrible Scream 3. That film helped drive away the first generation that saw the original 3 films. When a trilogy ends on a note like that, it can scare many fans off.

    4) Lack of star power. Back in the day, Neve Campbell had a built in fan base with “Party of Five.” Those days are over.

    5) The story is getting to be implausible. Self–referential horror was a breath of fresh air when Scream was first released, but it has been so overplayed it is now a parody of itself. The target audience has seen “Scary Movie”. It’s a parody now. NOt to mention these people have all had murder attempted on them by 7 different people. There is a time to let a franchise die a dignified death.

  4. Majosha says:

    Plenty of people still care about horror movies. But said films have to be interesting and original, unlike the crap studios shovel into the theaters on a regular basis (the entire Scream franchise included).

  5. Lucy says:

    I am not surprised. I did not like the movie.

    I cannot believe I paid 11 dollars to see that and I cannot even pinpoint what was wrong with it.

    I give you something positive: I liked the original cast and one scene with Adam Brody and that was it.

    The young cast was totally uninteresting and not convincing.
    I am sorry, but Hayden Panettiere does not convince me as the hot geek. I am not even going to talk about Emma Roberts (argh!)…
    Am I too harsh? no, that’s me being nice, sorry…lol

  6. LittleFATMe says:

    Seriously, you can turn on CNN and find real world horror at any time, unless a horror movie really breaks the mold or comes out at Halloween it’s kinda busted.

  7. malachais says:

    Rio was so cute, and I’m glad it did well. People still like horror movies, just not stupid ones.

  8. Samigirl says:

    Horror is my absolute favorite genre. The movie sucked though. In fact, 2, 3, & 4 allll sucked. People still like to be scared, grossed out, on the edge of their seats, but the Scream franchise is done and over. Please, Wes, give me a movie that will actually SCARE me and give me the heebie jeebies. Haven’t had one in a long time!

  9. Kim123 says:

    So Courtney talked about David’s boner for naught

  10. kazoo says:

    there was no reason for this movie to have been done.

  11. I RUN NEW YORK says:

    SCREAM 4 is played out. That’s why it didn’t do well. Not because it’s a horror film. People want something new. Not a 4th version of an old played out movie.

  12. jc126 says:

    I don’t think people want to see a divorcing couple, plus this movie should’ve come out a decade ago.

  13. wow....really? says:

    Emma Roberts did it.

  14. searching4grace says:

    @ wow really… I hope that’s a guess, and you’re not one of those people who just throw stuff out there to ruin it for other people. Not everybody wants a spoiler.

  15. Dizzybenny says:

    I dont think it’s just Scream 4 that’s a disappointment, I think the whole year so far in movies have been bad!!
    Started with the Green Hornet,Sucker Punch recently and it hasent stoped!
    I checked on Yahoo movies the top 12 of this week and you usually see 3-4 movies that made 100 or close to,but theres only one,Rango the next one after the closest is Hop at 82 million.
    Kids movies are racking up the money but it’s the big 15-30 group that’s taking a hit.
    Next month the BIG summer movies will start to come out with BIG 3D effects,will they live up to there expectations??
    On a personal note I’ve been keeping up my resolution of 2011 to boycott 3D movies.They’re not worth the x-tra money that I pay to see them! 🙂

  16. Alarmjaguar says:

    Whoa, Bedhead, my internet worlds are colliding! This is too much for a Monday morning. But glad to see you on yet another cool blog!

  17. wow....really? says:

    @searchingfor grace–It was totally a guess. I just wanted to blame Emma Roberts. I haven’t seen the movie. 🙂

  18. Hakura says:

    @Crash2GO2“The sun is essential for our health. Look at how animals sun bathe. You can’t tell me that mother nature doesn’t know what she is doing.”

    No offense, as I’m sure *she* knows what she’s doing…But unfortunately, we don’t. We’ve majorly screwed up the ozone layer, making it harder. I’m on the extreme end, though. (using 100+ SPF whenever I’ve going to be outside longer than from my car to a door).

    Even so, I do get freckles on the places I covered with Sunscreen. I’m not sure how to prevent that either. >.< Maybe some kind of special grade would help us not to tan/freckle through the sunscreen.

    @Michelle – I’m glad I got it right! =)

    @Margaritachum – I hadn’t really thought it, but you’re right about the reason people become so obsessed with tanning… It creates a lot of ‘contours’ that makes your body look more angular or thin. But it’s entirely possible to do that with spray tan, too.
    @DizzyBenny“On a personal note I’ve been keeping up my resolution of 2011 to boycott 3D movies.They’re not worth the x-tra money that I pay to see them! “

    While I haven’t been to too many 3D movies (& thought the few I’ve seen were neat), I always feel bad for the one’s where glasses are requred. A few of my friend’s who have bad eyesight (in one or both eyes) can’t enjoy them. I know a few of them have only been released in 3D.
    ——-
    I’ve never cared for horror. At mid-20’s with no kids, I really enjoy the animated moves. It’s nice to have ‘unrealistic conflict’ in a movie sometimes, like with HOP, & an easy resolution. (Sure, it’s goofy, but cute.)

    I have enough stress & angst in my own life, I don’t need any help from a movie.

  19. Hakura says:

    OOPS!!!!!!!!

    I accidentally copied one of my previous responses for another thread & stuck it with the one here.

    For some reason, I haven’t been able to edit my comments for a while now. (not sure why?)

  20. Blank says:

    “Do people still care about horror?”

    This statement irritated me a lot. It made the jump from people don’t care about Scream 4 to people don’t care about horror.

    This movie looked like a dud. It actually looked boring.

    France and Japan make better horror movies than the US now and the people that like horror movies know that.

    It didn’t even appeal to people that aren’t big on horror movies.

  21. i says:

    Doesn’t anyone think that the “horror” truly exists in the reality that we are collectively living in?
    Earthquakes, environmental apocalypse, economic depression/meltdown, radiation poisoning of an entire country, tsunamis, losing our homes and our sense of safety…
    I’m sure there’s plenty that I’m not listing.
    As fun as it is to take a break from the “horrors” and go to a film shouldn’t the films that we escape into be responsible departures from reality?
    Shouldn’t films, shouldn’t the writers of those films work a little harder to truly give us a reprieve from our real-life difficulties?

  22. Kat says:

    I saw Scream 4 on Friday (opening day) and really enjoyed it. Yes, it’s not perfect, but if you’re a fan of the series there is still a lot there to enjoy. I will probably go and see it a second time in theaters.

    Also, people who post spoilers are pathetic trolls.

  23. Nudgie says:

    If you want to see a Horror film, go see “Insidious” and see what you can do with only a $1M budget and GOOD WRITING AND ACTING.

    Scared the bejeebus outta me 😉

  24. Cali says:

    Yes, people still care about horror especially me! What we don’t care about is the lack of new ideas and the same old recycled junk being played over and over again. I mean come on, I am Screamed out and it was never really scary, more funny and entertaining than anything else, but it’s really played OUT. Why would you spend money to see this in the theatre? I will watch it when it comes on HBO or maybe even ON Demand, but thats it.

  25. Cali says:

    @Nudgie, I saw Incedious last week and was not impressed! That movie started out so promising too, sigh, the best thing about that movie was the creepy music, it was the scariest thing about the film lol. I am really a horror movie person so it really take a lot to get to me. I guess I’m always looking for the thrill the Ring and the classic Exorsist gave me.

  26. KattyKat says:

    First of all I was in my teens the last time a Scream movie came out. OK, I was in my 20s and by that time had no interest in seeing the lame 3rd installment. I saw the first one and I don’t remember it being a horror movie as much as a horror parody. I don’t think today’s teens and twentysomethings even know what movies it’s parodying. That would help a lot. Although, thanks to Michael Bay Zombie maybe they do. I don’t know. I won’t see the retreads.

    I don’t think Horror is dead by any means. I think it’s in transition again. The ones I loved like the Ring and the Grudge were PG-13. Then came the misogynist Rated R Saws and their imitators. The newer ones are coming in PG-13 again. I haven’t seen Insidious yet. It will go on my to-stream list when it comes out but I did notice the rating.

  27. Kariyukai says:

    Of course the kids movie pulled in more $$$. You have, in most cases, 2 parents and 1-2 kids buying tickets. Parents aren’t going to see Scream 4.

  28. Mouse says:

    The answer is yes. GOOD horror flicks. I couldn’t make myself watch the first 3 of these because they look AWFUL. Why would I want to see Cox’s jacked face in a fourth yawnfest?

    Skip this garbage and go rent Let the Right One In. The original, not the remake.

  29. Camille says:

    “Or, in the alternative, maybe very few people wanted to watch Scream 4 in the first place.”

    This.

    The Scream movies sucked (to put it simply). They should have stopped after the 1st one (I’d actually rather it had never been made at all, as I found it stupid and very NOT scary). Wes Craven hasn’t made/produced a good horror film in years.

    And yes, people *do* care about Horror movies. But as Mouse ^ above says, skip this lite-weight crap and go and rent the original Let The Right One In (excellent film! <3 ).

  30. Ashley Decker says:

    @ KattyKat,

    Don’t let the PG-13 scare you away from Insidious! It’s an excellent film with great scares in the most unexpected moments. I really loved it.

  31. Cherry Rose says:

    I am a horror movie fanatic. =]

    I think the reason Scream 4 didn’t do so well is that 1) the premise of the movie is a bit dated and 2) it’s a slasher flick, and 3) no one gives a shit about the actors.

    And for those who are saying it’s terrible to watch horror movies when there’s so much stuff going already in the world…then why do we watch movies period? Movies like Titanic, Pearl Harbor, war movies, why bother making those too? Sheesh.

    Go lighten up a little. Movies are meant to entertain or have us express emotions. They give us an escape for a few hours.

  32. MaudeLebowski says:

    “Quack.”
    That was Courteney, emoting.

  33. Newbie says:

    I’m going to get the cyber-butt-kicking of a lifetime (maybe) for saying this amongst horror fans, but I can’t STAND Hostel and all the Saw movies. It’s just one opinion, and I don’t want to offend people, but I don’t understand what kind of sick and twisted person thinks of such grisly and horrifying things to do to people for entertainment. IMHO, there are real freaks and serial killers out there who probably thought that shit was fabulous, and they probably have or at least thought about mimicking it. I’m sorry to people who loved them. I just can’t get my entertainment kicks from a movie about someone who is trapping and torturing people. It goes against every principle I have.
    *ends rant*

  34. MaudeLebowski says:

    I’m with you Newbie, I prefer horror that is supernatural or at least doesn’t get so grisly and explicit.

  35. Str8Shooter says:

    @Lucy: I have to agree with you 100% about Scream 4. I was dying to see this (no pun intended, LOL) and finally did on Sunday…and was let down for reasons I can’t explain. Something was just OFF! The original leads looked kinda bored, and the new ones (with the exception of Hayden, who was at least decent) were horrible. Julia Roberts’ niece? Yeaaaaahh….you may want to rethink the whole ‘acting’ thing!

    Now, on the other hand, I saw Insidious the week before…and scared the crap out of me! And this is a movie that was PG-13 and cost 1/40 of what S4 cost!

    When, o WHEN is Hollywood gonna learn??!!

  36. Monster beats common in numerous style journals from the United States, headphones Beats Monster is only a lower with his effective and powerful type from the shadow from the abolition of dual hearing and visual thunder.