troperville

tools

toys

Wiki Headlines
We've switched servers and will be updating the old code over the next couple months, meaning that several things might break. Please report issues here.

main index

Narrative

Genre

Media

Topical Tropes

Other Categories

TV Tropes Org
random
This is a "Wild Mass Guess" entry, where we pull out all the sanity stops on theorizing. The regular entry on this topic is elsewhere. Please see this programme note.
Scream
Randy is not dead and may return in a later film
He is a far too popular and likeable character, and other fans have been pleading for him to come back. It could even be seen as a bit of Fridge Brilliance if the writer does ever decide to bring him back because the entire purpose of Scream 4 (the first in a new trilogy) is to subvert many events of the first film. For example:
  • Jill is the new Sidney, but she was one of the killers
  • Charlie is the new Randy , but was the other killer and dies and stays dead instead of getting up like Randy did in Scream
    • This troper thought Robbie was the new Randy, their initials are even the same (Randy Meeks, Robbie Mercer) he still most likely died though, but I'm hoping he lived!
    • Robbie seemed like the new Randy, but at the end Charlie actually calls himself the new Randy, but he degenerates quickly into a new Stu
      • But Charlie's a psycho, so his word isn't all that reliable anyways. He's probably just deluding himself.
      • True
  • Trevor is the new Billy, but was an innocent Red Herring etc...
The aformentioned Fridge Brilliance would come into play in the recently announced Scream 5, having Randy return in the second film of the new trilogy as a mirror to his death in the second film of the "old" trilogy. Whaddya think?
  • And just for the record, this wouldn't be a resurrection like so many A Nightmare on Elm Street or Friday the 13th movies, just make it so Randy didn't die. Maybe he survived his injuries, was transported to a hospital in a different city (one closer to his family, probably) and he's been laying low for the last little while.
    • Randy is, without a doubt, dead. Not only do we see him getting stabbed and killed, we also see that his throat's been slit. Add that to the fact that Joel mentions that his van is a crime scene, Randy's sister is sad about his death in Scream 3, and the fact that he has never been so much as mentioned as being alive for two and a half movies..... yeah. He's dead. It's like saying Tatum, Rebecca, or Trevor is alive. Their deaths are 100% final. If you want deaths which may have been survivable look at Kirby (Same wounds as Sidney, never mentioned again) or Robbie (Not wounded as bad as Dewey has been, alive for a while afterwards, paramedics are seen coming up and pulling out their equipment in the background of a scene) Now those characters may have survived.
      • Yeah, but it's just wishful thinking.
      • That I get, I'm still in wishful denial that Tatum died, Randy died, Cotton died, Jennifer died, Rebecca died, Trevor died, and that Kirby and Robbie could be dead!
      • Yeah, but it's especially sad when the characters that are in more than one movie are killed off. We Hardly Knew Ye

Scream 4 had 3 killers, Judy was the 3rd
Think about it, there's NO WAY Jill and Charlie could have done half those kills, they aren't strong enough. There's also a lot of times where it seems like they're both in other places Rebecca, where Jill is in the hospital and Charlie is with Robbie, Olivia, where the cops were pursuing Ghostface while she was being killed, and Kate, Hoss, and Perkins. Where Jill was with Kirby and Charlie was most likely with Robbie. It just doesn't add up! Add the fact that Judy was so incredibly CREEPY and you have a perfect 3rd killer!
  • This troper thinks it makes sense, but she was too obvious a suspect, and clearly set up to be a Red Herring, just like the cop in Scream 3 that Patrick Dempsey played. Though maybe the writer will reveal Judy to be the killer in Scream 5, and make her admit to some of the murders in Scream 4.
    • I definitely agree she's too obvious for a regular, it's just that NO ONE else could qualify and it'd be a huge shock to reveal a survivor to be a killer. Think about it, some scenes seem off without 3 killers and she's the only one who could possibly be a killer and alive. Robbie and Kirby may have survived, but their attacks were isolated and done in a way that they could not be killers. Judy is the only one that makes sense.
    • Considering Jill killed off Charlie when he outlived his usefulness, who's to say one of the other killers wasn't a victim who she killed for the same reason?

The Scream films exist in the View Askewniverse, which is also the real world
How else would the Jay and Silent Bob cameo in Scream 3 make any sense?
  • Or the scene in Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back where they walk onto the set of Stab 4, which is being directed by Wes Craven.
    • That would make sense because, as stated in Scream 4, only the first 3 Stab movies are based in fact, and the series apparently went downhill after that. (It would explain why the killer in Stab 4 was a monkey.
  • Maybe the director`s assistant for the Bluntman & Chronic movie (played by Jamie Kennedy) was actually Randy Meeks, having survived his attack in Scream 2. (I refer you to the first WMG on this page.) It would explain why he is so meek, timid, and jittery ( being attacked by a killer would do that to you). But it would also show that he is working his way up in Hollywood from lowly director's assistant to an actual director, eventually.

Scream 3 had 2 killers, Angelina was the second one
It was in the original script, and she was pretty suspicious. Maybe Roman betrayed and killed her because he wanted to be the soul survivor, a plot point later employed in Scream 4.
  • What's more, the film seems out of place in that it only had one killer, rather than the two every other film had. Not to say this film isn't allowed to break the pattern, but it certainly does seem a bit off.

Kirby and Robbie from Scream 4 survived their knife wounds
This troper is reluctantly adding this WMG because of how prevailant this theory is. So, OK, there is a possibility that both of them, or only one of them survived. It would be nice to have a couple of new recurring characters in future Scream movies besides the usual three.
  • I'm in total support of this theory. I'm a huge Kirby and Robbie fan! :P I really wanted them to make it. Besides, Dewey was stabbed way worse in Scream 2 and survived for much longer. It could definitely happen.
  • Robbie definitely didn't survive. When The cops get to the house post-bloodbath, Judy feels Robbie's pulse and says "He's gone." Kirby, on the other hand...
  • But that only happened in the Pay-Per-View cut. Also, she's not a doctor and she was obviously nervous, having seen so many corpses in one night ( Kate, Hoss, Perkins), she could've easily made a mistake. Not to mention she spent like half a second checking his pulse, which probably isn't enough time if the person is dying and his heart rate is slowing down.

Stu's motive was revenge for Casey dumping him for Steve
  • Early in the movie Randy has a quick line where he says that Casey dumped Stu for Steve. Stu says that he dumped her for Tatum. So if he was angry and jealous about it maybe that's why that pair had to die.
    • Well, that and peer pressure. He was very sensitive.

The true Ghostface is an old man who teaches teenagers how to become serial killers
  • Well, that was kind of used as the plot twist at the end of Scream 3, with Roman telling Billy and Stu to start the original murders.
    • Yeah but he seemed a bit unstable to be a puppet master type villain.
  • This would account for the change in the Ghostface voice (assuming the voice is the old man's, rather than the actual killer's), which was caused by Roger L. Jackson's real-life voice change (due to aging), but was never addressed in-universe.

Dewey and Gale will not appear in Scream 5
  • It's just a thought, but they really don't have much of a place in the franchise anymore. They get engaged at the end of Scream 3, and they have a rocky marriage that gets better in Scream 4, but their plotline has now been completely resolved. It's like when they removed Orlando Bloom and Keira Knightley in Pirates of the Carribean 4, there is no need to have them in future sequels, it's the same for Dewey and Gale. Not saying that they should be killed off, just Put on a Bus. Let's say that they moved to another country to get as far as possible from any more killings. This, in turn will allow more new characters to have more screen time in the fifth and sixth films.
    • This troper seconds this. Even though they play a role in the climax, they feel unnecessary to the storyline. It really wouldn't be a bad thing if the same thing happens to Sidney. The more she's in these movies the more likely it is she's going to end up murdered.

Scream 5 is going to have a blatant joke about sequel numbers
  • The joke is probably going to be Stab (some ridiculously big number) or Stab (followed by some Colon Cancer )

Dewey killed Stone The Bodyguard.
Ok hear me out here. Though Stone had some defining moments like catching Gale eavesdropping and fighting Ghostface to the death, he was a complete and utter dick to Dewey, treating him with disrespect despite Dewey surviving twice up to the events of Scream 3. During his death scene, he was snooping around Dewey's trailer, and even stole pocket change from him while on the phone with presumably Dewey. To top it off, he made a remark about Dewey's sister's death which was seconds away from the killer's Kruger style one liner. ("That Makes me *Stab* ANGRY!!!) Last but not least, he approached the group and pointed at Dewey before collapsing dead. I am not saying Dewey was the killer for all of Scream 3, but he used the ensuing chaos to his advantage to get even with Stone.
  • But remember, Dewey was in the house with Gale and Jennifer the entire time, that's how the audience is supposed to know that it's not Dewey on the phone with Steven Stone.

Scream 5 is going to seemingly kill off Sidney, only to bring her back for the finale of Scream 6.
Search your hearts, you know it to be awesome.

Ghostface really is a ghost.
He possesses people and motivates them to kill. As for possessing multiple people at once, either he's one ghost that can split up or many ghosts that can form into one collective.

If Sidney is in the next movie, she is going to kill herself
Sidney can't possibly stay sane after all of that.

Scream 5 really will involve Time Travel.
One of the characters in Scream 4 mentioned that Stab 5 involved time travel, which is possible foreshadowing of the sequel. It won't be the standard time travel, though. Instead, we'll have flashbacks of Sidney's mom trying to escape from a killer (maybe Billy and Stu), and at the same time, have Sidney running from the same killer and trying to figure out his identity.

Ghostface as the Seven Deadly Sins
  • Pride: Jill
  • Wrath: Mrs. Loomis
  • Lust: Billy
  • Greed: Mickey
  • Gluttony: Stu
  • Envy: Roman
  • Sloth: Charlie
    • I always thought Jill was envy.
      • Probably, but Roman was envious of Sid before she was famous and truly wanted to kill her.
Stu
is still alive. He was electrocuted I know, but take horror movie physics away and you got the odds of surviving an electrocution. Not to mention after the TV stopped shocking him he made a moan before passing out. It sounded like a faint sign of life.
  • Quite possible as one of the Rumors and even Wes and Matthew Lillard themselves said that Stu would have survived and been orchestrating the murders of either Scream 2 or 3 (I can't remember exactly) but that they had to drop it after Columbine. Seeing as you said Horror logic applies to this series, it could very well be possible that we may see Stu in the future.
The entire Scream universe horror follows movie rules in a cosmic setting.
This isn't just to be one step ahead of the killer, this universe is cursed to live as an eternal horror movie. This not only includes the rules Randy and others mentioned throughout the films but ones they never mentioned: 1. As long as the heroine/scream queen lives, someone will always try to kill her. 2. Every killer has to wear the titular costume. 3. No matter what their motive is, it will always lead back to why the Heroine has to die in order for them to succeed. 4. If there is more than one killer throughout the series, they will always pay tribute to their predecessor while adding their own style to the mix. 5. No matter how much the Heroine succeeds, she will always lose someone, or something she cares about. 6. Only the scream queen can kill the killer.

While these rules are mostly set in stone, the characters on both the protagonist and antagonist ends of the curve strive to change them in some way. Such as Sidney surviving despite not being a virgin.

Billy Loomis
will return in the fifth movie. Not via ressurection, but by some bizzare way, he survived getting shot in the head (I looked it up, it's possible to some degree, like if the bullet is stuck in the skull). All new characters will be Red Heerings like in the previous films, making The Reveal much more surprising. He will express disgust on how horror is all the same now, and is trying to take it back to it's classic roots saying somthing along the lines of "You can't kill the classics" and "The best always come back".
The next one will have...
Sid, Dewey and Gale armed to the teeth waiting for the next killer to show up. They blow him/her away and the rest of the movie would focus on Maureen's life while adding new things to make it seem like Ghostface was around before Sidney.

Dewey is Unbreakable.
Think about the sort of punishment he goes through throughout the series only to escape with little or no lasting effect. Even his limp from a 'severed nerve' is convientiently invisible and vague enough to be psychosomatic, a sympton he convinced himself he had, because a full recovery within months would be so implausible.
Scarface (1983)WMG/FilmSecondhand Lions

random
TV Tropes by TV Tropes Foundation, LLC is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available from thestaff@tvtropes.org.
Privacy Policy
25014
26