Mendelson's Musings (10-02-24)

Will 'Scream 7' appeal to young fans? More "box office → streaming" proof. WBD preemptively declares it's more than 'Joker 2'. Why 'Wild Robot' and 'Transformers One' both benefit from rave reviews.

In tonight’s unexpectedly optimistic newsletter…

• Can Scream 7 sell itself to new fans who only cared about the Shaw Sisters? (free)

• Inside Out 2 & It Ends With Us reaffirm big box office → big streaming views (free)

  — Apple wouldn’t care about box office coverage if anyone watched Apple TV+.
  — Brief kudos to departing Sony Pictures Entertainment CEO Tony Vinciquerra for A) handing the reigns to a (slightly) younger generation and B) keeping Sony out of the streaming wars and instead becoming an A-level arms dealer.

• The pre-Joker 2 trailer drops — Companion, Juror No. 2, Mickey 17, Sinners, etc. — showcase a Warner Bros. Discovery that wants to be seen as more than just an assembly line for DC superhero movies and Wizarding World content. (paid)

• Why rave reviews and strong buzz matter to DreamWorks’ commercially successful The Wild Robot *and* Paramount’s unsuccessful Transformers One. (paid)

nevecampbell

A post shared by @nevecampbell

Scream 7 (seemingly aimed entirely at the olds) gets a release date. 

For better or worse, Paramount will release Spyglass' Scream VII in theaters on February 27, 2026, just under three years after the March 2023 debut of Scream VI. No, I don't know if audiences will care about the abrupt firing of Scream V and Scream VI lead Melissa Barrera in late 2023 over her online statements (and sharing of others' statements) concerning the actions of the Israeli government against the civilian populations in Gaza.  

The scandal-plagued Benjamin Netanyahu now seems determined to start World War III (and help usher Donald Trump back into the White House) as a means of staying in power and avoiding an increasingly hostile sentiment *among* Israelis. That's precisely we all warned everyone about last year while "serious people" (and disingenuous hatemongers) were again equating legitimate criticism of the Israeli government's actions with "Jews will not replace us"-style antisemitism.  

So... being on the right side of history will put the changeover (which also saw initially hired helmer Christopher Landon leaving in the resulting firestorm) under a continued microscope. Ditto Neve Campbell, who did not appear in Scream VI over a salary dispute, jumping back in as the lead and selling it as some "truth to power" triumph in terms of gender parity as opposed to desperate producers backtracking to the only plausible way to keep the IP alive.  

We'll see what the world stage looks like in February 2026, but it stands to reason that this will be one of those online-only controversies that make a negligible impact on general audiences. The challenge may be selling a seventh Scream film that seems entirely aimed at moviegoers (give or take) my age and were teenagers back in December of 1996 when the first Scream opened. Neve Campbell is back as the "final girl," and longtime franchise screenwriter Kevin Williamson is now in the director's chair.  

Pending whatever we don't know about the plot, the film seems likely to disassociate itself from the previous two Radio Silence-directed entries. Those films successfully relaunched the decrepit franchise via new, youthful and comparatively inclusive protagonists. Along with Creed, it was a rare legacy sequel relaunch that succeeded in passing the torch. That is what (beyond the real-world politics) made the backtracking so disappointing. 

The big question may be to what extent Scream VII tries to appeal (or succeeds in appealing) to audiences who fans of not the overall IP were but of the last two Carpenter sisters-specific films. Maybe there's a genuinely clever idea in play. I hoped the next Scream would be a meta-commentary on how conventional the Scream series has become.  

Regardless, I will be intrigued to see if Scream 7 can be anything other than a proverbial Rise of Skywalker wank-fest, which is what the villains of the 2022 entry wanted all along. But it's my job to care about this stuff. Will those who merely showed up to Scream VI for pleasure be as inclined to show up for this proverbial "What if Creed IV tossed out Michael B. Jordan and made Sylvester Stallone the lead again?" follow-up?  

Inside Out 2 and It Ends with Us again shows box office > streaming. 

Disney announced that Inside Out 2 has amassed 30.5 million household viewers globally in its first five days on Disney+. That's the top movie debut on the platform since Encanto in late 2021. This "despite" the Pixar sequel becoming the third-biggest grossing film of the decade (behind only Spider-Man: No Way Home and Avatar: The Way of Water) with $1.7 billion and becoming (whether you count The Lion King or not) the top-earning animated feature ever in unadjusted domestic and global grosses. Considering that Inside Out 2 was initially intended as a Disney+ feature, this should be the end of all discussion about whether A) theatrical success can do anything but help streaming viewership and B) transactional theatrical success is more valuable than theoretical streaming glory.  

In a related note, Sony's It Ends with Us debuted atop the “Fandango At Home” VOD charts this past weekend, currently residing at #2 on iTunes and Amazon behind only the just-released Deadpool & Wolverine. So, earning $631 million and counting domestically and $1.32 billion thus far in theaters didn't seem to negate post-theatrical demand for that Marvel sequel. Nor did the Blake Lively starring adaptation of the Colleen Hoover-penned novel earning $148 million domestically (more than any romantic drama since the first Fifty Shades of Grey) and $341 million worldwide (behind only the Fifty Shades trilogy in terms of post-Titanic romantic dramas) on a $25 million budget do anything other than make it a more sought-after title in the post-theatrical landscape.  

As we get confirmation that Apple is pulling back from a theatrically focused release strategy thanks to having their feelings hurt over negative box office stories, I'm sorry you had a sad over us correctly pointing out that Argylle was not a commercial success. However, this isn't the 2000s where "Hey, just put Brad Pitt and George Clooney in a random crime comedy" might be enough for box office glory. And even in those days, such films would cost maybe $50 million because the big stars would take less money for back-end glory. Perhaps if you had an active subscriber base worth a damn (exhibit A: Ted Lasso season four), then you could stomach box office failure for the sake of Apple TV+ viewership glory.  Theaters will again suffer for the sins of streaming hubris.

Concurrently, we got word that 70-year-old Sony Pictures Entertainment CEO Tony Vinciquerra will step down in January, with 53-year-old current COO Ravi Ahuja taking his place. It's worth remembering to what extent Sony's film department(s) maintained a relatively steady ship amid industry-wide chaos by staying out of the streaming wars. As hoped, the pay-TV window Sony signed with Netflix in late 2021 was a cushion that allowed the Tom Rothman-run distribution house to slowly evolve from "the Spider-Man studio" to a studio that makes a varied slate of films alongside periodic Spider-Man-related flicks. They and Lionsgate mostly avoided the carnage of the streaming era by instead sitting on the sidelines and selling the guns. Let's hope Ahuja stays the course.