user 16960
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2026
- Messages
- 1,245
Yeah, I wouldn't be surprised if all the characters existed in some capacity. Maybe even the episode plots are loosely based on events we never saw in their actual lives
View Askewniverse - Timeline
- Thread starter Pro Bot
- Start date
Pro Bot
Well-Known Member
I mean, Clerks, Mallrats and Dogma are literal in-universe films according to Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back and Jay and Silent Bob Reboot. I can easily see Jay and Silent Bob involved with an in-universe Clerks show personally.
Currently rewatching the movies before Scream 7 and I still think Scream 2 needs to be moved and the marquee at the beginning ignored as just a production date. Not only are the events of the first movie referred to as being a couple years ago but you'd have to believe that Gale writing The Woodsboro Murders and Stab's production all happens within a 7 month period.
Plus the biggest evidence of all is if Scream is September 1996, Sidney would still be in high school if it were April 1997. The earliest the movie can be is Fall 1997 and I know Scream 5 and 6 try to say the events of the movie are 1997, but I feel like that's just them putting little effort into the logic of the timeline. Like how Scream 5 sold itself as being 25 years since the original murders (2021) and 6 retcons it to now be 2022 because the movie released then. Personally I see Scream 2 as around Spring 1998, but if you want to keep what Scream 6 says, then it should still be later in 1997.
Plus the biggest evidence of all is if Scream is September 1996, Sidney would still be in high school if it were April 1997. The earliest the movie can be is Fall 1997 and I know Scream 5 and 6 try to say the events of the movie are 1997, but I feel like that's just them putting little effort into the logic of the timeline. Like how Scream 5 sold itself as being 25 years since the original murders (2021) and 6 retcons it to now be 2022 because the movie released then. Personally I see Scream 2 as around Spring 1998, but if you want to keep what Scream 6 says, then it should still be later in 1997.
Pro Bot
Well-Known Member
Fair enough, fair enough... December 1997 is good enough.
It just requires a lot of evidence to be ignored for that date to work. It's one of the reasons people use to put the first Scream in 1995. So Sidney could be in college and fit around that marquee date.
Pro Bot
Well-Known Member
The 4:30 Movie is definitely canon. There's a character part of the Hicks family.
Watching Scream 3 and June 1999 is making sense. I saw on Reddit today that the date June 28th 1999 can be seen on the script at Jennifer's house. Not only this, but rewatching the movie in 4K I noticed a calendar in the Stab production office that seemed to be for June and there's more calendars later on in Roman's office that show June and August and when certain scenes in those months would be shot. Confirming the movie is shooting in June matching this other evidence. It also fits with Roman's line about finding Maureen 4 years ago, a year prior to the first movie.
Pro Bot
Well-Known Member
Doesn't the date refer to when the script was made? Wouldn't that make it approximately July 1999 (or 2000)?
It's the script being printed live from the killer in Jennifer's house so the date on it should be the date it's being printed. Not the actual movie script.
Pro Bot
Well-Known Member
Oooooh, that's good then. Thank you.
user 16960
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2026
- Messages
- 1,245
I'm curious on how the Mortal Kombat story works for this universe. Like does it take place in a parallel universe they travel to or is this just the View Askewniverse's version of Outworld and Netherrealm? Also either way I think you'll probably have to use dimension brackets to indicate the parts set in the other realms outside of earthrealm
Pro Bot
Well-Known Member
It's only the ending that counts.
1. Mortal Kombat is a multiverse, so yeah. All of those are parallel universes.
2. Billy Loomis is sent to the Mortal Kombat setting during the ending of Scream. After defeating the big bad in his standalone ending (which is separate from the main timeline's storyline), he apparently returns to his universe. We know this due to the Stab video game. That, or it's Earthrealm and it's a coincidence.
user 16960
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2026
- Messages
- 1,245
I know it's a multiverse I meant like if it was the Scream universe variants of the MK cast and locations or if it was just entirely a separate universe basically.
Pro Bot
Well-Known Member
I guess it's the "MK Ghostface ending reality" variants, then.
user 16960
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2026
- Messages
- 1,245
Yeah, I think it's the same for Leatherface, I think in MKX he just gets transported to a variant MK universe since he mentions Drayton being alive but it's clearly the 2010s in the Mortal Kombat reality there.
Pro Bot
Well-Known Member
https://www.reddit.com/r/ViewAskewniverse/s/hxz2i8NOZL
Ugh, seriously? A reddit post? I don't think he's lying, but this is such a terrible source. Anyway, Jay and Silent Bob are kinda in that film but not really. If it's counted, then I don't know. Maybe Silent Bob just decided to talk for a bit. No, it's probably just two people who look like them.
Basically, Fanboys might possibly count.
Ugh, seriously? A reddit post? I don't think he's lying, but this is such a terrible source. Anyway, Jay and Silent Bob are kinda in that film but not really. If it's counted, then I don't know. Maybe Silent Bob just decided to talk for a bit. No, it's probably just two people who look like them.
Basically, Fanboys might possibly count.
Pro Bot
Well-Known Member
Yeah, no, I definitely believe the redditor's claim that Kevin confirmed that they're the same character. It lines up, plus that film already connected to both Zack and Miri Make a Porno and Yoga Hosers. It's sounds sensible enough. Just wish we got an actual video of Kevin confirming it.
I suppose this is Jay and Noisy Bob, then. I mean, Kevin is wearing the Silent Bob jacket. This is an extended version of their actual cameo, by the way. That's why it's a deleted scene. They're still in the movie.
Pro Bot
Well-Known Member
Theory: Kevin Smith was almost born Brian David Smith in real life but was named Kevin due to fear of a mixup with another child in the ward called Brian David Smith. Since Brian David is essentially a replacement of Kevin Smith in The 4:30 Movie, what if in the View Askewniverse, Kevin Smith is a pseudonym of Brian David?
Kevin Smith (View Askewniverse) - Timeline
1986 - The 4:30 Movie
1994 - Release of Clerks
1995 - MTV Mallrats Premiere Party
1995 - Release of Mallrats
1998 - Fanboys
1999 - Release of Dogma
2004 - Release of Jersey Girl
2013 - Release of Jay & Silent Bob's Super Groovy Cartoon Movie!
2013 - Jay & Silent Bob's Super Groovy Cartoon Movie!
2014 - Release of Tusk
2016 - Release of Yoga Hosers
2019 - Jay and Silent Bob Reboot
2020 - Release of Bluntman v Chronic
2025 - Quick Stops: Volume 3 #2, "Sentimental Attachment"
Of course, officially, they're two separate individuals. Just remove The 4:30 Movie and that's Kevin Smith's canon timeline.
Kevin Smith (View Askewniverse) - Timeline
1986 - The 4:30 Movie
1994 - Release of Clerks
1995 - MTV Mallrats Premiere Party
1995 - Release of Mallrats
1998 - Fanboys
1999 - Release of Dogma
2004 - Release of Jersey Girl
2013 - Release of Jay & Silent Bob's Super Groovy Cartoon Movie!
2013 - Jay & Silent Bob's Super Groovy Cartoon Movie!
2014 - Release of Tusk
2016 - Release of Yoga Hosers
2019 - Jay and Silent Bob Reboot
2020 - Release of Bluntman v Chronic
2025 - Quick Stops: Volume 3 #2, "Sentimental Attachment"
Of course, officially, they're two separate individuals. Just remove The 4:30 Movie and that's Kevin Smith's canon timeline.
Pro Bot
Well-Known Member
Just before that scene with 6/28/1999, there's a different script with 6/29/1999. Thankfully, there's a third script with 6/28/1999 on it so it actually averages out as June 28th, 1999. Not consistent though.
Pro Bot
Well-Known Member
Drake's "I'm Upset" music video could theoretically connect the entire Degrassi franchise to this... but, uh... that's scary. You know how many episodes that is for a music video? Also, that would just make the Jay & Silent Bob episodes of that series even more confusing considering that Kevin and Jason are playing themselves going to Degrassi in order to make a Jay & Silent Bob movie. That just seems crazy.
Pro Bot
Well-Known Member
Astro Blaser, a fictional franchise from The 4:30 Movie, is in Paradise Records, which features Jay and Silent Bob. The 4:30 Movie is UNDENIABLY canonical.
Pro Bot
Well-Known Member
I'm still a Stuther. Matthew Lillard said that the movie left breadcrumbs without actually committing to it. The medical records, the first Stu AI video referencing dialogue no one was around to hear, the age and scars with no flaws... I think the first video has a chance to actually be Stu just based on that. The rest is totally AI. I could also be wrong, but the thing is, you can't call someone crazy for insisting Stu is alive when the literal actor also believes that.
Even still... every Scream movie has the exact same plot, as per usual.
Even still... every Scream movie has the exact same plot, as per usual.
I disagree. As a long time fan of the series, I think Stu needs to stay dead. The more time that passes the more ridiculous the idea to retcon his death sounds. TBH, he should appreciate they found a way to bring him back that doesn't undo the original movie, but it feels like he won't be satisfied until he's made the ultimate villain. The character served his purpose in the first movie as Billy's "lapdog" and they had some fun in 7 with the he's alive theories but that should be the end of it.
JudgeDreddpool
Well-Known Member
Bruh... they literally had a chance to bring Stu back, but instead we get "Nope, it was all AI and Sidney's neighbour was really the killer". Such a ******* waste of plot potential.
Pro Bot
Well-Known Member
The thing is, I find Scream's formula quite boring after 7 films of the same ****. We know what will happen in every movie. Oh, there's a new killer... who will it be? Who cares, Sidney will kill them at the end anyway! They always act like it's gonna be different this time, but it never is.
Anyway, here's my thoughts on Stu. The beginning of the movie literally makes no sense. Why would they travel to Woodsboro to burn down the Macher house and kill two random people? It doesn't really make sense to be anyone. Easy to reveal/retcon it was Stu, since... he'd actually be there. When they called the county morgue, there's no record of Stu's body ever showing up. That's never explained as part of the game our killers are playing. Stu saying "surprise, Sidney" and especially "I always had a thing for you" don't make sense when she was the only person there.
Scream is NOT realistic at all, by the way. In the last few films, characters get carved up like butchered animals and still get away. Heck, every single film does that stupid "always comes back for one last scare" where, somehow, the seemingly dead killer jumps out with full energy and sprints at the survivors. It's absurd.
Stu's injuries are more believable. He got stabbed a few times, but nothing that hasn't been survived in this franchise before. Massive head trauma from the TV... yeah? But if we're talking about realism, there's no way that TV could have been pushed over that easily or shatter all over his face. That isn't actually accurate to real life either.
At least if Stu did come back, people would actually care who the killer is. The problem in Scream is that it's so basic now. There's a random killer on the loose we've never seen before, they kill a few people, they die. What is this, an MCU movie? How do you make seven movies that all repeat the same patterns and not realise that you stopped caring who the killer was decades ago? Especially since the killers NEVER get away and Sidney has unbreakable plot armor because of Neve.
I'm not shitting on Scream as a whole, by the way. It's extremely influential and all of the movies are good to great except arguably Scream 3 and Scream 7. Even then, they're entertaining.
Anyway, here's my thoughts on Stu. The beginning of the movie literally makes no sense. Why would they travel to Woodsboro to burn down the Macher house and kill two random people? It doesn't really make sense to be anyone. Easy to reveal/retcon it was Stu, since... he'd actually be there. When they called the county morgue, there's no record of Stu's body ever showing up. That's never explained as part of the game our killers are playing. Stu saying "surprise, Sidney" and especially "I always had a thing for you" don't make sense when she was the only person there.
Scream is NOT realistic at all, by the way. In the last few films, characters get carved up like butchered animals and still get away. Heck, every single film does that stupid "always comes back for one last scare" where, somehow, the seemingly dead killer jumps out with full energy and sprints at the survivors. It's absurd.
Stu's injuries are more believable. He got stabbed a few times, but nothing that hasn't been survived in this franchise before. Massive head trauma from the TV... yeah? But if we're talking about realism, there's no way that TV could have been pushed over that easily or shatter all over his face. That isn't actually accurate to real life either.
At least if Stu did come back, people would actually care who the killer is. The problem in Scream is that it's so basic now. There's a random killer on the loose we've never seen before, they kill a few people, they die. What is this, an MCU movie? How do you make seven movies that all repeat the same patterns and not realise that you stopped caring who the killer was decades ago? Especially since the killers NEVER get away and Sidney has unbreakable plot armor because of Neve.
I'm not shitting on Scream as a whole, by the way. It's extremely influential and all of the movies are good to great except arguably Scream 3 and Scream 7. Even then, they're entertaining.
Pro Bot
Well-Known Member
He acted his ass off. Lillard isn't giving up on Stu's survival, so I see no reason why we can't. At least the questions posed by his survival are more fascinating than otherwise. I also believe Mace Windu is alive solely because Samuel L. Jackson says so.
I don't even agree with claims his return would "ruin" the original movie. Stu was thought of to return in a potential Scream 3, so Wes Craven certainly didn't think so.
JudgeDreddpool
Well-Known Member
Ah yeah, the whole Ghostface Cult plot that had to be scrapped after Columbine, right?
They traveled to Woodsboro as part of the ruse to make it look like Stu is back as well as draw attention to Woodsboro making people assume it was once again a target. Gale even says others went there after the house burned down but her "Sidney sense" told her to go to her. We have no idea those lines stayed with Sidney. She could have easily told Gale about it after the first movie, leading to it being included in The Woodbsboro Murders/Stab.
It's not about his injuries being believable (although bleeding out on top of a CRT TV falling on his head are pretty believable to me) or not, but the fact it's been 30 years and he's been confirmed dead since. I'm not a fan of the way Chad survived 6 but they showed he was alive right away. Not 30 years and 6 movies after the fact. And yes they had an idea to bring him back in 3 but that was just it an idea when there was only 4 years and one sequel in between the reveal and one that never came to fruition. That doesn't mean Williamson wants to still do it or think its as feasible many years and sequels later.
And I didn't exactly care for the killers in 7 (the motive I feel could have worked well if executed better) but it's still better than jumping the shark by bringing a confirmed dead character back years later for sloppy fan service. The thing is Williamson tried to satisfy those fans giving them Lillard back without undoing his death, but he really should have realized it wouldn't be enough for those people.
Stu served his purpose. He was Billy's lapdog sidekick who just because people like the actor and think the character is fun can't let him go. And if the series is so dry on ideas they are desperate enough to go that route, as a longtime fan of the franchise for decades, I'd much rather they just end it./SPOILER]
It's not about his injuries being believable (although bleeding out on top of a CRT TV falling on his head are pretty believable to me) or not, but the fact it's been 30 years and he's been confirmed dead since. I'm not a fan of the way Chad survived 6 but they showed he was alive right away. Not 30 years and 6 movies after the fact. And yes they had an idea to bring him back in 3 but that was just it an idea when there was only 4 years and one sequel in between the reveal and one that never came to fruition. That doesn't mean Williamson wants to still do it or think its as feasible many years and sequels later.
And I didn't exactly care for the killers in 7 (the motive I feel could have worked well if executed better) but it's still better than jumping the shark by bringing a confirmed dead character back years later for sloppy fan service. The thing is Williamson tried to satisfy those fans giving them Lillard back without undoing his death, but he really should have realized it wouldn't be enough for those people.
Stu served his purpose. He was Billy's lapdog sidekick who just because people like the actor and think the character is fun can't let him go. And if the series is so dry on ideas they are desperate enough to go that route, as a longtime fan of the franchise for decades, I'd much rather they just end it./SPOILER]
Pro Bot
Well-Known Member
Yeah.
