Sidney's long lost half-brother, although his motive is faschinating, he just is too far fetched for my taste and ruins the original killer (Billy's) impressiveness as the killer. (By Roman having so much to do with his choices.) So I deinitely do not like the canon killer. But I appreciate the actor, he was brilliant. I enjoy the final act because of him.

Kevin originally planned that Stu would've returned as the killer, and I'm glad it was changed. Stu just didn't have any more to give to the series and wouldn't really have given any sort of closure.

Neither would've Billy, although I love his character so much that I would've liked to see him return anyway. Except for the fact that it would've totally contradicted Scream 2 repeatedly mentioning how dead he is. And therefore his "resurrection" would've felt totally forced. So in the end, I wouldn't prefer him. *SIGH* Why'd he have to diiiiie.... :/

Billy's dad would've just made it all feel so old and unoriginal. Mrs. Loomis was brilliant because it brought in the psychological predisposition heritage thing, but Mr. Loomis had no real place as a killer.

But Neil, Sid's dad, I've always wanted to be the killer in a sequel. Not only because he was the prime suspect in the original but because it would just be so fitting after all this and seeing to the family's story. I wouldn't mind if he was the killer in Scream 5 and then finally in the last part, Sid herself...

Or Billy :)

Billy returned would be cool!!!

I never watched Scream 3 but I watched Scream 1 and Billy was the best killer.