James Wan

Methodology

Source. Assembled from ScreamWire's classified archive — 130 wire items (Feb 18 → Nov 4) matching James Wan, deduplicated by URL (10 cross-day re-sightings removed). Every entry links to the original reporting. Descriptive, never predictive.

Why no deal amounts. Only 1.9% of tracked deal items site-wide carry a reported figure — the trades rarely publish terms — so dollar amounts appear only as the source phrased them (e.g. “rich eight-figure deal”), never as comparable numbers. This is a deal-flow tracker, not a comps database.

What counts as a transaction. A row appears under Transactions, Slate or Deal mix only when the publisher’s headline names James Wan, names the project, and states James Wan’s role in a transaction (bought, set up, developing, ordered, distributing, hired or cast for…). A company mentioned alongside a film is not enough, and neither is a classifier tag. Reports of the same transaction are merged; separate transactions on one project, such as a set-up and a later casting, stay separate. 51 deal-flagged records did not meet the test and are listed under Unresolved.

What these counts are not. They describe what ScreamWire has confirmed from its own archive of published coverage — not everything James Wan has done. A deal we never archived, or one whose report does not state the role plainly enough to meet the test above, is absent from every number on this page. Read them as a floor on activity we can evidence, never as a complete slate.

Source material and medium are recorded only when the headline states them; otherwise “not stated”. Dates are when ScreamWire first archived a report, so a resurfaced older story can carry a later date; reviewed exceptions are listed in the repository’s record-review file.

Grades are ScreamWire's editorial coverage grade — how strongly the wire covered the story — not a deal-quality score.