I know. I’ve already reviewed Scream 4 once before. It was hardly an impartial review though since it had been eleven years since the premiere of the preceding movie and it was not too thorough since I banged it out after a midnight showing opening day before going to work. But, since it was just released on DVD and Blu-ray this week, why not take another look?

Beginning with a dizzying number of “opening” sequences, Scream 4 sets the action back in Woodsboro as Sidney (Neve Campbell) has returned on a book signing tour and reunited with Dewey (David Arquette) and Gale (Courteney Cox) who are now married. Dewey is now the Sheriff, Gale is retired from reporting and unsuccessfully trying to write a fiction novel, and Sidney is the proverbial black cat who is constantly followed by death and despair. The mayhem starts up again as Sidney’s cousin Jill (Emma Roberts) and her friend Kirby (Hayden Panettiere) watch as their neighbor is savagely (and I mean savagely!) butchered by Ghostface which kicks in the old plot formula of a who-dun-it mystery combined with unnaturally loquacious teenagers and references to other horror films.

Even though the film was allegedly plagued with rewrites, reshoots, and typical Weinstein fuckery, the finished product that launched in theaters is pretty satisfying. It was announced as a reboot/remake/sequel hybrid which sounded pretty dumb at the time but started to flesh out as the cast was announced with the returning trio of Arquette, Campbell, and Cox and a host of other new characters. The main issue with the film (similar to the last two actually) is that there are too many damn people to keep track of. At this point, we are pretty safe to assume that the killers are not Sidney, Dewey, or Gale so thus every other actor is saddled with questionable lines and sketchy motives to make them seem like the killer. The reason the first worked so well (aside from the fact that it was the first) is that the potential psycho-list was not as long as my arm. You certainly cannot fault the film for a low bodycount though if you are into that.

If anything, returning writer (or writers) Kevin Williamson is able to tap into a good amount of the self-referential and self-awareness of the first film. Woodsboro’s current crop of teens are the gang from the first hopped up on Redbull with unfettered access to the internet to pirate all seven Stab films or whatever the hell kids do these days. Scream: The Next Generation would have been a fine movie on its own. Jill takes the victim torch from Sidney, she has a creepy-ish boyfriend like Billy, and instead of one, we have three Randy-esque characters in this movie. It is the somewhat awkward merging of the old and new classes that brings the film down since there really is no time to focus on anyone for fear of neglecting someone else.

Wes Craven tried to do his best with the film since it seems a bit more on point than part 3 but no where close to the excellence he brought to Scream 2. After enough horror films in general (and of a particular franchise to boot), it is easy to get lazy with the “scares” but there were a few effective ones here and there. The thing I will curse Craven and Williamson (and whoever else wrote the thing) for is their penchant for playing it too safe. There was one scene that almost tried to be as shocking as Randy’s demise in 2 but whoever is responsible didn’t have the cajones to kill off one of the main three. Going into the film, it’s a safe bet that if the character has not been in a previous Scream film, they are as good as dead. It would have been refreshing to have some more uncertainty about the old-school cast even though what the “typical” audience wants is a boring, happy ending.

The most aggravating thing about Scream 4 are the numerous scenes cut from the final picture. Most deleted scenes are taken out for a reason but here are tighter chase scenes, more character development, and backstory that are severely missed in the regular release. Sure, the extra scenes with the sadly wasted Mary McDonnell or more stuff with Kirby (my favorite new character) would have extended the run-time but there was plenty of material that didn’t work to start with. A commentary comes on the Blu-ray with Craven, Roberts, and Panettiere (and Campbell for a brief time) but it is nowhere near as in depth or thoughtful as some of those from the previous films.

The painful thing about Scream 4 is that everyone (cast and crew included) tried hard to make a decent follow-up but only succeeded in reminding the audience how special and awesome the original is. If the series were to continue, it needs to be around some different characters in a similar storyline lest it continue to fall in the shadow of its predecessor.

The thing I most worried about upon seeing Scream 4 was that my giddy anticipation for the film would render any objectivity null and void. Thus, while I gather my thoughts to obtain my truly valid response to the film, let me give you some quick thoughts on it.

Some of the nagging issues I had with the previous sequels have been corrected with a cast that is much more fleshed out and relatable than the Ghostface fodder of before. This time, the characters are über-aware of horror films, both new and old, which results in interesting conversations but causes some of the surprise to dampen as even the characters are aware of what is to come.

The script is not as tight as the first and feels more intent on poking fun at the remake/reboot trend as well as the previous films in the series than breaking any new ground. There are some clever call backs to the original film as it tries to be a combination of continuation and reboot at the same time.

The returning cast of Neve Campbell, David Arquette, and Courteney Cox are decent enough as they fall into old roles and relationships. Some of the newcomers, especially Jill Roberts and Hayden Panettiere, are strong in their roles and performances even if they are shafted some by the somewhat non-consequential presence of the returning leads.

The movie potentially comes off the rails in the third act; it is this that I am stuck on the most. The reveal of the killer is shocking but the motivation is not very good and smacks of insignificant whining like the end of the 3rd. Regardless, mostly it is fun and energetic (helped greatly by the expansion of the cast for once) and I can say for certain that it is far better than Scream 3 and at worst on par with Scream 2 which is not a bad consolation for a third sequel.

To my recollection, Scream 3 was the first R-rated movie I “legally” saw in theaters once I was of age. Perhaps that is why I had so many fond memories of it even though the troubled production and distinct lack of the main character had given others a critical leg to stand on. I figured I would like Scream 2 more this time around but the end result was about the same. Would my Scream 3 memories fare any better?

Well, yes and no. By 1999, writer Kevin Williamson had been involved with several Scream-ish productions as well as launching the pinnacle of teen angst, Dawson’s Creek. Thus he was either too busy to return or was burnt out from young adult affairs. Likewise, Neve Campbell was reportedly difficult to nail down for this installment, agreeing to it only with a reduced schedule (and thus reduced screentime). Since the rest of the important cast and crew returned, we have what seems to be a Scream movie, but doesn’t really feel like a Scream movie.

The first lampooned horror movies in general while the second targeted sequels, remakes, and “Based On” movies. Scream 3 focuses on Hollywood as a whole to uneven results. The main crux of the film is based on the production of Stab 3, the second sequel to the film based on the events of the first featured in the second. If you haven’t seen these movies, this won’t make sense. Given that what we saw of Stab was so laughably bad and overacted, it figures that Stab 3 would be full of dull, uninteresting characters who, coincidentally, are on similar trajectories as the characters here.

Writer Ehren Kruger seems to be as aware of the Scream formula as any of the fans. We have the obligatory celebrity death scene up front, then reconnecting with characters we care about, then learning about those we don’t. In the process are some death scenes and some meta-commentary (this time on rewrites and the prospect of being an actor in a horror movie) before a big finale. But instead of injecting some fresh blood into the series, Kruger copies the previous movie, faults and all. Remember that cumbersome cast that no one could really stand out from in the last? It’s back again. Even though there are some decent performances from the likes of Matt Keeslar or Deon Richmond, there are as many completely useless characters that might as well have died in their first frame.

Much to any fan’s enjoyment, Randy (Jamie Kennedy) returns to give the final rules for a trilogy on the reasoning that the film’s random backstory throws the sequel rules out. Considering none of the “concluding horror trilogy” rules apply and they appear in a badly written scene (a random girl can wander on and off a movie set with no one noticing?), his appearance is neat but it doesn’t fit the story at all other than to point out how Kruger can kind of write like Williamson. As evidenced by the sort of cool, yet totally out of place scene when Sidney is dreaming about her dead mother, Kruger is a decent writer but apparently not the right guy for this series.

**SPOILERS HERE. SORRY, I CAN’T AVOID THEM THIS TIME**

The ending is a total mess. Not only is it “inspired” from several other scenes from the series thus far, but the reveal of the killer to be Roman illustrates what is wrong with the movie. Given that Campbell was MIA for much of the movie, she hadn’t previously interacted with Roman. He has to introduce himself be revealing that he orchestrated Billy and Stu from the first and was her half-brother. Yikes. And we thought the motives for the last two were sketchy. At least you could kind of understand where the anger, or just craziness, of Billy and Stu or Micky and Mrs. Loomis were coming from. Roman here just comes off as a little bitch, whining that he didn’t get his way.

**END SPOILERS**

Aside from the asinine final act, the mostly comedic tale has its positives, especially from the likes of the manic Parker Posey as the wannabe Gale Weathers or the sarcastic detective played by Josh Pais. Of course, David Arquette and Courteney Cox return and they mostly take center stage while Sidney is in hiding. Patrick Dempsey as the detective in charge is one of the few sympathetic new characters and one that you actually hope might make it. After the near perfection from the last film, director Wes Craven takes a more restrained approach with nothing incredibly bad but nothing really standing out like the last. There were a few jumps and chase scenes that were done well but given the lackluster script, he might have decided not to give a damn.

It is funny that this review is longer than the previous two because I keep going back and forth on this movie. On one hand, it’s entertaining which is pretty much all that I can hope for on some level. As a random horror film, it is okay but riddled with the contrivances, plot holes, and teleporting killers that you might see in Friday the 13th Part VIII. As a Scream film though, it is a poor copy of the largely better films, even the one rushed into production.

It is notable that for the duration of the Saw series, production company Lionsgate was able to keep banging out a new movie in the series less than a year apart with only two major duds out of seven. After the success of the first Scream, Dimension Films surely was quick to retain writer Kevin Williamson and director Wes Craven for a follow-up that incidentally is set two years after the first. If real time had followed the story time, Scream 2 potentially could have been the best of the series but it comes off feeling very rushed.

Scream 2 does have the distinction of being one of a select few movies where the sequel mostly measures up to the first, albeit in different ways. In fact, some notable people (either Siskel or Ebert*) found this movie more likable than the first. The first film of course was packed with references to horror films throughout but Williamson takes the story of the survivors from the last story and interjects it with clever reminders of why this movie should be pretty bad: it is a sequel to a horror movie after all.

From the almost grandiose opening scene featuring Jada Pinkett Smith as an unlucky movie-goer and the obligatory sequel “rules” from Randy, it is easy to tell that Scream 2 strives to be bigger, meaner, and weightier in its commentary on the talking points from the first: horror films and their effect on the viewing populace. Unfortunately, bigger does not always mean better, especially when the original benefited from a tight cast of characters, a rock solid story and some level of restraint in the proceedings. Now, the sequel suffers from the classic detriments of sequels before and after, namely an excess of everything.

Almost all the issues I had with the film would have been corrected by a bit more editing, either on the script or the movie itself. The main problem is that there are too many characters to deal with. Of course we have the returning survivors Sidney, Gale, Dewey, and Randy but there are also far too many new characters vying for limited screentime from Sid’s new boyfriend Derek (Jerry O’Connell), her roommate Hailee, Randy-esque movie geek Mickey (the even then awesome Timothy Olymphant), and on and on. Even the bit part Cotton Weary (Liev Schrieber) has an expanded role that is effective but still extraneous other than as a potential suspect.

While I enjoyed that the character dynamics were essentially reset from the first with a new group (Randy, Gale, or Dewey could easily be involved this time), it also throws more potential poorly established “suspects” in the mix. And due to the larger cast (even though I enjoyed Sarah Michelle Gellar in her brief role), the reveal of the responsible individual(s) seem very random and haphazardly chosen among the available characters. The killer(s) from the previous film worked so well because they were easily suspected and dismissed several times during the film.

Even though the story is a bit lacking, almost everything else is near perfect. The shots are beautiful, the editing is snappy, and the scenes themselves play out with ease, even if the script tries to undermine that. The overstuffed cast had no bearing on the actors who shined with their somewhat limited roles. Neve Campbell, David Arquette, Courteney Cox, and Jamie Kennedy all click back into their respective roles. Even though she struggled in some places like previously, Campbell plays Sidney as strong, yet broken as she attempts to deal with tragedy around her which leads to an excess of guilt and self-doubt.

I read a review that said Wes Craven directed the hell out of this movie and I couldn’t agree more. I would probably have ranked the production of Scream a solid 7 or 8 but this one gets a full 10. You needn’t look any further than some of the incredibly tense scenes such as Cici in the sorority house or Gale in the recording studio at the end. I have seen this movie countless times and I was on edge during some of these moments. Composer Marco Beltrami returns as well with a sometimes traditional, yet sometimes odd score to accompany the similarly bifurcated tone of the movie. Even Hans Zimmer’s Broken Arrow theme emerges in a distracting but still awesome motif for Dewey.

For most, it seems to be a pretty close race between Scream and Scream 2 for superiority in the franchise thus far. The original sits at an 82% rating on Rotten Tomatoes while the sequel is at 81%. Clearly, it is not as steep of a drop in quality such as Nightmare on Elm Street 2 or Hatchet 2. While there was a lot of potential in the follow up, it did not gel for me as much as the first.

*I would verify which but the site for archived Siskel & Ebert videos has apparently been taken down.

When I first saw Scream in theaters with my dad almost fifteen years ago, I did not care for it. I can’t really say why but the first viewing did nothing for me; I didn’t hate it but I was mostly just ambivalent towards it. Later that year, Digger had a copy on VHS which I watched again and fell in love. Here was a horror movie that was not afraid to pull punches, was not bogged down in some ridiculous backstory (see the Halloween entry from the prior year), and had a sharp wit to it. Since then, Scream has been in constant rotation of the movies I randomly watch.

Mainstream horror in the mid-90s was not in a very good state. I’m sure there were plenty of indie or straight-to-video releases of whatever installment the Hellraiser or Puppet Master series were on but all of the big franchises were either completely finished or creatively drained. Scream came along to fill the void in a way that is still astonishing that it hadn’t been done before (at least not to the same degree of success). Featuring the script which started a bidding war in Hollywood by a new-comer and directed by a veteran (of mixed success) to the genre, Scream very well could have been quickly swept under the rug and died before registering with movie goers of all kinds. According to Box Office Mojo that almost was the case before positive word of mouth actually increased the box office take in its second week, a rare feat for any movie, let alone a horror film.

It is commendable that writer Kevin Williamson is able to create such a rich story on the backs of horror movie staples that predate the film by decades. Helped tremendously by the legendary Wes Craven as director, Scream elevates itself as something more than “just a slasher film.” On the surface, Scream is just another slasher film and the glut of teenage-based horror movies in its wake probably did the film no favors. But Scream stands out with just one mention of its trump card: The Rules. Effectively deconstructing every previous slasher movie, horror nerd Randy lays out the key to survival in these movies in just three simple declarations. No sex, no drugs or alcohol, and no announcing your imminent return. Of course no one pays any attention but no one ever does in these movies.

Considering that this was the first movie (that I ever saw anyway) that featured horror movie characters who are, for the most part, completely aware that they are horror movie characters, it was a big success considering that it made over $100 million. A movie series like Friday the 13th almost depends on the interchangeable killer fodder that appear on screen. The virginal final girl Sidney has some family trauma which keeps her distant from her kind of creepy boyfriend. Her father is absent. Her friends are mostly self-absorbed. In a typical slasher, that is basically the extent of any character development. Even if I don’t always care for the underlying story, Williamson has always been able to create characters that are fully fleshed out and even sympathetic to a point.

Another big part of Scream’s success was the way it is able to handle the awkward pairing of horror and comedy. It helps that the backbone of the film is satirical which lends itself to poking fun at not only other movies but also itself. Even some of the non-horror elements are written and delivered so perfectly such as the requisite bitch Gale Weathers berating her cameraman or the subtle sarcastic remarks muttered off-screen about the absurdity of the events. The actors too are easily able to handle the Sorkin-lite verbiage about youth, life, and horror movies (most of the time at least).

Neve Campbell as Sidney starts off rather meek and reserved but transforms into a full-fledged heroine with seemingly minimal effort, even though she had the most bumpiest of the performances. Everyone else played wonderfully but especially the typecast-shedding Courteney Cox, the goofy gumshoe David Arquette, and the nerdy everyman Jamie Kennedy. Of course, these are the characters who not only lived the longest but had the most support from fans. Also of note is the score from Marco Beltrami who is not as regarded as say John Williams but can manage effective music to fit every scene with perfection (except those random parts of Halloween H20).

Just as I mentioned in an early episode, Scream is a comfort movie for me. Everything fits together so well and the characters are so genuine that you can’t help but be sad when the film draws to a close.