Scream: A Look Back

Scream
1996-Written By: Kevin Williamson-Directed By: Wes Craven-Score: 4/5

Ah, the film that started it all. Or should I say re-started it all? Scream is the film that rebooted the horror genre in the 90's, after it had hit a very hard downfall in the mid-80's. Scream was written by the excellent screen-writer Kevin Williamson, and directed by master Wes Craven. It set the bar for films to follow, not only sequels, but most horror films of the 90's. While I don't think it is the best film in the series, it defiantly has some high points, being scary, and funny.

Scream 2
1997-Written By: Kevin Williamson-Directed By: Wes Craven-Score 4/5

Made one year after the original, Scream 2 was realesed with much anticipation. They brought back almost the entire key-crew, and did an amazing job with a sequel. This is by far my favorite! Kevin Williamson steps up his script, making in funnier, bloodier, and scary, with even more in-jokes to keep you busy. The acting was even better this time around, and it marked a a great point in the series.

Scream 3

2000-Written By: Ehren Kruger-Directed By: Wes Craven-Score 3/5

Made nearly four years after its predosessor, Scream 3 definatly is my least favorite of the series. Where to put the blame. Hm? There is only one difference I see. And that is Ehren Kruger, who wrote this Scream, rather than Kevin Williamson. Why this happened, I don't know. The story strayed to far from the original, and tried to make it an entirly new film. And it just didn't work. The series was running so well. Why did it betray me?

Scream 3 Review (2000)

In the year 2000, nearly four years since Scream 2, and five since the original, Scream 3, the conclusion to the trilogy was finally realesed into theatres. It once again brought back the hip ensemble cast fans had begun to know and love. At its time, Scream 3 had the largest number of opening theatres in history, only to be beaten a few years later by Harry Potter. While most critcs praised the film as being the best of the bunch, many fans were dissapointed, as was I. But now that fans are dissapointed, we have to put the blame somewhere, I happen to put it on the writer.

If you've read my pervious Scream reviews you would know that I absoloutly love Kevin Williamson as a screenwriter, he was the genius father of the first two films, and frankly, they were the shit, and now for Scream 3, (for reasons I don't know) a new writer was brought onto the board. Her name, was Ehren Kruger. I did not like the writing in this Scream as much as I did in the previous two. The first two Screams were witty, and clever, knowing of the source material, and the charecters were intruging and fun to listen to. In the last installment, the writing fails us, and we are no longer a clever satire, but that which we were making fun of. Thanks Scream 3, now we are all hypocrites.

The story of Scream 3, is set a few years after the events of Scream 2, the production of the movie Stab 3 -which is based on Scream 2- has begun, and mysteriously the cast and crew begin to get killed. Of course, to give the actors and actresses of Stab 3 inspiration, the real life Dewey and Gail are there. And soon enough, Sidney, who is now living in the middle of nowhere, gets pulled into the nightmare.

The acting in Scream 3 was good for the most part. Just like in the previous two films, Courtney Cox, David Arquette, and Neve Campbell all do a really good job playing their respective rolls. The only problem is, with so many characters having died in Scream and Scream 2, we are left with our three main charecters, and a whole bunch of new ones we don't get to know well enough to care about. Where as I was impressed with the two original films for being able to keep the plot running smoothly with so many rememberable characters, Scream 3 just fails, and makes the story even more confusing than it is.

This film falls victim to one of the complaints that I had about the previous films, which is the lack of originality in the killings, and the lack of blood in those said killings. We are once again left with stab wounds with little trickles of blood pouring out of them.

As much as I am shitting on the film, i must admit that I did have a fair time watching it, and enjoyed it while it lasted. Where as I've watched the first Scream three times, the second Scream two times, I feel absoloutly no desire to watch the third one again. Plans have been made by Dimension for a Scream 4, starring the surviving cast, directed by Craven, and written by the original writer Kevin Williamson, and i am very excited to see it happen, and definatly will see it, if these plans come to fruition. Overall, Scream 3 is worth seeing if you liked the first two films, but definatly not as good as the greats that came before it. Scream 3 gets just that. A Three.
3/5

Scream 2 Review (1997)

After the major success of the first Scream movie, the studio obviously wanted to cash in on that. What kinda movie studio are you if you don't cash in on your horror film franchises? So, in 1997, a year after the first, Scream 2 was realesed into cinemas. It kept the same surviving cast of the first, and added mo re, young, hot TV stars to be filler. These include Sarah Michelle Gellar, Jada Pinkett, Jerry O'Conell, and Omar Epps. While the film wasn't as financially successful as the first, (only by like 2 million dollars) they decided to continue the franchise and make it into a trilogy. Wes Craven returned to direct once again, and the script was written by the undeniable genious Kevin Williamson.

The story of Scream 2 is essentially the story of the first film. This time, Sidney Presscot, fresh off her recent brush with mass-destruction, is away to college. Here she has new friends, new habits, and hopefully a new life. But, a new movie titled "Stab" has just been realesed about the original Woodsboro killings. And someone has taking a liking to this film. Too big of a liking, and members of her campus start dying off one by one. And even worse, Gale Weathers comes to investigate the latest deaths, that seem to be following Sidney, however, Deputy Dewey comes, and along with Jamie Kennedy, provides the bulk of the comic relifef

Now, the plot is essentially the same. And that is defiantly not a bad thing, because I really enjoyed the first

Scream movie, and it was fun to poke at the self-refrencial style that it had. Scream 2 continues that with a passion and does not dissapoint. With the realese of "Stab" the film even makes refrences to its predesscor, which is great. Kevin William and Wes Craven turn out to be a force that shouldn't be reckoned with. I hope them both the best, and am excited to see Scream 4, which will bring all the actors, and essential crew back together for another round of scares. The first film was, like a lot of 90's horror flicks, less about the murders, and more about who was commiting them. Scream 2 doesn't change that formula, and makes an interesting twist ending, that connects morbidly back to the first.

Once again, the acting was top-notch by everyone involved. I really enjoyed how the writing did in fact make the college students, made the charecters grow, rather than have the exact same views and personality they did when they were in highschool. Neve Campbell does another excellent job as Sidney, Courtney Cox is always a treat to watch, and David Arquette and Jamie Kennedy do right by their charecters

There are two things that I enjoyed more in Scream 2 than in the original film. One being that there is a lot less jibber-jabber. The first film was excellent because it had an interesting story, portrayed by interesting charecters, and the second does the same, but with a lot more action, and thrills, and not so much talk over and about everything that is happeneing around these people. The second is that the blood-letting is a bit higher in this one. If you read my review of the first one, you'll know that I was somewhat dissapoionted by the lack of kill originality and bloodflow. This one increases the bloodflow, while it didn't quite fix the problem of the kills. They are still just stabs.

Overall, Scream 2 plays out a lot like Scream 1. But because of the things that I mentioned in the above paragraph, I belive that Scream 2 is the superior film. I really like the new blood, the interesting story, and good characecter development. So mark down Scream 2 as one of the few sequels that is better than the origial. And though Scream 2 is better than Scream 1, it still doesn't quite make it into the five star category. Scream 2 gets 4 zombi heads, out of 5.

Scream Review (1996)

Holy shit! Thank God that this film came out when it did. For those of you who don't know, during the mid 80's to about the mid 90's, the bussiness of horror movies was in a big slump. The horror film economy was like our economy right now. The films were still getting made, but no one was buying them, and no one was seeing them. Then in 1995, Kevin Williamson, (a genius) wrote the screenplay for Scream. When it was realesed a year later, Scream took audiences by storm, with an ensemble cast that included: Drew Barrymore, Neve Campbell, Courtney Cox, and Jamie Kennedy, and what promised to be a very original script. And it was. Flocking to theatres, Scream revitalized the genre, and introduced the world to Kevin Williamson, and told all them youngsters about Wes Craven.

Simply stated Scream probably has the most original story, and that being said, you've seen this story a hundred times, masked kill stalking teens, there's your story. But what makes it different is the characters, not the story. The characters are self aware that they are in a horror movie, and that's what makes Scream such a... no, just...no. After two fellow students are killed, the city orders all school to be canceled, and issue a curfew of nine-o-clock. But of course, with a killer on the loose, who wants to go home at nine?! So they have a party complete with booze, drugs and movies. Jamie Kennedy works at a video store, and is a horror professional like the all of us, so him, along with his friends no how a horror movie (and therefore their own enviorment) work, and what to do, and how to survive. Filled with enough in refrences that you'll have trouble keeping up, Scream is good for both a newbie, and the addict.

Scream is what launched the success of Kevin Williamson, who went on to write the screenplays for the next two films to come after this, along with the first I Know What You Did Last Summer, Cursed, and The Faculty, none of these were as successful, or good (opinion). Scream also launched the infamous Ghostface, and re-enstated Wes Craven as the suspense master that he truly is. Before Scream, the last big thing Craven had done of Nightmare On Elm Street, was New Nightmare.

Speaking of suspense, Scream has a ton of it. And I loved every minute of it. The first time I saw this film, the tension was so fucking great, it was killing me. Craven does a great job of making a really good film, as he shown numerous times before, as in everything he has ever possibly made. But directing is only one part of what makes a great film. Another great part goes to Williamson, but I've already talked about that enough. Now usually as a horror film, one either takes the gore route, or hit the tension with an iron fist. Scream does an excellent job at keeping both very prominent, and having a great sense of balance and timing between the two.


The blood here isn't extreme. It did have nice gore, and a good gore factor, but its not somthing that will make you sick to your stomach. The worst kill (as in bloodiest kill) actually is the first one that you ever see. You know that one where the guy gets his guts wripped out and are hanging from his stomach to his ankles. The rest of the film includes, beatings, stabbings, hangings and brutal beatings, but it truly wasn't extreme, trust me, I can handle a lot or gore, and I don't really mind it. But I also don't care if there is gore. Anyway, I'm rambling. But the blood within Scream, was used well, looked good. It was kind of like the musical episode of an old ninetys sitcom, every sitcom has one, but it really just doesn't need to be there. But you watch it anyway. And this isn't referring to the movie as a whole, but to the blood.

All of the acting in this movie was awesome. Every single actor and actress in this film seemed to be perfectly cast, and knew what they were doing. Neve was perfect as the lead, Courntey Cox was taken perfectly from her then comedy standard. While the film clearly advertised Drew Barrymoore as a main character. They were funny, serious, scary, and they seemed to get the source material, which was great.

Overall, as it's probably easy to tell, I really, really, really liked Scream, it was scary, fun, well acted, funny and amazingly put together from a techinal standpoint, the lighting, and production looked and felt very nice and real. The only problem was the lack of blood, which is okay, and the fact that the film was nearly two hours long. But again, I really, really, really liked it. So yeah. Scream gets Four zombi's out of Five.

.