Scream 5 is coming, and it’s time to take a look at the cult franchise. What is the best episode of the saga initiated by Wes Craven and Kevin Williamson?
After the return of Michael Myers in a new Halloween trilogy , the return of Leatherface in 2022 on Netflix in a new The Texas Chainsaw Massacre , or the horrific return of Remember … last summer in the series is Ghostface’s turn to come back and cut throats in Scream 5 .
After the Scream series , the “real” Scream returns in a fifth opus soberly titled Scream , in the tradition of Halloween 2018. Neve Campbell , Courteney Cox and David Arquette fall back into the mouth of the wolf, but for the first time without Wes Craven, deceased in 2015. Revealed by Wedding Nightmare , Matt Bettinelli-Olpin and Tyler Gillett take over, with the heavy task of justifying this umpteenth nightmare.
But there remains the real thousand-point question, the one that has torn the hearts of fans since the dawn of time (i.e. the end of the 90s): is there a better Scream ? If yes which ? Some reasons to debate, if not to decide.
ATTENTION SPOILERS !
SCREAM
Scream Killers : Billy Loomis, Sidney’s boyfriend, and Stuart Macher, Sidney’s friend.
Scream morts name: 8
Best Murder in Scream: Tatum in the garage door, obviously.
Why It’s Surely The Best Scream For Everyone: Because the movie landed in the mid-’90s Savior-style. In fact, in the middle of this decade with the air of food shortages for horrific cinema, we were suffering from a period of lean particularly stingy in proposals , concepts or creatures capable of making us shiver. Therefore, when Wes Craven arrives with his instantly recognizable masked assassin, his clever, but not clumsy meta speech, success is immediate.
Turning to the quasi-phenomenon of society, Scream will not only draw hundreds of thousands of spectators in the theaters, but will also be at the origin of a revival of the genre, as well as its validation by the general public criticism, which will now struggle to analyze this part of pop culture. It must be said that Craven’s film is full of finds and bits of bravery . Not only does the speech of the feature film allow each viewer to feel smarter than usual, while the tempo of the narration never allows him to overhang the narrative, relentlessly plunging it back into it, in favor of perfectly murdered murders. choreographed.
But these situations, each more creative than the next, almost never saw the light of day. Indeed, the editor Patrick Luissier revealed in an interview with the Hollywood Reporter that the rushes of the opening scene of Scream had almost caused the dismissal of the director , the studio not understanding at all the tone he wanted. confer to the whole. A shame when we know how much the latter is now considered a model of the genre, as much as the note of intent of the entire saga.
Introducing Ghostface, this simultaneously cartoony killer (how many doors, beer bottles and other buffets will he have intercepted behind his mask?) And formidable (impossible to forget that first stab below Casey’s collarbone) this first chapter is literally full of cult sequences . From the murderous garage door, through a delayed satellite link, to the motivation of its murderer, and a number of ideally placed jumpscares, the film continues surprises with admirable ease, until its conclusion, which, rare in the genre, indeed constitutes the apex of the film.
Why Everyone Should Think Twice: No need to lie to each other, if Wes Craven was a peerless genre analyst, remarkable character inventor, formidable concept finder, and artisan of meta language among the many. more skilful, he was never or almost never a valiant creator of images. With the exception of the first Freddy and The Grasp of Darkness , his films have gone from frankly ugly to gently grayish .
Scream belongs to this second category . The faded photo, a sort of VHS sock juice, or certain frames that we would swear thought to anticipate the cropping of future television broadcasts compose a work that is sometimes wickedly bland, and which almost turns into a masterpiece.
SCREAM 2
Killers Scream 2 : Debbie Salt alias Debbie Loomis (Billy’s mother, killer of the first Scream ), and Mickey, still a friend Sidney dilapidated.
Scream 2 morts name: 10.
Best Murder in Scream 2: Buffy Balcony Pier, of course.
Why it might be the best Scream: Because it’s a pretty perfect sequel in the genre, which is quite an achievement given the situation. On the one hand, getting past Scream’s phenomenal success was no small feat, especially with a slasher wave set in motion ( Remember … last summer came out in between, with Sarah Michelle Gellar too) . The production was launched in fourth gear , so that the sequel was released barely a year later, even if it meant forcing rewrites during filming to make up for things.
On the other hand, the film was immediately a victim of its success, since the draft script was published on the internet , knowing that several false endings had been written to avoid at all costs killing the surprise (Hallie and Derek in killers for example, and even four killers), but that other real elements had also leaked, according to Kevin Williamson. Another reason to tinker with history to stay on course.
Despite this, Scream 2 managed to amaze and detonate . The bloody color is given from the intro, where a couple are murdered in a hysterical movie theater, in front of Stab , who reenacts the intro scene from the first Scream , with Heather Graham as Drew Barrymore. In the meta escalation of the saga, it is a major scene, which entertains as much as it questions the genre (the audience who mixes film and reality, the circus of fans who camouflage the killer). In one scene, Scream 2 is already questioning its status with striking mischief, and not to mention the popcorn.
The sequel is not lacking in ideas, where the direction of Wes Craven and the spirit of Kevin Williamson unite to create memorable scenes. The death of Cici or the car accident, which forces Sidney and Hollie to get closer to the killer in the air, are classics in the genre, executed with great skill. Randy’s death is a total shock, both in the writing (sacrificing a major character) and the directing (the killer’s hands popping up in the frame to stop the discussion suddenly, on the contrary where attention has been placed, in the park).
Another great Scream 2 moment is the showdown between the killer, Gale, and Dewey in a campus building . There, there is all the essence of Scream : the pleasure of a thunderous chase, then the tense silence of a game of hide and seek; the sadistic pleasure of playing on the nerves of the public, going from a romantic parenthesis between Dewey and Gale, to the fake death of one of the two; the tension between humor (Dewey’s hand on Gale’s breast) and death; the clever relationship to the image, where the two characters can comment on a previous scene in the film, before discovering scenes cut from the murders, then being caught in their turn by the “film” of the killer who surprises them. And the soundproof studio idea is devilish, adding that perfect final layer to the stage.
There’s also the usual genre nonsense (the killer coming out of nowhere behind Gale’s back, in the auditorium), the virtuosity of Wes Craven’s directing (the moment Gale discovers the killer behind glass , and that the point of view is detached from it), and the effectiveness of the music of Marco Beltrami.
The film is a constant delight, whether in its stylistic breaks (the absurd, but perfect use of the Broken Arrow theme , by Hans Zimmer), or its desire to seriously write Sidney’s character (the parallel simple, but beautiful with a tragic theatrical figure, to the climax which is literally played out on stage). In short, a perfect suite.
Why it might not be the best Scream: Only because it comes after Scream first in name, and suffers from comparison for all and those who adored it?
SCREAM 3
Killer: Roman Bridger, aka Sidney’s half-brother, who wants revenge for being disowned by his mother.
Number of deaths: 10.
Best Murder: Tom Prinze who literally explodes before his first big movie role, or Jennifer Jolie, slaughtered behind mirrors after yelling “You can’t kill me, I’m the killer in Stab 3!”
Why Scream 3 is unloved : Scream 3 was seen as the movie too many. Too busy on his Wasteland series and his first film Mrs. Tingle (both quickly forgotten), screenwriter Kevin Williamson abandoned ship, simply leaving behind a draft story, in which Ghostface had to return to Woodsboro yet again, during the filming of a new Stab .
Partly because the Columbine Massacre reignited the debate about the impact of violence in cinema, the storyline was rethought. Ehren Kruger (like Freddy yes, if not a sign from the heavens) was hired to carry out the orders, under the control of Wes Craven, to ensure consistency. The action was thus moved to Hollywood, and the emphasis placed on comedy.
Another big change from Kevin Williamson’s initial idea: the identity of the killer. In its version, a fan-club of the Stab saga was responsible for the murders. At the end, Sidney arrived in a house to discover all the victims of Ghostface … who got up, alive and well, because all responsible for this gigantic staging in Woodsboro. Their thirst for fame had driven them crazy, and Williamson will take this idea (sucks) for Jill in Scream 4.
Scream 3 gave up all that to go to Sidney’s hidden half-brother, a magnificent string worthy of the Young and the Restless . This is probably one of the most missed aspects of the film, considering that the script has undergone a lot of rewrites, due to various settings. Among them: the limited availability of Neve Campbell , which explains why Sidney is so little present during part of the film, to the profit of Dewey and Gale who lead the investigation.
Throughout the filming, the script was regularly rewritten, even if it meant turning over scenes to ensure consistency, or filming different options to be able to arrange everything during the editing if necessary. The ending has notably undergone several changes : to raise the stakes, Sidney’s fake death has been added, and the character of Kincaid has been brought back, since he had been forgotten.
In short, Scream 3 was the perfect and sometimes sad demonstration of the business that Scream had become , with all the absurdities and improvisations that this implies. Hence a film that seems more wobbly and grotesque, particularly with the desire to close a trilogy, offer a conclusion to its heroes (a small marriage and a found peace), while going further than the previous films to excite the public.
Why it’s anything but the worst Scream: Because this almost inevitable disenchantment after the immense love for Scream and Scream 2 has overshadowed the great strengths of this third opus. In the logical continuation of the saga, the meta cursor is pushed to the maximum, to reach the summits of pleasing abyss .
Tori Spelling appeared as Sidney on screen in Scream 2 , in the movie-in-the-movie Stab (after a sarcastic remark about the actress in the first Scream )? In Scream 3 , the heroes play with death alongside their movie doubles , in a cruel and compelling warped mirror game. Angelina Tyler, the sweet ingenuous chosen to play Sidney, admits to having slept with an old pig producer to land the role. The fantastic Parker Posey is having a blast in Gale bis, unbearable until the killer finally silences her. Wes Craven’s alter-ego Roman Bridger turns out to be the killer responsible for this nightmare.
Not to mention Carrie Fisher, in a hilarious look-alike appearance of Carrie Fisher (” Who got the role of Princess Leia? The one who slept with George Lucas “). And how can we not see a parody of Weinstein (producer of the film) in John Milton, superstar producer of old horror B series, who abuses young actresses?
Hollywood was thus the perfect final destination to fully embrace the mischievous dimension of Scream . The actor who can not help but jump on the scenario (which will turn out to be that of his own explosive death), Sidney who visits the setting of his childhood home (and therefore, literally the setting of the first film, shell empty in an empty studio), the climax in a movie house (B-series accessories, false mirrors, secret doors): Scream 3 is designed as a gigantic attraction . As if everyone was fully aware that the joke had lasted too long, only lengthened by the phenomenal success of the first film. And that it was necessary to laugh about it more and more, to the point of choking on it.
In the worst moments, it’s for tasteless scenes (Sarah’s death), or ridiculous ideas (the hidden half-brother who happens to be the director of a Stab , because why not). In the best, it’s to give birth to a very funny industry satire (Jenny McCarthy playing Sarah, who complains about her role as a stupid and useless blonde, or the slit throat of the producer who offers the finale as a last resort. cut to Roman), and more interesting ideas than you might think. It all started when Roman showed Billy pictures of his father with Maureen Prescott. That is to say a surprising snub in the great debate on violence, and the real power of images.
SCREAM 4
Slayer: Jill Roberts, Sidney’s crazy niece, who dreams of being a Tik Tok star.
Number of dead: 14.
Best Murder: The ultra-violent murder seen through a small window.
Why it could be the best sequel: Produced a bit hastily, it must be admitted, just to surf on the notoriety of the original, the first two sequels tended to trample on each other, thematically. More than ten years later, horror cinema has evolved a lot , survived the crisis of the 1990s, and a new Scream comes at the right time, whatever the studio thinks, very hesitant according to Williamson.
He therefore seizes with unfeigned jubilation the codes of his associates, criticizes mainstream torture porn à la Saw to voluntarily return to the brutality of the slasher made in the 80s. One could accuse him of revisionism (especially with the last punchline, declaration of love to the horrific icons of the good old days), but he prefers to comment on his time without giving in to the sirens of his facilities .
Generous, proud to display the biggest bodycount of the saga … so far, it’s been taking it easy on jumpscares and CGIs (even if the blades are digital, for the first time) to offer some pretty nasty kills . Like this extremely bloody murder, filmed from the opposite window, and therefore rendered even more graphic thanks to the over-framing effect, drowning a portion of the shot in red.
Better, it takes a further step in the meta by making fun of “post-modern stupid” cinema , the sub-genre that the saga itself has helped to popularize! An idea very quickly unveiled by the opening intention note, conscious abyss to quickly turn to the ridiculous, even to run empty, which reveals in the form of a wink the first twist after just a few minutes of footage . Scream 4 describes a world where denouncing clichés has become cliché and where the irony of this culture has ended up building a new, more diverse generation of moviegoers.
Formerly inhabited by geeks and scornful, the universe of Scream adapts to a new horror cinema , more universal, and this by focusing particularly on the quartet of main characters, and their disappointment in the face of the ambient cynicism. The character of Kirby, played by the radiant Hayden Panettiere , even becomes touching – a first in the sequels – when his cheeky benevolence comes up against very real violence.
Why it’s still very easy: It may well slip a few nods to the difficulties of its predecessors, Scream 4 was not born under the best auspices either. You don’t change a lagging team : it’s still the Weinsteins who interfere in the production and more particularly in the writing. Williamson is crumbling under the studio’s notes and forces himself to rewrite the script over and over again, to the point of redacting lots of ideas. Alas – as he will reveal to the New York Times – he will end up leaving the project, engaged on a series with other producers (according to Craven in The Hollywood Reporter ), who threaten him with trial if he does not return to the fold. .
If an Entertainment Weekly article is to be believed , the early drafts seemed much more centered around the original trio (the opening scene would have almost killed Sidney before bringing her back two years later), but it’s Bob Weinstein. who insisted on putting the group of teenage girls at the heart of the story. At the very beginning, Dewey and Gale were even supposed to have a child, an idea abandoned for logistical reasons.
This explains, with the limited availability of Courtney Cox, also involved in a series in parallel, this inability to get away from it all with so many characters and especially with the original characters, who almost come to parasitize the adventures of the new band of youth. If Sidney remains a little artificially linked to their adventures, the married life of Gale and Dewey, yet perfectly in its place in a reflection on new audiences and new uses of horror cinema, quickly goes by the wayside.
For the rest, the film may well integrate certain whims of its time rather well (the remakes, torture-porn, meta mockery), it remains produced, written, directed and conceived by a gang of old people , who affix a good look. less benevolent than before on active subgenres. The proof is the frankly reactionary treatment of found footage fashion, which is embedded in the film thanks to gadgets that would pass the Gameboy Camera as the latest in image capture technology.
Where the timeless George Romero had barely seized a few years earlier of the process to update his point, with a courage that commands respect, Craven, Williamson and his correctors prefer to repeat commonplace . The twist, obvious to anyone who isn’t fooled by Emma Roberts ‘ play , makes it an absurd outgrowth of the so-called millennial narcissism and therefore a poor motive, which probably would have been far more relevant in Scream 3 , as expected. And it’s not a sometimes a little strange montage that fixes things.
Admittedly modern, Scream 4 is coming to the end of the race and requires a passing of the baton. Hence our appetite for the next opus, some choices of which (the selection of very contemporary directors) suggest a real revival.