Showing posts with label Scream. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Scream. Show all posts

Friday, October 20, 2017

Scream 4







I’m probably not the first to point out the obvious here, although I haven’t specifically seen anyone else do it: Scream 4 took on horror remakes in an effort to revive the franchise. It bombed, and failed to get a sequel, exactly like the remakes it was going after. In fact, in the climactic scene Kirby (Hayden Panettiere) recites the names of fifteen horror remakes, only three of which ever got a sequel (and one prequel). Of those three, none made it to a trilogy. I seriously wonder what Scream 5 would have done if it’s entire reference pool of “recent sequels to horror remakes” was Halloween 2, The Hills Have Eyes 2, and Piranha 3DD (and, I supposed, Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning).

The movie is, as of now, probably my second favorite of the series. While it’s true there was a troubled production, this very much feels like the logical path these characters would have taken as they grew over the years. Dewey (David Arquette) is now the sheriff of Woodsboro, Sidney (Neve Campbell) is on a book tour promoting her self-help autobiography about how she overcame the hoard of serial killers coming after her, and Gale (Courteney Cox) is now a would-be fiction author married to Dewey and confined by the small-town life and her writer’s block.

The status of this movie as a new start, and a take on horror remakes, makes the new characters far less distracting than in the previous films. While the original three are still safe (and Sidney’s love interest from the last movie seems to have been abducted by aliens or something), the new cast integrates themselves effectively. Even though Scream 5 was never made, it’s shadow is here, and it’s clear these characters weren’t written to be one-shots. That does create some real tension to see which of them will make it to the next movie, which are the killers, and which get the ax.

In this movie Ghostface seems to be going after not just Sidney, but her surviving family. This makes Sidney’s newly-introduced Aunt Kate (Mary McDonnell) and her daughter Jill (Emma Roberts) primary targets as well. Through a mixture of Jill’s social circle, and Gale’s attempts to investigate with the aid of the younger horror buffs, we get a few other High School characters, throwing us back to the original. In addition to aforementioned horror-buff Kirby, we get Film Club co-Presidents Robbie and Charlie (Erik Knudsen and Rory Culkin), and Jill’s ex-boyfriend Prime Suspect Trevor (Nico Tortorella).

My favorite character, however, is Deputy Judy Hicks (Marley Shelton), who seems to be something of a loose Dewey equivalent for the film, as the innocent and goofy law-enforcement officer, while also bringing a new dynamic to the film. As Dewey’s deputy it’s clear to everyone there’s sexual tension, even as his marriage to Gale weakens. However, rather than going the obvious route of asking if they’ll cheat, they both simply suffer in silence as both are far too moral to ever take part in anything so illicit.

Even presenting lemon squares to Dewey is done in public, as if to silently say “I am doing this in full view of the public, so my morality is not in question.” I make this sound like some kind of tragic star-crossed lovers plot, but in practice it’s outright hilarious. Even Gale seems annoyed at Judy’s uprightness, being unable to challenge her with anything more than “Your lemon squares taste like ass!”

To talk about the actual plot: a new Ghostface returns just as Sidney’s book tour takes her back home, and as an annual Woodsboro screening of all the Stab movies approaches. Killing two girls, the killer dumps the bodies in the trunk of Sidney’s car, keeping her in town as a “material witness,” staying with her now-targeted family.

This Ghostface distinguishes himself from earlier versions primarily through a more overt obsession with fame. He frequently suggests in his calls that Sidney has benefited from her victim status, while leaving Woodsboro and those living in it behind. In that way this Ghostface is probably more distinct than any of the previous versions, being more overt with his motive. Ironically, in attempting to be genre savvy, this Ghostface manages to be sloppier than any of the previous incarnations, trying to force movie tropes, and being less prepared to adapt.

The movie doesn’t lay out the rules of remakes or modern horror as clearly as the earlier films, and I get the impression that’s because horror had reached a point where it was no longer as easy to define. Scream Wiki lists seven rules for this movie, as opposed to three for all the previous films, but some of them are much vaguer. For example, “unexpected is the new cliché,” and “don’t fuck with the Original.” They also note that virgins “can” die now, and that to survive a modern slasher “you pretty much have to be gay.”

The only two rules that define this film clearly, and separately from the earlier movies are that the ending of the original movie will be a fake-out ending, and to keep the movies relevant the killer will be filming the murders with the latest technology. Both of these rules are played with in clever ways.

The killer does film the events throughout. It’s not really drawn attention to as much as you might expect, but it is there. It’s commented on, and we’re told that the intention is to upload it to the internet. Given the eventually details we learn of the plan I’m not sure how the killer was going to explain the footage being uploaded after killing the patsy, but that isn’t too distracting.

Since we all know there will be a fake-out, the movie pulls a double fake-out. At the half-way point of the film the killer attacks Gale at the annual “Stabathon,” in what pretty much everyone in the audience knows to be the attempted fake-out ending. It’s a party with young people drinking and watching horror movies, so it fulfills the technical requirements of a fake-out, without any real effort to fake anyone out. I see this as entirely intentional: the killer isn’t even trying at this point, and that lack of effort renders Ghostface off the rhythm of the movie, as he believes himself to be in the final act going forward.

In the set-up of the final act Kate is killed, and the new cast flee to Kirby’s house, where Trevor shows up claiming he was sent a text from Jill’s phone, and Charlie and Kirby begin to fall for each other. Fearing that Jill is next, the old cast minus the hospitalized Gale, rushes to Kirby’s to protect her. Ghostface, of course, shows up, kills Robbie, and kidnaps Charlie, forcing Kirby into the trailer scene where she has to answer horror film questions in imitation of the opening of the original. Thinking she won, however, Kirby approaches Charlie, who immediately stab her (her survival is a point of contention among fans, the scene showing she lived was either never filmed or cut, I’m not sure which), revealing himself as the first killer.

The second killer, as we find out with Sidney’s capture, is Jill. As it turns out, our new target had the goal of assuming Sidney’s identity within the new “remake” as the soul survivor, and had manipulated Charlie by recognizing him as a misogynist pig who she could control with faked sexual interest. Trevor is now captured, serving the duel roles of Sidney’s father and evil boyfriend Billy Loomis, as Jill takes him hostage in the role of one to frame as the other. Only unlike Billy, Jill is smart enough to off Trevor immediately after the reveal.

Needing a second killer, she also kills Charlie who expected her to stab his shoulder so he could be “left for dead,” stabs Sidney, then seriously wounds herself in a scene that demonstrates both her obsession and her utter detachment. Her rants about modern culture and the affects the internet create an interesting character, although they do sound somewhat like an older person ranting about “kids these days.” While her motivation seems a bit weak as reality television finally seems to be fading from the public landscape, the idea of a stupid teenager yelling “I don’t need friends I need fans” works as a character, if not a message.

Also, while kind of obvious, I do like the idea that Charlie’s implied ultimate punishment was to die as a virgin, having killed the girl who would have happily solved that problem. I’m pretty sure we’re supposed to interpret him as a moron, thinking that the girl who killed her friends and family for fame would show loyalty to him. It’s kind of the ultimate karma for a young person who lets his sexual frustration boil over into misogyny.

Trying to think back to the first time I saw this movie, I think I knew a second fake-out was coming. If nothing else, I was pretty sure they weren’t going to kill Sidney and let the killer win (although a series of sequels about Jill with actual killers after her, as she hides what really happened, does seem like a brave direction). So, the final confrontation happens in the hospital, when Jill finds out that Sidney might pull through. Before going to finish her off, Jill makes a slip-up referencing Gale’s wound, which she couldn’t have known about unless he was the attacker, and Gale, Judy, and Dewey descend on the room to protect Sidney. After a skirmish, Jill is electrocuted, then shot, and we cut to a reporter calling Jill a “real survivor” and “right out of the movies.” Irony! Roll credits.

This movie is, in many ways, much closer to the first than either of the other sequels. It mixes real horror and humor in the same scene. Jill is easily the second best Ghostface, but the #1 slot is a pretty high hill to climb. Where Jill came across simply as shallow an unfeeling, there was a real sense that Billy Loomis was a person with a truly deep-seated evil that had merely expressed itself through the avenue of recreating a horror movie. In all probability Billy Loomis would have been a killer no matter what. I imagine that if the two had ever met Jill would have tried to take a selfie, and Billy would stab her while she was doing it.

The movie hasn’t aged perfectly, as web culture is probably less vapid than it was at the time of release. The Jersey Shore is long gone, replaced by Matpat producing thoughtful commentary on supposedly “shallow” entertainment. That said, reading Jill as simply a sociopath, the movie still works.

Friday, October 13, 2017

Scream 3


Scream 3 is the only film in this series that I don’t actually like. Don’t get me wrong, taken on it’s own it’s not bad. However, compared to the previous films, it’s lazy. It’s particularly annoying that the movie taunts us with the suggestion that one of the main characters will die, and all three of our leads are still alive when the credits roll. Furthermore, we’re told this in a posthumous videotape recorded by Randy (Jamie Kennedy), the main character who was killed off in the previous film.
That’s the problem with this movie: It’s supposed to be the concluding chapter. It’s the end of a trilogy, a finale, the close of the story. However, Scream 2 actually felt much braver in it’s decision to kill off Randy. This movie, however, doesn’t have any moments that are particularly shocking or surprising.
One point that is borrowed from the second movie: building the reveal around a brief line of dialogue from a previous film. That way, the movies feel connected, without getting too bogged down in continuity. For 2 it was the comment about Billy’s mother leaving town, setting up her reappearance. In this film it was the suggestion that Maureen Prescott had slept with a large number of men, setting up both her sexual abuse during her time in Hollywood, and the possibility that Sidney (Never Campbell) had an unknown sibling.
However, the movie chooses to expand and throw in new characters, when it should be slicing everything down to the basics, and building a film on established characters from the previous movies. All the elements for a good finale are here, but they’re assembled in the wrong way.
The set-up of the film makes sense: Sidney has gone into hiding, working on a womens’ crisis hotline. In order to get her attention, the killer begins a rampage on the set of the newest Stab movie, where Dewey (David Arquette) is working as a consultant. Gale (Courtney Cox) is contacted by the police and comes to the set after the first murder of the now-famous talk show host Cotton Weary (Liev Schreiber). The killer begins targeting the actors in the order of their deaths in the film (Cotton had foolishly agreed to appear as himself in a cameo in which he would be killed off).
Eventually, Sidney is lured into the case. As she, Gale, and Dewey hunt for clues, it eventually comes to light that the killer’s motives relate to Sidney’s mother Maureen, who had spent some time in Hollywood under the name Rina Reynolds. It becomes clear that she’d been sexually abused by multiple men at the home of Producer John Milton (Lance Henricksen), who profited from her death by making the Stab films. Henricksen gives us a decent Wes Craven impersonation, although I kind of wish Craven had taken the plunge and played the role himself.
When the killer captures Gale and Dewey, Sidney is lured to his home, and finds out that her mother had a child who grew to be Stab 3 director Roman Bridger (Scott Foley). Roman had sought Maureen out before the events of the first film, and had the door slammed in his face. So, he groomed both Billy and Mrs. Loomis as killers in an effort to get revenge. From that revelation the film plays out as expected: Roman has a plan to frame Sidney as the killer, there’s a confrontation, and he’s killed. The only major deviation from the previous film is the lack of a secondary killer, and that only because a rewrite eliminated the idea of Sidney’s in-universe actress Angelina (Emily Mortimer) being his accomplice.
I don’t wish to give the impression that Foley does a bad job. Indeed, better established, I think Roman could have been an excellent villain. But, this wasn’t the time for new elements to take center stage. The movie also suffers from having Gale’s actress, Jennifer (Parker Posey), suddenly become a main character investigating the crime. While the idea of Gale competing with a fictionalized version of herself to be the best Gale Weathers is moderately amusing, it further distracts. This movie complicates what should be simplicity and humanity.
I spent a lot of time debating how I could criticize this movie without a better solution myself. And then it came to me: the perfect ending to this trilogy would be for Sidney’s brother to be a character known and beloved throughout the series. Ironically, Scary Movie got it right: the revelation of Dewey as the mastermind would have been both logical (why did the killers never finish him off in the previous movies?), and heartbreaking. While you could argue that Dewey would have little trouble finding Sidney, bringing her into an environment in which she was vulnerable would be far more difficult.
So, is this a bad film? Once again, no. However, if you’re going through the Scream movies and skip from 2 to 4, you won’t feel like you missed that much.

Friday, May 13, 2016

100 Scariest Movie Moments: #13 Scream

In analyzing Scream, it’s important to realize that it did not introduce self-awareness to the slasher genre. That honor, to the best of my knowledge, goes to later Friday the 13th sequels; particularly Part 6, and Jason Goes to Hell. The latter actually made the FBI anticipating Jason’s slasher-film behavior a plot point. It’s this tendency that actually makes the later Friday the 13th films a lot more fun than the earlier ones.

Scream was something of an ironic backfire for Wes Craven. He set out to destroy the slasher genre by making the cliches so obvious that no one could take the format seriously anymore. I somewhat wonder if he still would have made the film if he had possessed a crystal ball and known that the coming age of the internet would make almost all entertainment dependent on its ability to be enjoyed ironically.

What makes Scream still unique among black comedy takes on horror is that the film does not attempt to separate the horror from the humor. The scenes often contain mixtures of the two, but the film never feels disjointed. It would be useful to compare this to a more recent self-aware slasher, You’re Next (which I do highly recommend). In that film, you feel almost as if you’ve watched two movies; a serious horror film about a house under siege by killers, and a black comedy about those killers finding out that one of their victims is highly proficient with improvised weapons. (I’d say that the latter movie begins when one of the killers comes through a window, and is promptly thrown on the floor and beaten to death with a blunt object.)

In Scream however, the killers will spout off movie references even at the most dramatic, terrifying moments. This doesn’t take away from the drama or the fear. We realize that the movie references are an expression of the madness of Billy and Stu (Skeet Ulrich and Matthew Lillard). They see life itself as a fiction that they’re creating, and because of this, they feel no remorse at killing.

Scream could be said to be the film that gave birth to the 21st Century; a time when we’re all plugged into the formulas of entertainment and find them just as engaging as the stories themselves. We’ve realized, as much as we’re reluctant to admit it, that magic tricks are no less impressive when you can see how they’re done. They remain captivating, and often times even gain a certain element as you lose the false impression that they’re as simple as waving a magic wand.