Studio: Paramount Pictures
Director: Matt Bettinelli-Olpin, Tyler Gillett
Writer: James Vanderbilt, Guy Busick
Producer: William Sherak, James Vanderbilt, Paul Neinstein
Stars: Melissa Barrera, Kyle Gallner, Mason Gooding, Mikey Madison, Dylan Minnette, Jenna Ortega, Jack Quaid, Marley Shelton, Skeet Ulrich, Jasmin Savoy Brown, Sonia Ammar, Courteney Cox, David Arquette, Neve Campbell
Review Score:
Summary:
A new Ghostface terrorizes Woodsboro by targeting the friends and family of a woman with a secret connection to the original killing spree.
Review:
Like any horror film franchise that touches at least two different decades, “Scream” has a sizable segment of “superfans.” To others, “Scream” simply seems like a slick series of self-aware slashers that are easy to enjoy on a quick night of frightful fun. To the superfans, “Scream” serves up astute commentary on the state of scary movie cinema, and should be studied as intently as “Citizen Kane” and revisited often. Those people are as passionate about Sidney, Dewey, and Ghostface as “Star Wars” fans are about Luke, Leia, and Baby Yoda. They eagerly await rumors on new projects, put Kevin Williamson on par with Ernest Hemingway, and hold Wes Craven in such sacrosanct regard that he’s virtually deified.
“Scream” 2022, or “Scream 5” if you prefer, doesn’t set out to skewer its devoted diehards specifically, although in light of how slavish its supporters can be, it’s amusing that the topical theme this time around is toxic fandom. Where “Scream 2” satirized sequels and “Scream 3” swiped at exploitative “based on a true story” terror, “Scream” 2022 makes its meta-message about how dangerous fervent fans can be when they think they know better than the creators, and try to carve out their own story by carving up bodies.
“Scream” opens on a familiar scene as Woodsboro teenager Tara answers a menacing phone call, fails a game of “Stab” (the fictional films based on the Woodsboro murders within the films) trivia, and takes Ghostface’s blade in her body as a result. Tara doesn’t die though. Instead, the attack draws Tara’s estranged sister Sam back to town, as it’s Sam’s secret connection to Billy and Stu’s original killing spree that kicks the new Ghostface’s nefarious plan into gear.
After two more attacks take place, Sam seeks help from retired deputy Dewey and gathers Tara’s social circle together to get to the bottom of what’s going on. Mindy, the niece of nerdy know-it-all Randy Meeks, thinks she’s sussed out the scheme. Based on Ghostface’s pattern, he seems to be writing a “requel.” Not a remake or a reboot, but a fashionable refresh that’s popular with Hollywood nowadays. Since inferior “Stab” sequels are now ruining childhoods, someone seems hellbent on creating a chapter that can proudly reclaim the franchise’s sagging legacy.
Having experienced a slow yet steady quality dip in its own series, righting the listing ship is exactly what “Scream” sets out to do too. And “Scream” succeeds by being closer in tone to the 1996 classic than any of the other sequels. Gone are overt fourth wall winks too goofy for their own good. Back is an appropriately tuned sense of humor that’s smart, snarky, and subtle, not silly, slapstick-y, or trying too hard to be clever. Heavy horror and light levity mix together for a mood that’s energetically entertaining without sacrificing substance or becoming too bonkers to suspend disbelief.
Of all the big fright franchises doings these so-called “requels” in the 2020s, with “Halloween” (review here) and “Texas Chainsaw Massacre” (review here) leading that list, “Scream” weaves what’s new with what came before more seamlessly and more satisfyingly than anyone else. Neve Campbell returns as Sidney, Courteney Cox returns as Gale, and David Arquette returns as Dewey, but all three walk a balance beam that lifts everyone above the pit of unnecessary cameos without unfairly overshadowing newcomers. Their inclusions are organic. Their interactions are enjoyable. Compared to how little those aforementioned properties did with Lindsey Wallace or Sally Hardesty, “Scream” figures out where its legacy characters realistically fit, and finds reasonable roles for them in the story.
“Scream” also creates compelling new characters that are endearing enough for us to not be disproportionately focused on the familiar faces anyway. Some resonate better than others, of course. Even with half as many minutes, Kyle Gallner’s creepy burnout leaves more of an impression than Dylan Minette’s monotone mope. One of the girls registers so faintly, I repeatedly forgot she existed whenever she wasn’t onscreen. Considering “Scream” requires an ensemble well stocked with red herrings as well as victims, a few fizzles are acceptable casualties among a roster that’s otherwise packed with personality evenly spread between everybody.
Not unlike how Craven and Williamson reinvigorated the entire slasher subgenre with the first film, this fifth one arrives at a perfect time, with a near-perfect plan, to revitalize “Scream” itself. That plan seems straightforward: stays as true to the “Scream” spirit as possible. That means a movie populated by pretty people quipping about hot horror trends like “elevated” A24 joints, zipping around a pristinely picturesque suburbia where there’s never a weed in sight, and several savage stabbings bleeding out of a meaty mystery that jabs at obsessive movie lovers radicalized by Reddit into weaponizing their fandom. Its cinematic sleekness also means plentiful product placement (Have a Racer 5 IPA with your Pizza Hut!) and a clean mainstream sheen, but “Scream” still has sharpness in categories like kills, scripting, and style too.
Review Score: 75
Expect an aggressively implausible whodunit where the who is unsatisfying and the how and why they dunit has holes deeper than the Mariana Trench.