Kevin Williamson, or Ehren Kreuger, must have paid attention in English class; open an essay with a strong introduction and close with a persuasive conclusion and you can be forgiven for the middle part (heck, markers hardly pay any attention to that part so what the Hell). This is the case with Scream 4. The not so anticipated sequel to the freshest slasher film of the 90s offers an opening so shocking that you'd think they've struck gold once again. Sadly, after an incredibly brutal murder a quarter of the way into the movie, it loses a lot of steam and becomes a confused puddle. It builds to a suitable conclusion and ends how it began but there are quite a few problems getting there.
Craven's direction isn't as slick as it once was. He still plays with lights and shadows very well but the chase scenes (if that's what they're called) aren't half as satisfying or tense as, say, Sidney in Stu Macher's house in Scream or Nancy in her 3rd nightmare in the original Nightmare on Elm Street. He seems quite happy to get the murders out of the way as quickly as possible. His editing skills are also a bit out of touch - he's kept the most cringe worthy line of the movie in and thrown out a lot of (possibly) interesting scenes. He has forgotten to build suspense or present a feeling of foreboding; a total of 11 are butchered before the final party but at the rate they die and with the lack of any other outcome visible, you are left feeling a bit bored.
The writing suffers from tampering. It's easy to see the differences between Williamson's script and Kreuger's. Williamson presents some sparkling, bitchy prose and finds the humour in the demise of characters. Kreuger takes a sledgehammer to subtlety and gives us closing lines like "F*** Bruce Willis" and "I'm gay, if it helps?" which effectively kill any suspense that could have been built. Kreuger also hasn't learnt to find inventive ways to kill people (you can see his murders coming a mile away and they all happen with such ease you'd think murder was easy). Majority of the middle comes from his pen which means majority of the kills are boring and uninspired. Apparently, 15 years after the original said "Kids know their horror movies," they've all forgotten about the biggest clichés (don't leave a party on your own, don't play dead to spook someone, don't investigate a strange noise or think you're too old to be one of the victims). He also allows his killers to be revealed way too easily.
The sound is another problem - Marco Beltrami's score in the original was hip, spooky and had some really nice moments. This time around, it seems Marco Beltrami was smacked by the wand of excess and has managed to fill out the original sound with so much junk that it's completely distracting. Horns herald the end of almost every single character whilst a choir chimes in whenever someone is giving their slow, death gaze.
The return of Sidney, Gale and Dewey is handled well. Williamson uses them to flesh out his themes whilst allowing the younger cast to shine. Haydyn Panettierre as the bitchy, best friend steals most of her scenes until the finale where Emma Roberts really breaks out. The always cute Rory Culkin and Erik Knudsen make a good pair as the Randy substitutes but aren't half as cool as the film store geek. Marley Shelton gives deputy Hicks a creepy side that I never would have thought possible.
The movie is cynical. Williamson is cynical. There's no doubt about it. He hates young people; he finds them stupid, callous and happy to make the same mistakes the older generations did. He hates horror films. He hates this movie. It manages to parody itself better than Scary Movie did. The older characters (Gale and Dewey) are taken out of the picture early and have trouble keeping up with the changed times. Sidney is as brave and thoughtful as ever, it's just a shame that the younger generation are too selfish to notice. Themes of ageing are presented with such cynicism, it must be that Williamson wrote the film for those of us who hate youngsters. He also hates critics - his comments on 'meta, post-modern bullshit' are exact and display his frustration over those who climb all over movie's meanings.
In closing, the film manages to redeem itself with a killer reveal that beats out that of the 2nd and 3rd movies. Even if you did realise who the killers were a half way through the movie, the motive is sooooo twisted and cynical (there's that word again) that it makes the whole thing almost fresh again. A scene of self-mutilation is so shocking you have to laugh at it's audacity. There's also a nice 'meta' moment in the hospital where the killer remarks "it was supposed to end at the house; this is just... silly." There are some great ideas floating around at the end but it's closed a bit too neatly for it to have any real effect. This prevents it from becoming a rival to the original.
The film, as a 4th in a series, is the best 4th in a series ever; it beats Hallowe'en 4, The Final Destination, Friday 13th part IV, Saw IV, Star Wars Episode 1, Scary Movie 4 and every other 4th part ever. But I think it's best that Scream goes out now. Williamson said he had planned a new trilogy but with the shape of the script, it would seem utterly impossible unless they did the exact same thing for 5 and 6. That would be a crime.
Craven's direction isn't as slick as it once was. He still plays with lights and shadows very well but the chase scenes (if that's what they're called) aren't half as satisfying or tense as, say, Sidney in Stu Macher's house in Scream or Nancy in her 3rd nightmare in the original Nightmare on Elm Street. He seems quite happy to get the murders out of the way as quickly as possible. His editing skills are also a bit out of touch - he's kept the most cringe worthy line of the movie in and thrown out a lot of (possibly) interesting scenes. He has forgotten to build suspense or present a feeling of foreboding; a total of 11 are butchered before the final party but at the rate they die and with the lack of any other outcome visible, you are left feeling a bit bored.
The writing suffers from tampering. It's easy to see the differences between Williamson's script and Kreuger's. Williamson presents some sparkling, bitchy prose and finds the humour in the demise of characters. Kreuger takes a sledgehammer to subtlety and gives us closing lines like "F*** Bruce Willis" and "I'm gay, if it helps?" which effectively kill any suspense that could have been built. Kreuger also hasn't learnt to find inventive ways to kill people (you can see his murders coming a mile away and they all happen with such ease you'd think murder was easy). Majority of the middle comes from his pen which means majority of the kills are boring and uninspired. Apparently, 15 years after the original said "Kids know their horror movies," they've all forgotten about the biggest clichés (don't leave a party on your own, don't play dead to spook someone, don't investigate a strange noise or think you're too old to be one of the victims). He also allows his killers to be revealed way too easily.
The sound is another problem - Marco Beltrami's score in the original was hip, spooky and had some really nice moments. This time around, it seems Marco Beltrami was smacked by the wand of excess and has managed to fill out the original sound with so much junk that it's completely distracting. Horns herald the end of almost every single character whilst a choir chimes in whenever someone is giving their slow, death gaze.
The return of Sidney, Gale and Dewey is handled well. Williamson uses them to flesh out his themes whilst allowing the younger cast to shine. Haydyn Panettierre as the bitchy, best friend steals most of her scenes until the finale where Emma Roberts really breaks out. The always cute Rory Culkin and Erik Knudsen make a good pair as the Randy substitutes but aren't half as cool as the film store geek. Marley Shelton gives deputy Hicks a creepy side that I never would have thought possible.
The movie is cynical. Williamson is cynical. There's no doubt about it. He hates young people; he finds them stupid, callous and happy to make the same mistakes the older generations did. He hates horror films. He hates this movie. It manages to parody itself better than Scary Movie did. The older characters (Gale and Dewey) are taken out of the picture early and have trouble keeping up with the changed times. Sidney is as brave and thoughtful as ever, it's just a shame that the younger generation are too selfish to notice. Themes of ageing are presented with such cynicism, it must be that Williamson wrote the film for those of us who hate youngsters. He also hates critics - his comments on 'meta, post-modern bullshit' are exact and display his frustration over those who climb all over movie's meanings.
In closing, the film manages to redeem itself with a killer reveal that beats out that of the 2nd and 3rd movies. Even if you did realise who the killers were a half way through the movie, the motive is sooooo twisted and cynical (there's that word again) that it makes the whole thing almost fresh again. A scene of self-mutilation is so shocking you have to laugh at it's audacity. There's also a nice 'meta' moment in the hospital where the killer remarks "it was supposed to end at the house; this is just... silly." There are some great ideas floating around at the end but it's closed a bit too neatly for it to have any real effect. This prevents it from becoming a rival to the original.
The film, as a 4th in a series, is the best 4th in a series ever; it beats Hallowe'en 4, The Final Destination, Friday 13th part IV, Saw IV, Star Wars Episode 1, Scary Movie 4 and every other 4th part ever. But I think it's best that Scream goes out now. Williamson said he had planned a new trilogy but with the shape of the script, it would seem utterly impossible unless they did the exact same thing for 5 and 6. That would be a crime.