web
counter
 

Scream Review: We All Go a Little Mad Sometimes

By Dustin Rowles | Posted Under Film Reviews | Comments (28)



Wes-Craven-Scream-Movie-2.jpg

How much better would Scream have been if a better, funnier, more knowledgeable screenwriter had stumbled across the idea sooner? A Dan Harmon or a Joss Whedon or even a Steve Franks (“Psych”)? Scream, after all, was inevitable. Self-referentialism is the first stage of a genre’s journey toward eating itself, followed by sequels, knock-offs, remakes and reboots. Screenwriter Kevin Williamson just got there first, and Scream had the good fortune of landing the director partially responsible for mainstreaming horror for teen audiences before it, which gave the original Scream that added bit of meta. It also resurrected Wes Craven’s career, which had been given up for dead after Vampire in Brooklyn and mediocre sequels to his own more successful films. It’s fitting that, 15 years later, as Craven’s career is once again on the decline, that he’d relaunch the series with a third sequel.

Rewatching the original Scream for the first time in 15 years, however, it becomes quickly apparent that the film was largely the beneficiary of great timing. It didn’t succeed because it was a particularly original or inventive film. It differed from the typical teen slasher flicks before it in only one respect: It announced those horror movie conventions before following through on them. Somehow, the horror movie tropes and cliches in Scream were magically absolved with a wink to the camera and the casting of a television icon in Henry Winkler. Add a Drew Barrymore cameo for big-screen legitimacy, and the original Scream essentially boils down to a cinematic hoodwink, a brightly lit slasher knock-off starring two television stars and a bunch of nobodies being directed by a revered horror director on the downside of his career. But, hey! it makes references to other horror movies! How clever!

Now, of course, Scream is itself now considered a classic (to 20-somethings who have never seen a movie made before 1991), despite the fact that the references in Scream aren’t particularly clever or sly, just regurgitations of a few classic titles and a line from Psycho. The reality, however, is that Scream is little better than its first knock-off, I Know What You Did Last Summer, only Scream was first. But first counts for a lot in Hollywood, so screenwriter Kevin Williamson (who actually wrote his own knock-off) should be congratulated for watching ten or 12 horror films during those summer hiatuses from “Dawson’s Creek” and mashing them up with an almost smart Edvard Munch reference.

But the other reality is this: Despite mediocre writing, by-the-numbers directing, terrible performances (especially that of Skeet Ulrich) and an ending that should’ve been far more predictable than it was, Scream is a fun movie to watch. Just not a very good one, and certainly not deserving of both the accolades it received upon its release and the three sequels, including a fourth Scream film coming out this Friday. As an example of an ironic, self-referential film, Scream doesn’t hold up well in this post-racial, post-ironic Obama America. But as an entertaining slasher flick with pretty people and a few decent chase sequences, it’s alright, and definitely easy to revisit ahead of the sequel.

If you were born in 1997 or otherwise somehow avoided the original Scream, the plot is fairly basic: A year after the murder of Sidney Prescott’s (Neve Campbell) mother, the ghost face killer begins picking off teenagers in a manner similar to that in other horror movies. The identity of the ghostface killer is unknown, but the murders seem to revolve around Sidney, which makes any of her surviving friends a suspect, including the boyfriend (Ulrich) trying desperately to get into her pants and his best friend, Billy, played by Matthew Lillard, who was — and still is — my favorite character in the original Scream. Gail Weathers (Courteney Cox), a tabloid reporter who had exploited the murder of Sidney’s mother, is also involved, initially as a bitchy bystander but later as someone who gets pulled into the murder spree along with Dewey (David Arquette), the boyish and bumbling town deputy.

As murder mysteries go, it’s hard to say because you can never get the first viewing back. On the rewatch, the ending seems telegraphed in every other scene, but I do remember that the 1996 version of myself was surprised by the identity, though at that time, I hadn’t been as educated by the influence of Scream sequels, its knock-offs, and the handiwork of M. Night Shyamalan. Perhaps for 1996, the twist didn’t feel like the work of a novice screenwriter.

Watching it again, I was also dismayed with how thin those allusions were, how uninspired. Even Jamie Kennedy’s famous “rules” scene seems trifling today, when you can catch 142 pop-culture allusions in any 22-minute episode of “Community.” But maybe, in 1996, it was announcing those rules that concretized them, that made us all the more aware, although it’s difficult to imagine that they weren’t already apparent to anyone that had seen four or more slasher flicks. But that’s the genius of Scream, I reckon: Not that it was clever, but that it was first.









Each Time You Like, Share, Tweet or Stumble a Pajiba Post, An Angel Does the Paul Rudd Dance



The Stars of Our Youth Who've Aged Most Impressively (As Seen at The TV Land Awards, in Descending Order) | Are You Pretty? I Can't Tell Under All That F*cking Slap: Five "Dewy-Faced" Starlets In Need Of A Makeup Intervention.









Comments

If I want to jump in shock, I'll shuffle around the library in socks and occasionally touch something metallic.

If I want fear, I'll go read Lovecraft or Poe or one of the other greats.

And if I want my stomach to turn, I'll just watch the news.

Posted by: Wintermute at April 12, 2011 3:13 PM

I eagerly clicked over here and got halfway through this before realizing that it wasn't an advance review of Scream 4 that began with a little bit of original Scream history.

Scream was a very fun time back in 1996 on opening weekend with a full theater. Those winks and those jumps were a blast the first time around. Unfortunately, like much of pop culture these days (as you mention), its referential nature and those same winks keep me from finding it re-watchable. I'm not opposed to the art of allusion; it has been around in literature for hundreds of years longer than Family Guy has been bastardizing it. My problem is that it seems to have become much less organic and artful in so much of modern popular storytelling.

As for I Know What Did You Last Summer, I didn't feel like it was a Scream knock-off, although it was trying to cash in on Scream's popularity. (I actually made a double feature of Scream 2 and I Know What You Did Last Summer when they were released back in '97.) It went the straight horror-thriller route with none of those winking in-jokes (save for one Silence Of The Lambs reference), and as a result its lack of fun immediately lost my interest.

Posted by: DarthCorleone at April 12, 2011 3:52 PM

Your criticisms ring very hollow. First matters, it's called originality. Something the movie industry should value more.

also, I wonder if you left Edgar Wright off the list of substitute screenwriters on purpose.

Posted by: LwoodPDowd at April 12, 2011 4:05 PM

I was a high school freshman in 1996. This scared me so much I slept in my grandma's room after I watched it. It was terrifying. Oh who am I kidding? I didn't just sleep in my grandma's room, I slept with her.

Posted by: Austin at April 12, 2011 4:07 PM

This is the case of someone coming to the movie late and not getting why it was a big deal. I was there opening weekend and Scream KILLED in the theater. Every week it grew its box office. Up to that point no one had really been commenting on the 80's slasher films. It was self reverential but turned the rules on their head. By announcing them and making it part of the narrative it freed up the movie so that anyone could be a victim or a suspect.

Also, this was the only film in the franchise where the cast had the entire script before filming. By 2 and 3 the producers were so worried about the identity of the killer getting out that the cast wasn't given the final pages until just before filming the end scenes. That's why re-watching Scream it seems obvious who the killer is but the actor played it up, but first time through it looks like the obvious red herring.

The other 2 are weaker but Scream completely holds up on re-watch. Just because it seems cliched now doesn't mean it was at the time. And it did launch the slasher/horror revival of the mid 90's. For better or worse.

Posted by: TylerDFC at April 12, 2011 4:10 PM

"A year after the murder of Sidney Prescott’s (Neve Campbell) mother, the ghost face killer..."

I see what you've done here. And I like it.

Posted by: thejodester at April 12, 2011 4:49 PM

I feel like as an admirer of horror movies you shouldn't be missing the point as much as you are.

Posted by: superasente at April 12, 2011 5:29 PM

It's supposed to seem hollow. By this time that was that slasher flicks were, and that's hollow. Scream purposely slams you with hollow, caricatures that were undeniably familiar at this point. It was essentially the anti-Clueless. it was the dying days of excess for the California Mall Culture.

Why not gives us some actual lambs to the slaughter?

It's a classic.

Posted by: Brian at April 12, 2011 5:39 PM

I'm not remotely embarrassed that I know this (I watched Scream again for the first time since I was a teenager during last year's Monster Fest and was surprised at how well it held up), but I'm pretty sure your favorite character, the one played by Lillard, is named Stu. Billy is no one's favorite character.

For the record, my favorite character is Tatum, simply for her delivery of "I'll send you a copy. Bam! Bitch went down! I'll send you a copy. Bam! Sid! Superbitch!"

Posted by: bravesjade at April 12, 2011 5:40 PM

That opening scene is terrifying. Seriously.

Posted by: samantha t at April 12, 2011 5:59 PM

I think you're a little harder on this than it deserves. The "Look behind you, Jamie!" sequence, with Jamie Kennedy saying it to Jamie Lee Curtis, even as Sidney and Dan Dority are saying it to him, with no one, including US, watching Scream, actually able to do anything but watch, is very clever.

Posted by: Todd at April 12, 2011 6:05 PM

I'd seen all those cheesy 80's splatter films both at the cinema (the original 'Hellraiser' being a favourite) & on home video.

By the time 'Scream' came out, I was already 25 & couldn't have cared less.

Didn't see it until just a couple of years ago (on cable tv) & quite enjoyed it, even if the acting was (unintentionally hilarious) crappy.

Posted by: harold ballard's ghost at April 12, 2011 6:10 PM

So you really just hate any horror films with violence then? Cause Scream has held up quite nicely even without the shock value of Drew Barrymore's demise in the opening scene. It is a well-written, strongly directed slasher film where you actually give a damn about the characters because the characters were actually developed by solid performers.

Don't act like this film stole someone else's thunder. It was many years before someone else jumped on the meta-horror bandwagon and did anything nearly as novel with it as this film. Frankly, the earliest post-Scream release I can think of that actually got the essence of this Scream meta is Behind the Mask: The Rise of Leslie Vernon. That only came out a good decade after Scream. There were other meta-horrors that didn't even try to do anything different because they thought copying Scream made them edgy and different. Yawn.

Haters gonna hate.

Posted by: Robert at April 12, 2011 6:17 PM

The 1st time I watched Scream was at my parents' house in Guatemala. They were out for the evening and my sister and I were having a pizza/ice cream/movie night. My sister and I are screamers. We scared the crapola out of my son's nanny who rushed upstairs because she thought someone had broken in. Guatemala City isn't that safe. Long story short, she ended up watching the movie with us and enjoyed it immensely even though she doesn't speak a word of English.

Posted by: Az at April 12, 2011 6:28 PM

I saw Scream at least three times in the theater. That was the first and last time I ever did that with a movie. Then I bought it when it was released on VHS and watched it over and over. It creeped me out every damn time. Was it because I was 16 or 17 when it came out and it was frightening to think of kids my age killing people? Was it because we had THE SAME COUCH SYDNEY HAD IN HER HOUSE? It was definitely because it was a scary, original, and fun movie. I watched it again in the last year or so and still enjoyed the hell out of it.

Posted by: Pinky McLadybits at April 12, 2011 6:31 PM

I watch this every year before Halloween and I still love it every time. I don't get how you can dismissively argue that Williamson just seemed to stumble upon the idea first. That's was originality is. What makes you so sure other writers inevitably would have come up with this idea? He came up with it first and he deserves recognition for that. I also don't get what you're getting at about the movie holding up in a "post-racial, Obama America" either. Who cares? A lot of movies have a definitive cultural feel reflecting the time it was made. Do we stop watching them or are they suddenly not entertaining in a new era? Do we not like Casablanca now?

"Liver alone!"

Golden.

Posted by: THRILLHO at April 12, 2011 7:11 PM

"As an example of an ironic, self-referential film, Scream doesn’t hold up well in this post-racial, post-ironic Obama America."

I can't tell if this is supposed to be serious.

Posted by: wonderbreadhead at April 12, 2011 7:16 PM

Poor Lois Duncan.

Posted by: Goddess at April 12, 2011 7:36 PM

Poor Christopher Pike.

I think the movie works because of Neve Campbell's performance.

Posted by: CaseCrum at April 12, 2011 7:52 PM

Ahhhhhhhhhhhhh, Neve Campbell and her heinous way. Of. Pausing between. Words. When. She's upset. LOVE her!

I saw this New Year's Day 1997. My boyfriend parked his CRX (oh yeah!) waaaaaaaaay out in the parking lot so it wouldn't get dinged. We flipped the car on the way home. I tell you, that first scene from Scream and flipping that car were equal on the freak-out scale for me.

Posted by: fullertonregan at April 12, 2011 11:43 PM

I don't have anything to add to the other commenters. I also loved "scream" and hated this review.

Posted by: James at April 12, 2011 11:58 PM

i just rewatched scream and have to agree with the rest of the commenters. Scream is a pretty damn fine movie.

except the the whole meta-horror thing had already gone down two years earlier in Craven's New Nightmare. which he wrote and directed. so, it was a boat he was already on by the time he made Scream.

Posted by: idleprimate at April 13, 2011 12:50 AM

You are literally the only person I know who doesn't like Scream. Seriously. It's rad.

Posted by: The Pink Hulk at April 13, 2011 12:59 AM

"Scream" bored the shit out of me.

And WTF is "this post-racial, post-ironic Obama America" even supposed to mean?

Posted by: , at April 13, 2011 1:49 AM

I was 14 when this came out and it scared the ever-loving crap out of me. I've watched it several times since and while the scares are gone, I still love the opening sequence and Ghostface's voice remains creepy every single time.

This movie revived a floundering genre as well. It combined humor and genuine scares with a little meta in there, too. Usually I'm on the same page with you, but on this I have to disagree. Scream is not only a good movie, it still holds up all these years later.

Posted by: Even Stevens at April 13, 2011 2:01 AM

Bad film, cynically made, lapped up by the dating crowd. Its success prompted a wave of horror-comedy imitations that killed straight horror for a decade.

"Now, of course, Scream is itself considered a classic (to 20-somethings who have never seen a movie made before 1991)."

Nails it.

Posted by: PaulB at April 13, 2011 8:40 AM

Back then (when I was a pimply-faced 14-year-old), it scared the bejesus out of me. Now when I watch it, I can't help but crack up.

"It's called tact, you fuckrag." I still quote this to people. (Also the only good line Billy Lumas/Skeet Ulrich had.)

Posted by: Haybags at April 13, 2011 4:48 PM

Also, I'm a 20-something (almost 30) who loves 70s-80s horror flicks, despite the campy fuckery. So kiss my white ass, Rowles.

(Anyone else think that Ulrich resembles Johnny Depp from his Nightmare On Elm Street days? A greasy, cracked out version of Johnny Depp, but a version, nonetheless.)

Posted by: Haybags at April 13, 2011 4:53 PM