It's really hard to talk about this movie without unpacking its 25 year legacy and in some ways, Scream (2022) seems up to the task and in others, it just plain doesn't. It takes some risks and even if I'm not there for the 3rd act payoff- I respect that they went there,
Ultimately, that's what Scream (2022) is- a love letter to the OG and a cinematic obituary as well as we put old pieces to bed and make room for the new. The one thing I will say is I can't commit to a new series with Sam Carpenter (Melissa Barrera) as our lead. It's not a particularly strong performance with no observable trajectory. In certain scenes, it at least seems like the movie was shot out of chronological order (hardly news, many movies are not) but Barrera was unaware of where she was on her character's journey at the time, dancing between mild-mannered and meek to a bizarre maybe confidence? It's hard to tell, honestly. I'm going to get my point that the legacy characters weren't in it enough out of the way, a bold choice that the directors must have recognized would alienate some fans. I wanted more of them, sure, but it was also mostly cuz I didn't want to be stuck with Sam and younger sister Tara (Jenna Ortega) for much longer.
There are 3 pivotal areas in a slasher movie, especially one like Scream, that I want to spend the rest of this review unpacking, so those wary of spoilers- take a break.
Legacy- like I said, I would have liked more Sidney and Gale and Dewey but I knew this was going to use them as set dressing, which is what it feels like until the 3rd act where the movie can't seem to decide whether it's sticking to the original (with Sidney in the driver's seat, although nice nod to Gale needing something to do with one of Sidney's quippy one-liners) and starting something new with Sam. I will say, I had a hunch that one of the legacies was in jeopardy before going into the movie and it was a bit of a bummer to have my suspicions confirmed but again, parts for the audacity but points off for the execution. (No one vaults up and guts somebody after being shot 3 times, so we either needed a bullet vest reveal or something else) There's also a fair amount of fan service from every film (Sheriff Hicks leaves a note about her lemon squares on the fridge for her son) while also SPOILER decrying toxic fandom, rightfully so. The toxic fandom stuff doesn't land after how much of the previous ramp up has been about fan service, but I get the vibe they are going for... just doesn't fully work.
Kills- literally everyone dies by being stabbed or shot. There's a great immolation scene but otherwise, nothing to write home about and in a slasher? That's a problem. One of the early deaths shows the knife going in one side of the throat and protruding out the side of the neck as it's slowly driven in. This is a kind of intensity and savagery that Scream doesn't always give us, but it's short lived and becomes pretty fun of the mill by the end.
Killers- No. Just no. Dumb and no. This is where the movie starts to crack for me. Killer toxic fans? I don't hate the idea. In fact, Scream 2 (1997) broached it pretty well with Mickey (Timothy Olyphant), but this Scream revisits it but oddly positions it as something totally new? This is where we have to unpack this cringe connection between legacy and new. Our protagonist, Sam, is the daughter of Billy Loomis. Despite Billy being a Virgin in Scream, until Sidney. Despite the mother never being mentioned by name. Despite Billy dying 25 years ago and Sam being 23 (left 5 years ago when she was 18.. 18 + 5= 23). But fine, that connection, despite not working on the timeline, is a clever enough addition. However, then doing the whole "is Sam really the killer?" thing early on just reminded me of Riverdale when one of the characters kept going on about having "serial killer" genes. No, I didn't for a moment think it was Sam so that was a rough red herring.
The problem is- the other killers were easy to guess. Their motive might not have been but legitimately the opening scene, I called who one of the killers was before the titles. The second killer was not much of a stretch either, frequently citing movie references they "had never seen before" in such an obvious way that I wanted to scream (for all the wrong reasons) at the characters on screen.
Throw in one of the killers weird "baby" pet names given to the other killer in the climax begs a very statutory rape question that is never fully explained, but truly, that is the least of Scream's issues when it comes to its killers.
Ultimately, that's what Scream (2022) is- a love letter to the OG and a cinematic obituary as well as we put old pieces to bed and make room for the new. The one thing I will say is I can't commit to a new series with Sam Carpenter (Melissa Barrera) as our lead. It's not a particularly strong performance with no observable trajectory. In certain scenes, it at least seems like the movie was shot out of chronological order (hardly news, many movies are not) but Barrera was unaware of where she was on her character's journey at the time, dancing between mild-mannered and meek to a bizarre maybe confidence? It's hard to tell, honestly. I'm going to get my point that the legacy characters weren't in it enough out of the way, a bold choice that the directors must have recognized would alienate some fans. I wanted more of them, sure, but it was also mostly cuz I didn't want to be stuck with Sam and younger sister Tara (Jenna Ortega) for much longer.
There are 3 pivotal areas in a slasher movie, especially one like Scream, that I want to spend the rest of this review unpacking, so those wary of spoilers- take a break.
Legacy- like I said, I would have liked more Sidney and Gale and Dewey but I knew this was going to use them as set dressing, which is what it feels like until the 3rd act where the movie can't seem to decide whether it's sticking to the original (with Sidney in the driver's seat, although nice nod to Gale needing something to do with one of Sidney's quippy one-liners) and starting something new with Sam. I will say, I had a hunch that one of the legacies was in jeopardy before going into the movie and it was a bit of a bummer to have my suspicions confirmed but again, parts for the audacity but points off for the execution. (No one vaults up and guts somebody after being shot 3 times, so we either needed a bullet vest reveal or something else) There's also a fair amount of fan service from every film (Sheriff Hicks leaves a note about her lemon squares on the fridge for her son) while also SPOILER decrying toxic fandom, rightfully so. The toxic fandom stuff doesn't land after how much of the previous ramp up has been about fan service, but I get the vibe they are going for... just doesn't fully work.
Kills- literally everyone dies by being stabbed or shot. There's a great immolation scene but otherwise, nothing to write home about and in a slasher? That's a problem. One of the early deaths shows the knife going in one side of the throat and protruding out the side of the neck as it's slowly driven in. This is a kind of intensity and savagery that Scream doesn't always give us, but it's short lived and becomes pretty fun of the mill by the end.
Killers- No. Just no. Dumb and no. This is where the movie starts to crack for me. Killer toxic fans? I don't hate the idea. In fact, Scream 2 (1997) broached it pretty well with Mickey (Timothy Olyphant), but this Scream revisits it but oddly positions it as something totally new? This is where we have to unpack this cringe connection between legacy and new. Our protagonist, Sam, is the daughter of Billy Loomis. Despite Billy being a Virgin in Scream, until Sidney. Despite the mother never being mentioned by name. Despite Billy dying 25 years ago and Sam being 23 (left 5 years ago when she was 18.. 18 + 5= 23). But fine, that connection, despite not working on the timeline, is a clever enough addition. However, then doing the whole "is Sam really the killer?" thing early on just reminded me of Riverdale when one of the characters kept going on about having "serial killer" genes. No, I didn't for a moment think it was Sam so that was a rough red herring.
The problem is- the other killers were easy to guess. Their motive might not have been but legitimately the opening scene, I called who one of the killers was before the titles. The second killer was not much of a stretch either, frequently citing movie references they "had never seen before" in such an obvious way that I wanted to scream (for all the wrong reasons) at the characters on screen.
Throw in one of the killers weird "baby" pet names given to the other killer in the climax begs a very statutory rape question that is never fully explained, but truly, that is the least of Scream's issues when it comes to its killers.
Tell Your Friends