Scream 2

'Scream 2' was the sequel to 'Scream', made only a year after its predecessor, it was clearly in high demand.

It was a good film overall, it certainly would not be added to the long list of sequels which didn't live up to their previous films - as it is discussed IN the film. Again, the references to movie cliché's and common movie stereotypes and rules is very interesting and can be really funny as you find yourself agreeing with the characters when they discuss films. Wes Craven created a very worthy sequel, the dialogue, as with the first one, was probably the strength of the film. Neve Campbell's role was pretty much the same with no huge development in her character but she performed well and kept her acting up to the same standard as in 'Scream'. The two recurring characters who really out-did themselves in this film were Courtney Cox and David Arquette, both their characters developed substantially in this film and both actors did so very well.

The script was well done but was slightly more predictable this time. When it came to who the killer eventually was, you had already worked out this because they had been absent for no apparent reason from the story for over half an hour. However, Craven did add some surprises and there were aspects of the story - both funny and scary - that you did not see coming. There was a lot more violence in this film and the body count is bigger as stated in the trailer, this film is definitely more horror than black comedy but there are some really great scenes featuring both.

Overall, 'Scream 2' is not as good as the first one but it is still definitely worth a watch. Don't watch this unless you have watched the first one because you will be lost within the opening minutes of the film.

If you thought that slasher movie sequels could be nothing more than an inferior continuation to the original and provide nothing new or innovative, "Scream 2" is here to prove you wrong. The entertaining characters, suspenseful directing and unique kind of meta humor that you loved from the original are back and combined with an exciting new plot, proving that even slasher movie sequels can be great as long as there's enough care and passion put into them.

In addition to becoming the first major box office hit for Dimension Films, 1996's SCREAM also became the horror film that would set the tone for the other horror films of the late 1990s. It was a phenomenal achievement in the horror genre so of coarse a sequel was just around the corner. The most common rule with movies is that sequels are terrible and while that is normally always true, that isn't the case with SCREAM 2. It should be noted that SCREAM 2 came out just a year after the original SCREAM. Most often when sequels come out a year after their predecessor, they turn out to be pretty bad (CHILD'S PLAY 3 for example). SCREAM 2, while not as good as SCREAM, manages to be an effective and well made sequel that surprisingly is just as clever as the first one and it contains the same kind of great dialogue the first one had as well. It helps that SCREAM 2 has most of the same cast members as the first one too. I think it's safe to say that SCREAM 2 was one of the better sequels of the 1990s. I'm giving it 7/10. Recommended for fans of horror.

Director Wes Craven and writer Kevin Williamson re-teamed for this unneeded but entertaining sequel. Also returning is a majority of the original cast (Neve Campbell, Courteney Cox, David Arquette, Jamie Kennedy, and Liev Schreiber), where the story picks up two years later with Campbell attending college when a new killer dons the Ghostface mask and stalks her and her college pals. As with the first film, everyone is a suspect and most importantly the film strikes a nice tonal balance of mocking slasher film conventions while also delivering the slasher film goods. Jamie Kennedy's video store clerk, now a film school student, at one point explains the rules for horror sequels, stating "there are certain rules that one must abide by in order to create a successful sequel. Number one: the body count is always bigger. Number two: the death scenes are always much more elaborate - more blood, more gore - *carnage candy*. And number three: never, ever, under any circumstances, assume the killer is dead." and "Scream 2" delivers on all three of these points. Besides meeting those sequel requirements, Craven is a master of suspense and shock and as with the first film, for a mainstream picture, he does deliver a shockingly rough horror film. Craven actually had to submit eight different cuts to the MPAA before getting an R-rating, so there's no mistaking that this film was from the same guy who made "The Last House on the Left" and "The Hills Have Eyes." The film is also immensely helped by a strong cast of new characters that include Jada Pinkett, Omar Epps, Sarah Michelle Gellar (interestingly playing a helpless blond character-type, the antithesis of Buffy the Vampire Slayer, which she was playing at this same time), Timothy Olyphant, Jerry O'Connell, Laurie Metcalf, Rebecca Gayheart, an unrecognizable Portia de Rossi, and the great David Warner in a small role as a drama teacher. Best of all are the very funny cameos for the movie-within-a-movie "Stab," where Heather Graham plays the Drew Barrymore part form the first film and Tori Spelling & Luke Wilson play Campbell and Skeet Ulrich's parts (an inside joke from the first film where one of Campbell's friends asks her "If they make a movie about you, who's gonna play you?" and she answers, "With my luck, they'd cast Tori Spelling."). Look fast for a before-he-was-famous Adam Shankman as a Ghost Dancer and Selma Blair has an uncredited appearance (or is heard) as Gellar's friend on the phone. Also, the film was edited by Patrick Lussier, who'd later go on to direct the solid "My Bloody Valentine" remake, Nic Cage's "Drive Angry," and was co-writer on under appreciated Terminator sequel "Terminator Genisys." My main complaint about the film is that Williamson's script hasn't aged all that well, seeming at bit too clever for itself, reminding me in many ways of the endless Tarantino wannabes of this era, where pop culture references were lazy substitutes for good dialogue, interesting characters, or original stories. Still, while this sequel basically covers the same ground of the first film, it's a strong cast with a talented director making a big budget slasher film, which is not something horror fans are treated to very often. FUN FACT! Robert Rodriguez ("Desperado" "Sin City" "Machete") directed scenes of "Stab", the movie-within-a-movie.

Wes Craven is back again at the helm of Scream 2, his followup to the mega-successful Scream. As sequels go, one could do a lot worse than this film. Sure, it has a pretty silly story trying desperately to cling to the original source material, but it never ever takes the story too terribly serious. How does Craven do this? He laces the film with all kinds of film references and humour directly tied to the film industry and actors involved. Several mentions of "Friends" cast members abound whilst having Courtney Cox return in her signature role as Gail Weathers. Craven also brings back the rules to horror films - now horror sequels; these rules are right on mark too(wish we had heard the most important!). In fact my favourite scene in the whole movie is in a classroom where students debate the inferior sequel to the superior original. Excellent examples are given to support one argument that sequels are better: Aliens and Terminator 2, and of course, The Godfather 2. Naturally this small cross section seems great when none of the hundreds of truly bad sequels are mentioned. Purposely I am sure! Is Scream 2 better than Scream? No way. It doesn't have nearly as much punch to it. The opening scene this time takes place in a movie theater, but it is not as powerful as the opening scene with Drew Barrymore in the original. The story is really something unto itself as well...but any kind of examination of plot other than a cursory one would give too much away. Not that that would be any great pity. I did like the acting in this one more. Arquette returns as Dewey affecting some kind of limp and pinched nerve in hand. He does a fairly nice job. Cox is lovely as ever and also is good in her role. Campbell is OK, as is the rest of the cast with Jamie Kennedy again standing out as nerdy movie maven Randy Weeks and, in particular, Liev Screiber doing a wonderful job as Cotton Weary(the man who had been accused of killing Sidney's mama). This sequel has more blood, more deaths, and more jokes. Like the original, I too enjoyed this film for its entertainment value if nothing else.