Scream 4

Before I begin with the negative I want to point out that I really enjoyed this movie. As slasher movies go this one is pretty solid. However compared to the first two movies in the series it is a bit underwhelming. There weren't as many surprises as one would expect from a movie like this. The killings and chase sequences lacked the the thrills that makes the viewer jump up.This could be because we don't really care for the characters as we barely know them. The whole interaction between the characters was very limited and felt rushed.The deaths were basic stabbing stuff. Not once did you actually thought OMG,horrible! Don't know about you but you have to have at least one scene like that.Also I think Wes Craven was so right to fear that after the Scary movie series that Ghost Face would not be effective any more. And he is right. Every time Ghost Face appeared you just couldn't take it very seriously. Speaking of which. While there were some funny moments it wasn't nearly as sharp as the comedy used in Scream 1. Still I did like the ending very much.Even if more red herrings could made the ending have more impact.Overall Scream 4 still manages to be entertaining and enjoyable as long as you realize it isn't as strong as the first two Scream movies in the series.

I literally just came back from a midnight screening of this and I had an amazing time. Craven's managed to reclaim the franchise with a worthy instalment that's a fantastic sequel as well as a quality slasher film in its own right. Honestly speaking, there aren't too many surprises to be had in Scream 4. No matter how mordantly self-aware the movies are (and believe me, Scream 4 gets a little tediously indulgent in its postmodern cleverness), there's an inevitable predictability to some of the proceedings but anybody who's a genre-savvy horror fan will appreciate how brilliantly everything is executed. The opening sequences, for example, are one of the best parts of the movie and are a perfect reintroduction to the franchise and while the bulk of the story lags a little, it's redeemed by the ballsy ending.

The acting is great with the core trio (Campbell, Arquette and Cox) delivering their usual, strong performances and the rest of the cast, however limited their respective roles, are just as entertaining. All you TV buffs there will get a kick out of seeing actors from Heroes, Veronica Mars, True Blood, Mad Men and Community share the silver screen and camp it up. More importantly, the film is hilarious and just a whole lot of ridiculous fun. Craven isn't afraid to take the story to some beautifully insane places and the ending was, to me, perfect.

All in all, it's a great, irreverent slice of horror that's hilarious and true to the franchise. Highly recommended.

It's been a while since I have seen a slasher, and Scream for that matter, yet here it is years later and finally we are getting back to the roots of the classic slasher. The movie starts out with a couple of funny scenes that lash out at the recent slashers that have been produced and how predictable and cheesy slasher films are, but then dives into the cliché of slashers starting with two helpless victims. After that, we start to get back into the classic killing spree that was seen in the first movie with the addition of a lot more gore. Yes, I'm sure we all know that slasher movies are becoming more famous for the increased amounts of blood that are constantly finding their way into the movies these days, as well as the increasing use of the F word.

So what is good about this movie? In my opinion the best part of this movie is the constant slams on horror movies and how lame they can be. The movie does a good job at mocking the genre and pointing out the goods and bads the genre has to offer, which is very satisfying to hear that even directors in this day and age can insult the genre. The second thing I liked about it, was the cast did a good job reviving the series. Yes you had the airheads and geek victims that are famous in the genre, but the main cast does a good job of playing the concerned victims who fear for their lives. The classic characters of Arquette, Cox, and Campbell are still strong and play their roles well as the returning survivors. The new cast also does a good job diving into the series, playing the roles of popular cheerleaders, AV geeks, and bad girls who want to have fun. Although a little overacted, the new generation has potential for making horror genres return to a classic style instead of turning into the crap we have seen it evolve into. A third positive would be the twist that this movie had to it. As I watched the movie, I tried to figure out the identity of the killer, or killers of the movie. I started to narrow down the victims and figured out the identity of one of them rather easily. However the other killer was quite a surprise, and was a nice twist to the movie instead of just a cheap identity that we had seen in the last two screams.

Okay so what about the bad stuff of this movie. Well the first thing I have to say is, the excessive amounts of blood seen in this movie. It seems that as technology improves, more directors think we need to see lots of blood and intestines. That's not my cup of tea to tell the truth and so I could have done without the excessive spill of red liquid. The second weakness in my opinion is the use of the F word. Again I think that this word is the only vocabulary word the movie world knows and I am getting quite annoyed with hearing it used as much as it is. However, if you are not offended or annoyed by the word you won't be too turned off by this movie. A third thing that I felt was weak, was the predictability of this movie. Yes it's easy to tell who is going to die and who isn't, that's what this movie makes fun of, but I found it really easy to predict when things were going to try and scare you. The camera angles, the music, and so much more gave it away and I was not surprised or scared by any of the tricks they tried to pull, though one lady screamed at just about every thing in the movie. Finally the fourth big weakness is the explanation for why the main killer is on the loose. It was lame and kind of cheaply written, and could have been much better had they taken more time to write it. Her accomplice had a better motive for killing a few of the victims, but still it wasn't the best.

Although it is predictable, Scream 4 is starting to return back to the classic work of slashers. It's aggressive humor, colorful cast, and new spin on the mind of the killer made it much better than I had originally intended. However, I still don't like the predictability, the phony bologna acting on some parts, and the weak motif for killing, which suggests that more work is needed before we can return to the old favorites. If Wes Craven decides to do another remake, then I suggest he work on adding new twists and stop making them so predictable.

I recommend this movie for die hard fans of either Scream or Horror films, as well as for those who just can't get enough blood in their day. This may also be a movie for fans who like to make fun of horror movies or are looking for a way to kill time in the day. Regardless I give this movie a 7 at the highest. Enjoy.

I'm 23 years old. 12 years ago, I watched the original "Scream" (1996) and it was the first horror movie I enjoyed. It was a landmark in the puberty years of many movie-buffs-to-be who grew up in the late 1990's (good times!). SCREAM 2 & 3 were released in 1997 and 2000, respectively, and although entertaining, didn't hold a candle to the original (which is fine, most sequels don't). "Scream 3", in particular, lacked Kevin Williamson behind the script, and not even Wes Craven could turn what Ehren Kruger wrote into gold (meaning, a good flick; it did make a lot of money, though, and Parker Posey made it hilarious at moments).

So, eleven years later, a new SCREAM movie comes out, reuniting the original director, writer and the three survivors of the franchise, heroine Sidney Prescott (my first movie crush, Neve Campbell, still naturally beautiful and always a competent actress), Dewey (David Arquette) and Gale (Courteney Cox). Die hard fans, like me, have been waiting for this for a decade, and it paid off. Actually, it works so well because it was made 11 years after the last installment. The movie is far from perfect, obviously, but stands as the best of the sequels; "Scream 2" was above the average but came way too soon, and the third one was a wasted opportunity.

The tongue-in-cheek humor works for the most part, and Williamson knows how to parody a trend that he (re)created himself, including the ridiculousness of torture porn from the likes of SAW and its annual sequels - "movies with no character development, in which you don't care who lives or dies". That is the strongest link in this franchise: we've come to care about Sidney, Dewey and Gale, making the SCREAM movies work equally as slashers and satires. Whether or not SCREAM 5 & 6 will be made, it all depends on how much money this will make; I'm satisfied with this 4th chapter, although I won't deny I will still see another one if Craven, Williamson, and Campbell are involved. That said, it was a nostalgic flick that made me feel like I'm a preteen again. It may be a "new generation with new rules", but the iPhone generation oughtta know: "The first rule of remakes: you don't f*** with the original". Bravo, Sidney!

I only semi-recently started to familiarize myself with the Scream franchise, but I loved it instantly. Creating genuine scares by avoiding all the clichés of horror movies, and turning the genre on its head with its self-mocking humor, and also by turning the killer not into a born psychopath with an elaborate back story or a supernatural, but someone dressed in a mask and robe, who uses his love of horror movies as his weapon against his victims. This helped create the mystery factor for the films, leaving you guessing til the end.

Unfortunately, as great as the franchise as a whole is, the sequels that followed the superb original did not live up to the same revelation in the end. The killer(s) was/were, if not predictable, then just the opposite to the point where you realize they didn't build up to it at all, leaving it to be a bit anti-climactic.

I'm happy to report that this is not the case with Scream 4. Even after an eleven year absence, Wes Craven and Kevin Williamson prove that they are still at the top of their game, and intelligent and original horror can still exist, even in these dark times full of repetitive sequels and remakes, something that the film comments on heavily.

The basic premise of the film is that Sidney Prescott returns to Woodsboro after ten years to publicize her new book on her experience with the killer. As soon as she returns, the killings begin again, and her cousin Jill begins to step into Sidney's shoes.

Where Scream 2 and 3 fail, this one succeeds. While I appreciated how they tried to put the premise of the first film in a different environment, it mostly felt like they were trying to live off the original, rather than build off it. While Scream 4 is constantly aware that it is repeating aspects from the original, making this impossible to be seen as a standalone, it does what any good sequel should do. It manages to take the premise of the original, and up the ante. Speaking of which, another thing that is upped besides the stakes is the body count and gore level. While the deaths for the most part are not nearly as elaborate as the original, they don't feel like the repetitive stab cycles in the 2 and 3. They are more brutal, and certainly show that violence in horror films has certainly gone up.

If there was any one weak aspect in this film, it would be the character development, or lack thereof. The three veteran actors from the trilogy, Neve Campbell, David Arquette, and Courtney Cox reprising their roles as Sidney, Dewey, and Gale Weathers respectively, play their roles very well, even amongst all the younger stars who more often then not, are in the spotlight, and it feels like they've definitely changed since the events in Scream 3. However, in this film itself, it felt as if they were just there as devices to the plot, and given no real character arcs. However at the same time, there wasn't much they could really do, since a lot of the focus had to be on the younger cast members, who actually put up some pretty good performances, though cannot be compared the cast of the original, but still fare a mile better than the characters introduced in the previous sequels.

I really liked how the actors from the two generations interacted, adding to the commentary on how not just horror movies have changed over the years, but our culture as well. With all that said, I suppose this is more of a character based movie than a character development one. Interesting how that works.

I felt this was the only one of the sequels to truly stay with the spirit of the original, while still making it work for today's audiences. The best example of it having the impact of the original has got to be the ending, which I will not elaborate on. All I'll say is that this is the only one since the original where the revelation of the killer(s) surprised me, as opposed to the "it was I, the butler!" conclusions of 2 and 3.

To sum it up, no fans of Scream or horror films could be disappointed.