Pânico

Scream single-handedly revitalized the slasher genre, which was beyond dead as of 1996, and inspired countless spin-offs and attempted remakes in its wake. Wes Craven creates yet another horror masterpiece, and does so in an original and unique way. Add in the witty, self aware, reference-filled script by Kevin Williamson, which was rumored to have taken influence from Friday the 13th Pt 6, and you have one of the most iconic slashers ever made. Arguably the greatest opening scene to a horror movie ever, along with so many more iconic lines and scenes (Randy watching Halloween on the couch). The acting is next level by horror/slasher standards and has a very likable cast. Skeet Ulrich giving his best performance of his career, Matthew Lillard, Neve Campbell, Courtney Cox, Drew Barrymore ... do i need to go on? The influence and impact Scream had on the late 90's is undeniable, simply one of the best scary movies of all time.

Scream With the countless number of teen slasher movies doing the rounds, it is too easy to watch scream and see simply another school serial killer movie that has just rolled off the factory production line. However, it was Wes Craven's 'Scream' that started the whole revival of the horror genre and re-invented the teen horror. Through no fault of its own, but rather a succession of bland rip-offs, not to mention a very successful spoof (Scary Movie), Scream's original impact has been severely dulled. Were Scream released today it would no doubt be moderately successful but would be instantly forgettable. But back in 1996 the teen horror market was wide open. The teenagers of the 90s were bored of traditional horror movies featuring haunted houses, vampires or deformed monsters. They had seen them all. So Wes Craven, having reinvigorated the horror genre once before with 'Nightmare on Elm Street', set out to do it again. This time, along with Kevin Williamson, who would go on to be creator of Dawson's Creek, created a new kind of horror – one that you could laugh at as well as scream at.

What made Scream so successful is that it was never patronising, and displayed a strong sense of ironic self-awareness. It took every horror cliché in the book and turned them upside down. For the kids that had seen too many movies, there was now a movie for them. The characters did not follow the clichés, but in fact talked about them, and talked about what would happen if they were in a movie. This sense of irony may seem tired now, but when Scream came out it was new and exciting. There was rarely a need to scream 'don't go upstairs' or suchlike in Scream, because the characters themselves were saying that! The idea of the killer being amongst the students adds a fresh dimension to the film, as fear gives way to paranoia at not being able to trust anyone. The subversions of the accepted horror clichés, in particular in the opening ten minutes (I'm not going to give anything away for those who have not seen it) also contribute to making Scream a truly shocking movie. It was this sense of innovation that made Scream such a breath of fresh air for the horror genre, and it is only a shame that Craven's genius has been ripped off so many times that his work has dated far too quickly. Craven and Williamson have also created a new horror star – but it was not a particular character but just a costume with an iconic mask. The Scream mask has become just as symbolic, perhaps even more so, than that of Michael Myers or Jason Vorhees.

For any serious horror movie fans, Scream is essential viewing, if only to witness the film that started it all. The 'movie within a movie' idea was terrific, and would be taken even further in the sequel. The frequent references to classic horror movies, and reversals of accepted horror clichés, especially in the opening ten minutes) are also fun to watch out for. There is even a wonderful moment where one boy climbs in the bedroom window of his girlfriend – a scene that would be taken and used as one of the foundation for Williamson's successful teen series Dawson's Creek.

The iconic mask, the one-liners, and the unique self-awareness when it comes to horror clichés make Scream a true original – accept no imitations.

Watching this film for the first time in the basement of a four story house, with no-one else in was the perfect setting for this film. From the very first scene I was gripped and I could not wait for the climax to discover the murderer and his motives. The script was extremely original, as they had purposely set out to parodie the typical slasher style movie.

It was written in a way that deceived and tricked and had you jumping out of your seats but also laughing at the paradoxical black humour. For anyone looking for a good horror film with a twist, you won't find a better one than Scream.

Overall I give it 9.5/10

I've gone back and forth in my feelings about "Scream" both times I've seen it, almost 20 years ago when it opened, and just now There are times when its meta-parody- but–still-scary approach to teen slasher films works quite well, especially the ending which manages to be funny, scary, over the top, and socially witty all at the same time. Other times it's too self conscious to actually be scary, but not surprising enough in its humor to really be as much fun as it could be.

It's also a hard film to criticize, because the answer to almost every complaint (e.g. the actors playing high school kids all look like they're well into in their 20s) can always be 'but that's the whole point, it's always that way in these movies'. But one thing that does annoy me that isn't so easily shrugged off is that the cast seem to be in a number of different movies. Skeet Ulrich, for example, brings a surprising amount of realism and depth to his character, while Courtney Cox as an 'I'll do anything for a story' reporter plays a cartoon of a cartoon. This isn't of issue of 'good' versus 'bad' acting, but it does make figuring out just what the tone of the film is, more muddy than it needs to be.

Probably the best thing about 'Scream' is it knows when to BE best. The opening and closing 15 minutes are the two strongest sections of the film, so if the middle is a little all over the place and sometimes repetitive, and a little more obvious in it's humor, that's not what you walk away remembering.

There's more than a few reasons to hate `Scream'; the main reason would be that the film single-handedly resurrected the teen-slasher genre, a movie category that had long been beaten to death. Because of the success of `Scream', witless horror crap like `I Know What You Did Last Summer' and `Urban Legend' got greenlighted, half the teenage casts of various WB television shows got summer acting jobs, and some awful scripts that should've been left dead and buried `Teaching Mrs. Tingle' got to see the light of day. `Scream' is responsible for a lot of garbage. But the truth of the matter is, `Scream' is also a phenomenal movie.

The plot of `Scream' is very simple: a masked knife-wielding maniac is busy stalking the students of High, killing them off one by one. The killer's inordinately obsessed with one girl, Sidney Prescott (Neve Campbell), who of course gets involved in the quest to unmask the killer. The catch (in case you don't already know it), though, is brilliant. Everyone in the film is familiar with all the slasher film conventions. They know that you shouldn't walk in the woods alone at night. They know that having wild sex is an unwritten invitation to be hacked to pieces. They know not to say things to each other like `I'm going outside for a cigarette; I'll be right back.' -- such statements are virtual death warrants. One of the best examples (and best characters) of this is Randy (Jamie Kennedy), the film-obsessed nut of the film, who actually goes so far as to muse what `real' actors and actresses should play the other characters in the film, going so far as to joke about who gets to be Tori Spelling. All the dumb conventions of slasher films are pulled out of the shadows, exposed for what they really are . . . and then, some of them get used anyway, because the characters willingly choose to ignore those conventions. Some cliches are thrown away, while others are embraced. `Scream' really turned the horror/slasher film genre on its ear, becoming the first truly suspenseful and exciting slasher film in many, many years simply because it suddenly had a million new avenues to explore. The film's self-awareness allowed to move in brand-new directions . . . and suddenly, scenes that used to be predictable in other slasher films suddenly become incredibly intense in `Scream'.

Director Wes Craven was perfect for this film -- as director of slasher classics like `Nightmare On Elm Street', he easily sets the visual feels and style of film to perfect evoke all the slasher films of yore . . . and then, much like `Scream's' script, chooses to either faithfully follow the tried and true, or to go off in competely unexpected directions. Either way, Craven manages to create a lot of absolutely nail-biting, thrilling scenes. He also doesn't hold back with the gore, which is always a plus in great slasher films. The acting ranges from barely mediocre to good -- Neve Campbell's okay as Sidney; Courtney Cox is pretty good as tart-tongued reporter Gail Weathers; Jamie Kennedy rules as Randy the film geek; and David Arquette is utterly bland and forgettable as Deputy Dewey Riley, the sad-sack policeman. But casts in slasher films don't particularly matter anyway; the good ones are all about suspense, terror, and gore. And in `Scream', Wes Craven provides massive amounts of all three of those criteria.

The irony is, `Scream' spawned dozens of imitators, and by spawning imitators, all the new avenues opened up by `Scream' quickly got old and boring once more. Still, purely on its own merit, it's an excellent film. The best slasher film of all time is still John Carpenter's `Halloween', without question, but `Scream' actually runs a close second. It's well worth watching. Grade: A-