Self-Reverential “Scream 4″ is Fun but Forgettable
In Scream 4, a copycat of the Ghostface Killer targets Woodsboro teens just in time for Sidney Prescott’s (Neve Campbell) return to her hometown to promote her book. She meets familiar faces like Dewey (David Arquette) and Gale (Courteney Cox) as well as the new generation of high school students which include her cousin Jill (Emma Roberts) and the film geeks who are devoted fans of the fictional movie franchise that is based on her life.
Other critics are starting to pounce on this film, and I agree that there are a lot of flaws within this new installment. Do you want a list?
- Their dialogue is never organic, always self-referential. Remember, directors, winking is sexy but too much of it is just disconcerting.
- The way they talk about each other is mean-spirited and sometimes pornographic.
- The Hitchcock references are so condescending that director Wes Craven probably thinks that none of us watch TCM.
- The town keeps populating despite its high homicide rates.
- An Oscar winner and a two time Oscar nominee are terrible here.
- The victims don’t use the buddy system even if the killers have done so successfully for the past three films.
- Jill and her group have no black friends, so much so that Ghostface’s costume might as well be a white sheet instead a black one.
- Scream 4 misleads.
I did notice a few interesting things about this movie, and some of them are good. Like when everyone calls Sidney a ‘victim’ as opposed to a ‘survivor,’ a more politically correct term that the Ghostface begrudgingly uses.
Scream 4 also portrays a living body’s functions and movements just as much as it does after the person’s death. Ghostface isn’t content to just kill, he wrestles his victims down before turning them into wallpaper. His victims fall down stairs or buildings more heavily than they have previously done. Like always, the serial killer meets his match with Sidney, who kicks, punches and blocks him. Their encounters, of course, reveals the Ghostface’s stunt work – when Sidney kicks him down the stairs he jumps instead of simply falling. It’s like every character has a gym membership, despite them mostly sitting down with their iPhones and laptops and watching movies.
They also don’t make 21-year-olds like they used to, as full-bodied women like Rose McGowan make way for frail looking creatures like Shenae Grimes. And of course, no one can top Drew Barrymore, and not just because she was the first. Slasher films in general can be retitled “expendable ingenues,” but the actresses in this film arguably have room to show their talents. Many of them here have comedy backgrounds, coming in handy with the films funny and scary sides. Emma Roberts, touted to take Campbell’s place as the Scream queen, knows how to flow within the insanity of the crimes as well as her own high school dramas. I have also come around to liking Courteney Cox again, becoming a enjoyably tough broad with age.
The real revelation here is Hayden Panettiere, playing Jill’s best friend Kirby. Yes, we know she’s spunky because of her leather jacket and short hair. She’s also the main girl in the film geek club, the one who finds the best use for her iPhone while her peers keep losing theirs, the nerd’s wet dream without dressing like one, the one who can out-trivia the boys. When the Ghostface asks her a trivia question, she throws in Piranha. She knows how to slip in the nuances of humor and fear at the same time and she deservedly steals the show.
And with Gale, Sidney and her publicist Rebecca (Alison Brie) as urbanites coming to Woodsboro, this cast dresses better than the ones in the previous Scream films. The women sport body-hugging dresses, Gale with her brown leather jacket, Rebecca with her trench coat. The boys hold their own too. Jill’s ex-boyfriend Trevor (Nico Tortorella) looks like a creepy version of an H&M commercial and even, Robbie (Erik Knudsen), a film geek, has a double buttoned shirt. Too bad that many of those pieces of clothing will be lopped or hewed, just like many things within or about this film, including a third act that might just be too crazy for any actor or actress to handle, even if, say, Tilda Swinton ended up being the killer.
C+
Notes: Rated R for strong bloody violence, language and some teen drinking, 111 minutes.
13 Comments
Thank you for mentioning the lack of diversity. I love the ‘Scream’ movies, but at the same time the overwhelming whiteness is more than a little frustrating at times (a fact which, in fairness, was addressed in the second one). I suppose one could argue that Woodsboro is an incredibly affluent suburb and might not be that diverse in real life – in re-watching the first one last night, I was gobsmacked at the luxuriousness of everyone’s homes, something which I had never paid attention to before – but then, this isn’t ‘real life.’
I’m still on the fence as to whether or not to see it. I’m planning a Scream-a-thon for my blog, so maybe I should.
Who would have guessed it was crap?
Regarding the diversity angle I’d prefer that Ghostface only kill privileged spoiled white kids. Black people have it hard enough in horror films anyway.
Sad but true
Nothing will top the first film.
Wow I have never word for word disagreed with a film review as vehemently as I do with this one.
For one what does diversity have anything to do with the movie? It doesn’t need to be diverse and honestly I would have been offended if they had put in diverse characters because it would have only been detrimental to the film. They would have only been fodder and honestly there just to be there. I’d rather have well developed characters then characters there for the sake or racial diversity. It’s a black comedy/slasher, not some commentary on the American lifestyle. And the town keeps populating because that’s how life works. It’s ten years later and people grow up and move in. Plus in the beginning its basically hinted that the townspeople sort of embrace their towns legacy.
Secondly the whole point of the Scream franchise is not to be scary and not to induce fear but to make us laugh and wink at all the film lovers out there who watch horror films on a daily basis. To you it may not seem organic but I talk like the way they do with my friends all the time. With Scream it’s trying to satirize the genre without having to make you notice like in Scary Movie and other films like that. Its a self-aware, meta series which is what makes it original. You take away the dialogue and you have another boring teen slasher. And if you think that dialogue is mean spirited and pornographic, watch FX or Spike’s original programming. I didn’t even notice it.
And as for the misleading well that’s the idea. You aren’t supposed to follow it completely since it is a MYSTERY after all. Character wise while they may look like models, I felt they were developed pretty well. At least better than Scream 3. Hayden definitely surprised me since I am not a fan of hers at all but I thought overall the acting was solid as well.
Scream 4 is not the best film in the series but I definitely think it wasn’t as bad as you made it out to be. I’d love to hear a second opinion review on this.
Detrimental? So non-white characters can’t be well-developed too?
Rich: There’s enough on this movie to comment on, but old adage says that the first is better. I have hazy memories of 2 and 3, and I kind of like this one over those sequels.
Travis: I’d like to geek out about income/residential trends in race at least in Canada, but I nonetheless stand by what I said.
‘It’s a black comedy/slasher, not some commentary on the American lifestyle’ is counterproductive. I’ve read erudite social commentary about “Psycho,” “Texas Chainsaw,” “Elm Street.” Scream, as you said, satirizes the genre and by default is a vindication or our social mores.
I never got the town embracing their ‘legacy,’ the Ghostface figures in the town square were put there as a prank. The adults, another group that’s not amply represented, treat the murders and Sidney with some disdain. The teenagers in the first movie talk about the ‘rules’ as if they’re afraid that their lives are turning into a movie, whereas the geeks in this film might as well say ‘This hot girl from my homeroom just got stabbed,’ which is actually pretty vulgar to me.
I also don’t think that the “Scream” franchise is only to satirize the genre. There’s fear and even earnestness in Casey’s death, Sidney’s past haunting her as well as the creepy boyfriends who stick to her and her cousin like glue. Yes, the series has always been self aware, but they play that up the hilt here, especially with the irritating scene between Anna Paquin and Kristin Bell. My experience with talking about derivative genre films is that I or other would would talk as if they were actually frustrated or dismissive of the films. The two actresses just say their lines. The best films about death, even horror films, makes us empathize with those who are in that vulnerable state, but this one just heedlessly piles the bodies on, like most sequels do.
Another thing I noticed is that great mysteries in general, when they reveal their third act, can trace their way logically as to who the killer is. Yes, there’s one scene that gives it away if you’re noticing, but other characters are placed within this movie to purposefully throw us off, which I think is lazy writing.
I waited to talk more about the film’s flaws here, and if you’ve read every word of the review, you’d see I tried to praise the film for commenting on the characters’ physical abilities and the actors’ performances. Although I suppose I can write about this movie again if I ran into it, but I probably have better movies to watch.
The use of red herrings is lazy writing? Tell that to like… every mystery story ever written. And Scooby-Doo. Of course it’s not gonna straight-up tell you who the killer is at the beginning.
I don’t like to do this, but you know when I do that it actually means something… but I agree with Travis.
Also, if you think “that hot girl from homeroom just got stabbed” is vulgar and unnatural, you should step into a high school classroom these days. My students would probably not only say that, but say even more crude things.
One red herring is fine, but a million of them? Of course it’s not gonna reveal who the killer is in the first scene despite a) Stab 7 does that and b) Skeet Ulrich always skeeved us out, which this new film tries to play around with. Maybe it’s not thee ‘that’ but the ‘how’ as every cliche in the film is played to the hilt.
I’d compare a realistic reaction to someone dying in a horror movie like the original Scream to say, a school shooting. Adolescents are mean, but they won’t take it to that level. I wouldn’t jump to vilify a generation, since I work with some of them.
Maybe it’s location, then. I’m a high school teacher. I won’t lump them all together like that. I know there are quite a few who would be very upset about it. But there are also quite a few who would most definitely take it to that level.
Well, I know this film has a broad cast, but I would have liked to know what beyond that you might have not liked instead of just listing off problems without any sort of explanation. So I’m not even sure what to say in response.
I’ll agree it has problems, but I’m not sure if I agree they’re the ones you point out. I was disappointed that it didn’t take into account the changes to horror films in the last decade and overall it felt a little too similar to Scream.
Classically structured/made movies have commented on things such as television and computer culture, so it feels weird for me to say that I think this film would have been more effective if it changed its form. It’s strange heating Gale say ‘How meta can you get’ and feel the film’s old school artificiality, since horror for the past decade have been more tactile than the Screams.
Yes, the jumpy parts were effective, but many parts of Scream 4 made me want to yell at the characters. That’s always my sign for a flawed movie.
great review…making me NOT want to watch it even more. I’ve stopped watching Scream since the 2nd scream. I quite enjoy the first one.
Trackbacks