Scream 4 (2011)

I saw Scream 4, or Scre4m as it is so coolly abbreviated, in the cinema, on the night it came out, directly after work, like an excited schoolkid. I could barely eat my popcorn or ice cream, or drink my gigantic Coke, I was that excited. Excited and unashamed, for I have been a complete Scream nerd for about ten years. I love the franchise so much that I don't even hate Scream 3, like most others do. I love them all equally, but if I had to choose, I'd say Scream 2 is my favourite. Having said that, Scream 4 (I'll call it Screa4m from now onwards for fun) totally blew my mind when I saw it months ago, and I was eager to find out whether or not it was just silly fandom clouding my mind, or whether it genuinely is a worthy addition to the franchise. So I sat down, with a big tub of "Phish Food", wrapped in blankets, my long-suffering cohort rolling his eyes from the safety of his perch far away at the computer screen ("I'm not watching this shit again!") and prepared to fully indulge myself in pure horror awesomeness.

Luckily, Scre4m was just as incredible the second time around. For those of you not in the know, the film takes place ten years after the events of the previous trilogy. Our final girl, Sidney Prescott, has turned her horrific experiences into a best-selling self-help book called Out Of Darkness, borne from her refusal to be a victim. Dewey is now the local sheriff, and is happily married to Gale, who has retired from journalism, and is struggling to write a follow-up to her popular novels about the Woodsboro murders. Sidney arrives in Woodsboro for the final stop on her book tour and who should show up only, you've guessed it, her old pal Ghostface. 

"Eh...line...?"

It's worth saying that the opening to Scre4m is pure genius. A series of fakeout beginnings occur, movies within movies, detailing the latest Stab outings (the fictional movies, within the Scream series, which were made about the Woodsboro murders). You know the drill, beautiful teens roll their eyes and complain that everything in horror is predictable nowadays, Ghostface turns up and stabs a bitch, etc, etc. However, when the film properly gets going, and the first kill is exacted upon someone Ghostface refers to as "the blonde with the big tits", this is when the fun really begins. The tone changes abruptly as the chick is murdered, quite viciously I might add, but not before there's a bit of desperate crawling towards safety, only for her to be pulled back, feet first, by the killer, just to sweeten the deal. It's strange to see such things in a Scream film, as in previous outings, the gore has been kept to a minimum and the kills are usually quite quick. The opening of the fourth movie establishes that, as the poster states, there are new rules for the new decade. However, there are homages to the original movie scattered all about the place. 


For example, the first kill involves a garage door, which is an homage to Rose Mc Gowan's death in Scream, there's a new Randy in the form of Robbie, who streams his high school experience constantly via a webcam attached to his head, the creepy boyfriend is back in the guise of hearthrob and creepy-eyes Trevor and, of course, Sidney's cousin, Jill (played at a slightly too frenetic pace by Emma Roberts) usurps her role for the proceedings. The new batch of kids are pretty, witty, horror movie obsessed and much more aware than those of ten years ago. Their knowledge of horror movies should aid their survival but, in the end, Ghostface is still too smart for them (does that mean he's one of them...ooooh...).

Does he just hang out with them then, or..?

It's worth noting that the new set of teens ripe for the slaughter take to their roles with gusto. Rory Culkin and Erik Knudsen are especially great as the two horror nerds who run the school's cinema club and organise the annual "Stabathon" (I would give anything to attend it if it was real) on the anniversary of the murders. They're nerdy, witty and full of energy, shooting out their lines at warp speed. Everything drips with sarcasm and barely-disguised contempt for those who question their ideals. Hayden Panettiere, who usually annoys the hell out of me and, let's face it, looks about 30 compared to everybody else thanks to her soccer mom hairdo, is hilarious as razor-tongued Kirby, the dream girl of Culkin's Charlie and the ultimate horror nerd/popular girl hybrid. In fact, Kirby is so beloved of the Scream superfans that there is a group on the IMDB forums entitled K.I.N.D, i.e. Kirby Is Not Dead, specifically dedicated to the cause of Kirby being alive and well. As mentioned previously, Emma Roberts is a perfectly fine actress, but she does go slightly over the top with her role (especially towards the end, but more about that later). For the most part, though, she gets it very well. These teens aren't too scream-y either, which was a welcome surprise for someone who's sat through more than her fair share of ear-splitting girlish shrieks with no purpose.

Of course, having said all of that, none of them can really hold a candle to the original three. Neve Campbell and Courtney Cox look fantastic for their age, and they take to their old roles with ease. Cox's Gale Weathers is just as acid-tongued and bad-ass as she was in the original, while Neve Campbell manages to be both fragile and strong at the same time - at one point leaping on Ghostface to stop him escaping. David Arquette is fantastically hammy as Sheriff Dewey, and the fact his real-life marital problems with Cox are reflected in the story of him and Gale make their performances all the more believable. However, what's different this time around is that the fate of the three central characters really does feel like it's in jeopardy for most of the film. It made it genuinely tense the first time around, and just as much so during my second viewing. 

 Those aren't the clothes she died in...

The essence of the Scream franchise is all about fun, silly scares, a reasonable amount of gore, witty dialogue and a villain who is equal parts scary and ridiculous (his cape is really long, how does he not trip more!?). Scre4m updates the formula a bit, along with the gore, and to great effect. One scene in particular, apparently the bloodiest in Scream history, is particularly gruesome, but also strangely poignant to watch, and it is perfectly pitched. The gore is not overdone, but it is enough to make one wince and want it to be over soon. 


There are scares in Scre4m, besides the very-popular and highly-effective cat scares, of which there are plenty, and they are effective overall. I felt a genuine sense of dread throughout, even on my second viewing, the kind which only comes with truly great horror. Certain scenes, such as one in an abandoned carpark, involving Sidney's publicist, are so atmospheric and well-judged, while another sees somebody being stabbed through a postbox, which is both ridiculous and horrible. Therefore, the kills are inventive, bloody and not drawn out, which matches the quick, witty dialogue, and the plodding, atmospheric score. 

 Relax, nerds, they're just faking you out

Although Scre4m references several horror films, including Saw, Halloween and Final Destination, it is at its' most clever when referencing itself. The "Stabathon", in particular, is hilariously meta, especially when a game is mentioned which involves drinking when; somebody can't get a cellphone signal, someone closes the fridge door and there's an innocent character standing behind it, and when somebody screams "Nooooooooo!!!!!!". Really, it does sound like an awful lot of fun. The essence of Scream, and its rather important legacy to modern horror, is quite often most evident in the dialogue of the characters - for example, when they refer to the expected becoming the unexpected, what it means to do a "screamake", and how savvy modern audiences are to everything. These are characters who are self-aware, who know what they're dealing with, and yet, who are ultimately still doomed. It's a scary thought, especially for those of us who pride ourselves on being horror buffs. It's also important to note that nothing about Scre4m is by the book, but at the same time, everything is. It's an interesting setup for a horror film, and one which only really works in the Scream universe (I Know What You Did Last Summer came out the same year as the first film, and didn't do nearly as well).

Elsewhere, the killers (there are always two) reveals are clever and fairly cool. I kind of knew who it would be, or at least who I wanted it to be, the entire time, and when it was revealed I just wanted to cheer. Emma Roberts is a tad shrill in her delivery and explantion, leading to a rather strange monologue, but the reasoning behind her actions is still quite believable. She states matter-of-factly, that "All you need to do to be famous is have fucked-up shit happen to you" and "I don't need friends, I need fans", it's really quite genius. The oversaturated media angle is present throughout the film and is really quite clever indeed, and believable. Of course, all the murders have been taped and uploaded to the internet. Of course that's the best way to get famous, in a world where people do so just by going on Facebook. Elsewhere in the final act, Sidney getting stabbed is a big deal, a huge risk for Wes Craven to take, but a part of me knew she wouldn't be killed. Come to think of it, Gale gets stabbed too...this was quite a risky addition to the franchise overall! 

 This was just a promo shot but man is it effective!

Now, this is the tricky part. As those of us who are obsessed with this franchise are well aware, Craven had two endings for Scre4m. The first ended the film with Jill getting famous, getting away with the murders, and being wheeled into hospital in a blaze of glory. It was a fantastically ballsy ending - one which was sure to split Scream fans in two. However, the ending he decided to go with had a massive fight after that happens, in the process of which Jill is disposed of after trying unsuccessfully to kill Sidney ("Who are you, Michael fucking Myers!?" she screams at one point.)  

The ending didn't bother me too much, although I thought the original one was much braver and more interesting. However, there are two more sequels to come (this is the beginning of a new trilogy) and I wouldn't have liked wasting Scream 5 knowing Jill got away with it and that she may strike again and blah blah blah. So I suppose, all things considered, it's a blessing in disguise. And it doesn't take away from what has undoubtedly been my favourite horror movie of 2011, so far. A welcome return to form for Craven, a fantastic edition to the franchise, a great horror film in its' own right and the beginning to what will hopefully be an incredible new trilogy. As long as, as Sidney states, they don't fuck with the original.