Scream 7 (2026)

I know that I may be in the minority, but I need to remind people that I liked Scream VI. I liked it a lot. It gave me hope for whatever might come along next in the series. And then everything started to go wrong, starting with the poor treatment of Melissa Barrera, which would lead to at least one other main cast member leaving in solidarity. There was also some horrible AI campaign used in the marketing, as well as allowing the brand to be platformed on a major gambling site. I started to lose any enthusiasm I may have had for this. I still had to see it though.

Neve Campbell is back as Sidney, married to a cop named Mark Evans (Joel McHale) and with one teenage daughter (Tatum, played by Isabel May) who resents her over-protective nature. She may not resent it when trying to stay alive though, especially when there seems to be a new Ghostface in town. Someone who claims to be Stu Macher. Gale Weathers (Courteney Cox) arrives just in time to help unmask the killer, or killers, and she now has siblings Mindy Meeks-Martin (Jasmin Savoy Brown) and Chad Meeks-Martin (Mason Gooding) working for her.

The second feature to be directed by writer Kevin Williamson, who also co-wrote the screenplay with Guy Busick, everything here shows why Williamson should perhaps just stick to the writing side of things. Having said that, it also shows that Williamson is nowhere near the sharp and savvy writer he once was, having ensnared himself in a sticky trap of the kind of ridiculous rules and contrivances that he used to be able to freshen up and repurpose to great effect. 

It's sadly ironic that a horror movie franchise that so often played around with the rules and conventions of the genre is now so formulaic. There are things that happen here that any Scream fan will see coming miles away, from the technology used (which everyone knew would explain a number of returning characters) to the third act reveal. And it's an odd choice to now give two characters the "cloak of Dewey invincibility", but here we are.

As stale and lethargic as things have gotten behind the camera, they're equally stale and lethargic in front of it. Campbell looks as if she cannot be bothered going through all of the usual plot beats, Cox is so far removed from the character that she once was (albeit with good reason) that she may as well go the whole hog and just start up the Gale & Sidney Stabby Podcast, and newcomer-to-the-series May doesn't have any of the appeal or grit to care about once she ends up in danger. McHale is a decent addition, both Brown and Gooding continue to work well together, and Jimmy Tatro and Michelle Randolph are really enjoyable in the expected opening sequence. That's it though. Anna Camp doesn't make enough of an impression, Sam Rechner and Asa Germann are absolute non-starters, and it's only Celeste O'Connor and Mckenna Grace who feel like youngsters we may enjoy spending some time with. Then we don't get to spend much time with them. Thank goodness we get some enjoyable line deliveries from Matthew Lillard (portraying what should be referred to as Schrödinger's Stu).

As much as I disliked Scream (2022), I can now see, with hindsight, that it had a bit more going for it than I gave it credit for. The cast, whether you liked them or not, at least had some character and energy throughout. The motivation for the kills was an attempt to do something fun and interesting (whether they succeeded is a different matter entirely). And it felt as if everyone involved tried to have some fun (again, success or failure on that front is subjective). This film, opening sequence aside, doesn't have any sense of fun at all. And a Scream movie without a sense of fun is just a weak slasher that references numerous superior films.

4/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share 

Scream VI (2023)

For as much as I love most of the Scream movies, including the fun Scream 4, I was absolutely not a fan of Scream (2022) aka 5cream. That immediately became my new least favourite in the franchise (not including the first season of the TV show) and I wasn’t looking forward to this next instalment AKA Ghostface Takes Manhattan.

Thankfully, being a completist is sometimes a good thing. I am glad I watched Scream VI, and it’s already one of my favourites (with my provisional ranking just now being 1, 4, 6, 2, 3, and 5). It’s far from perfect, and I still have issues with the core cast, but the set-pieces and the general vibe of the film, which feels a bit more relaxed and less reflexive and defensive than the last outing, works really well.

The premise is simple. A bunch of people who survived the last film are now in New York. Ghostface is also in New York. People are going to start being stabbed. That’s it. Red herrings abound (or do they?) as our leads try to pinpoint who is doing the murdering, and maybe figure out a way to stop them.

Although there’s one notable omission from the cast (no Neve Campbell this time around), everyone returns to their main role behind the camera. Matt Bettinelli-Olpin and Tyler Gillett co-direct, and the script is from both James Vanderbilt and Guy Busick. While that may not seem like a good thing to anyone who disliked the last movie, and I realise I am very much in the minority with my dislike of that film, it’s good to see how much better everyone does while feeling less beholden to everything that came along beforehand. This generally seems more free to properly subvert expectations and play around with the rules viewers think they are so familiar with, as evidenced in an opening sequence that is the best opener since the classic start of the first movie.

It is easier to enjoy the cast a bit more too, having accompanied a number of them through the events of the last movie, but this is the biggest problem that the film has. The supporting players are the most enjoyable (Hayden Pannetiere makes a welcome return, Dermot Mulroney is decent, and Courteney Cox has a confrontation worthy of her character’s status), and both Mason Gooding and Jasmin Savoy Brown are fine, not to mention one or two others caught up in the midst of the killing spree by virtue of being friends with the targeted group, but Jenna Ortega is left with less to do than she deserves, and Melissa Barrera continues to just not be a very appealing nominal lead. Sorry, there’s no way around the fact that she’s dead weight at the heart of this rebooted phase of the franchise.

The other problem with the film is a sad lack of commitment to actually, well, killing off characters. So many people are savagely attacked here that you will be forgiven for rolling your eyes during the third act when you see how many actually make it to the end credits. There are fantastic sequences, but some of them feel ultimately inconsequential. I still hold out hope for the next film through. Considering how big a step up in quality this one was, I can only hope that everyone involved finds the bravery to start gorily whittling down the core cast next time around. And if that is caused by another “legacy” character, all the better, because these film-makers certainly seem to have taken note of fan theories and internet gossip.

There are at least four great sequences that help to make this a memorable Scream film, and the fact that I didn’t feel the rest of the film pale into comparison after such a strong start is about as good a compliment as I can give it. It’s an unexpected return to form, as playful and violent as you could hope, with the extra fun of watching the parallel strands between this new trilogy and the original three movies come into sharp focus in a way that provides one more layer to a film series known for being so self-aware and self-referential.

I cannot wait to rewatch this. And, AND, I may even finally work up some enthusiasm to rewatch the last film. Maybe I will like it a little bit more. Maybe.

8/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5q_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews

Scream (2022)

Is anyone else getting as tired as I am of the formulaic way so many franchises have been "reinvigorated" over the past few years? Find some way to ensure the film connects to the original. Have at least one character from the first movie to help push those nostalgia/familiarity buttons. Make up for any weak plotting and poor scripting with some extra FX work. Oh, and have one big surprise, or death, that doesn't really feel all that surprising. Horror movies get a bonus for allowing a central character from the original to face their fear while showing how the trauma of being stalked by a crazed killer has affected their life. From the Star Wars movies to the Halloween movies, and now Scream, this is the way it works. I WAS looking forward to the next instalment in the wildly uneven The Texas Chainsaw Massacre franchise, but now I am not so optimistic. 

Scream starts, funnily enough, with a phone ringing. A young girl, Tara (Jenna Ortega), is attacked in her home. That attack brings her sister, Sam (Melissa Barrera), back home to Woodsboro. Sam is with her boyfriend, Richie (Jack Quaid), and she introduces him to a group of sort-of-friends that includes Amber (Mikey Madison), Wes (Dylan Minnette), twins Mindy Meeks-Martin (Jasmin Savoy Brown) and Chad Meeks-Martin (Mason Gooding), and Liv (Sonia Ammar). Everyone wants to survive the latest potential ghostface killings, but everyone is also a suspect. That's why Sam gets in touch with Dewey Riley (David Arquette), who subsequently warns Sidney Prescott (Neve Campbell) and Gale Weathers (Courteney Cox) to stay far away. 

The first film in the Scream movie series to be directed by anyone other than Wes Craven, and the second script not written by Kevin Williamson, this is a film that very much highlights the lack of both of these talents behind the camera. Not that directors Matt Bettinelli-Olpin and Tyler Gillett are bad. I've enjoyed most of their work before this, to varying degrees, and they stay firmly in control of the mechanics of the film, as it were, with the actual visuals and editing here being the least of the problems with the film. The overall feel of the film still lacks something though, that confidence and playfulness that Craven could wind through all of his better works. That is never more apparent than in a sequence that should be playful and fun, with the frame being blocked in ways that leads viewers to expect a jump scare at any moment, but instead ends up irritating and tiresome as it plays the same trick in a couple of different ways.

Never mind the directors though, especially when the writers, James Vanderbilt and Guy Busick, have to shoulder almost all of the blame for how bad this is. It's probably easier for me to list my criticisms of the script here in a series of bullet points.

* A distinct lack of tension. In attempting to feel fun and unpredictable, the writers made this arguably the most predictable, and therefore boring, entry in the series. So far.

* A killer so obvious that I really hoped my gut feeling was wrong. It wasn't. I saw the end of this thing coming a mile away. That's down to sloppy writing, whether it's to do with just dismissing characters until they start to become more prominent when you know the final reveal is due or interactions between characters that feel like they're pointing a neon-lit arrow at someone.

* The meta commentary here is awful, and I mean AWFUL. This is, in certain ways, very similar to The Matrix Resurrections, but that film showed how you could do super-smart commentary on events that also discuss the very film you are watching without feeling like a lecture delivered by idiots misunderstanding the appeal of their own source material.

* As subjective as it is, a lot of the humour doesn't work. I would also argue that a lot of the new characters don't work, but I'd say it's about a 50/50 with who I liked and who I didn't (although not liking the new lead is a big stumbling block).

* There's one character depicted in "visions" here, and it's a very bad move. It's usually best to leave that trope to Stephen King, who has used it so often that it's part of his comforting appeal when I read his stories.

* Putting even more emphasis on the Stab films, but without the wit or fun cameos that have been there in previous excerpts from the film-within-the-film series.

* As difficult as it is to confirm the feeling in my gut, the characters generally feel dumber in this film. Being so easily separated, being fooled by tech that should surely be avoided, and turning up somewhere after being specifically warned to stay away. These things have always happened in the Scream movies, and many other horror movies, but characters used to end up reluctantly "breaking the rules" as dangerous situations forced them to make difficult decisions in the heat of the moment.

Do the writers get anything right, in between silly moments like showcasing the "Randy Meeks Memorial Home Theater"? Yes. It's a shame that they can only deal with the characters of Sidney Prescott and Gale Weathers by merging them into some kind of symbiotic Laurie Strode-alike, but they do a lot better by Dewey Riley, giving Arquette some of the best scenes that he's had in the series. I also liked Quaid's character, the easy interplay between Brown and Gooding, and the fact that we had a bit more time with Sheriff Judy Hicks (played by Marley Shelton, reprising her character that I enjoyed in Scream 4).

Arquette is the heart of the film, which leads to the presence of Campbell and Cox feeling much more forced (despite it being obvious that they need to come into the picture at some point). Barrera and Ortega are disappointing, considering that viewers spend so much time with them. The former has to handle some of the more ludicrous moments, not really her fault, and the latter just doesn't feel like an important part of the cast once that opening sequence has finished. Quaid has enough charm and likability to make the most of his role, and I've just mentioned the enjoyability of Brown and Gooding in the last paragraph. Madison, Ammar and Minnette are there to make up the numbers, and there are a couple of enjoyable cameos to watch out for, as well as one awful one.

I won't deny that I enjoyed sitting in a cinema and hearing "Red Right Hand" accompanying some Woodsboro scenery, and there are a few bits of fairly graphic brutality that at least make Ghostface seem even more driven and vicious this time around, but I was very unhappy by the time the end credits rolled. Some have already been celebrating the fact that a sequel to this has already been greenlit. I would prefer if the series provided one last big twist, and just left an iconic killer to stay dead and buried now that the film-makers seem to have nowhere else to take the story.

4/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share