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 

Let's Scare Julie (2020)

Okay, you're best not to go into Let's Scare Julie looking forward to something presented in what is supposed to look like one long take. It doesn't manage to keep that up, which wouldn't be so bad if the edits didn't feel so unnecessary, as if someone had just forgotten it was supposed to be a gimmick used to sell the movie. You're also best not to go into Let's Scare Julie if you're looking forward to a superior horror movie. It is not. I have seen some people praise this, and it is one of those instances when I start to worry that I have somehow seen some completely different movie from them.

The plot involves a group of girls having a sleepover, kind of. They seem to be fairly typical teenagers, in the way they don't care too much about the repercussions of teasing one another and plotting against others outwith their group. That leads to them heading across the road, to play a prank on a reclusive young woman named Julie. Emma (Troy Leigh-Anne Johnson) stays behind though, looking after her little sister, Lilly (Dakota Baccelli). The prank doesn't go according to plan, which puts everyone in danger. Including Emma and Lilly.

There's a point near the start of Let's Scare Julie when you may get your hopes up that it has something interesting to say. Something that makes the grating performances and faux-gimmickry worthwhile. The girls are teasing Emma, and the dynamic seems to fluctuate between jokey camaraderie and a real streak of meanness. The prank at the heart of the movie is something that provides potential relief for Emma, a standard case of one victim having a breather while tormenters move on another victim. But these are Emma's friends, so the way they have been teasing her cannot be that bad. Can it?

Never mind though, the film doesn't stray too far down that path. Instead, writer-director Jud Cremata simply presents a horror film with too few scares, too little to care about, and too many moments that underline just how carelessly everything is thrown together. The most obvious example is the way in which the girls are jumping about and giggling one moment, telling each other they need to be very quiet as they sneak around the house the next, and then shrieking and making more noise later. It's incredibly insulting to viewers, and cannot be dismissed by shrugging and saying "black magic".

I don't want to be too rude to the young cast, which is why I am not naming more of the characters, or the actresses playing them (as this is almost an all-female cast), but it's worth mentioning that both Johnson and Baccelli are easily the best performers onscreen. Baccelli is also the youngest, so that may give you an idea of how I rated the others.

I struggle to think what Cremata was actually aiming for here. If he wanted to give viewers one of the more painful horror movies in recent years (not counting the million movies with the name Amityville or Krampus shoehorned into the title) then he succeeded. If the aim was something a bit different, and still scary, then he failed. Miserably. I could go on and on about every single thing that caused me annoyance, but that would end up being the kind of hyperbolic review I try to avoid. I just hope that some people trust me when I advise that this is absolutely not worth your time, unless you have to choose between this and some dross called The Amityville Krampus.

2/10

https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews