261 Days of Horror, Day 73: Scream 2
Apr. 4th, 2007 09:50 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
yendiScream 2. 1997. Directed by Wes Craven. Written by Kevin Williamson. Released by Dimension.
Scream 2 took a lot of heat when it first came out from folks who were disappointed that it didn't break the same "new" ground that its predecessor had. Which is a shame, since Scream 2 is every bit as postmodern as the first movie, but in different ways. Which isn't to say it's as good as its predecessor; in fact, it's an undeniably flawed film, but one that's usually clever enough to justify the moments of self-indulgence on the parts of the parts of Wes Craven and Kevin Williamson.
In fact, the entire film seems to alternate between moments that are ingenious and moments that are dubious, at best. Let's take a look:
Good: The movie opens at a screening of "Stab," the fictional film based on the events of the first Scream movie. A nice (and logical) movement out of the first film.
Bad: At that screening, the very first killing occurs, and it's chock full of stupid. The future Dr. Eric Foreman gets killed in the movie theatre bathroom when he falls for the old, "hear a guy whimpering in a stall just to get the victim to go into the next stall and try to listen" trap. The knife he takes through the ear as a result is impressive, but still ridiculously set up.
Good: The next kill, of Jada Pinkett Smith, is one of the best in the series. The killer does a wonderful Purloined Letter trick, wearing the Ghostface Killer costume at the screening, where there are dozens of others dressed the same way. Jada assumes that her man is the guy sitting next to her in the Ghostface costume, until he starts stabbing her in front of everyone. Even as she screams* and attempts to run, he continues to stab her, and the rowdy audience assumes it's all an act until it's much too late.
Bad: Gale Weathers and Dewey are back to square one, with no sign of the growth her character experienced in the last movie.
Good: Sidney's use of caller ID on one of the morons calling her and pretending to be a killer.
Bad: Bandying around Cotton Weary as a suspect for the entire film.
Good: Sarah Michelle Gellar as a victim. Her entire death sequence in the sorority house was brilliantly choreographed, and she did a great job in a small role.
Bad: The list of good sequels that Randy and company come up with. We've discussed good sequels ad nauseum here, but the point is, there are many more better-than-the-original sequels than just Godfather Part 2.
Good: The murder of Randy Meeks. Yes, I know that lots of folks hate this scene with a screaming passion. Not me. Aside from the fact that it references Slumber Party Massacre, there's also the sheer shock value involved. Randy is the "everygeek" character, the one with the knowledge of horror tropes and methods. Killing him shows that A) even that knowledge isn't enough, B) being in public isn't enough, and C) anyone can die at any time. And yes, he was my favorite character, too. But that's what makes his death so damned effective.
Bad: The fact that Dewey gets stabbed in the back, is presumed dead, and is discovered to have survived at the finale. I love the character too, but it's an annoying running gag.
Good: The way Dewey "dies" in the first place, getting stabbed in a soundproof room as poor Gale looks on in horror, unable to warn him or do anything to help him. Nicely played.
Bad: Oh, who am I kidding. I've pretty much run out of bad, here.
But there's still plenty of good:
• The killing of Sidney's roommate Hallie. It's one of the few quick, clean kills in the entire movie, made all the better by the narrow escape Hallie's just had climbing over the killer after the car accident. As Sid, Hallie, and the camera look back at the wreck and see that Ghostface is gone, there's a pause as everyone realizes exactly what's going to happen, and then we get the kill.
• The reveal. Unlike the sucktastic Scream 3's reveal, the idea that Billy's mom is out there, and that she's seeking revenge, is plausible without trampling on the previous movie. And finding an accomplice on an internet chat room is priceless (and back in 1997, didn't have quite the same sad air of reality that it does nowadays). One rumored alternate script had Hallie as a third killer, but much as I can appreciate the escalation principle, I think that two was as many killers as this movie could handle.
• The wonderful moment in which Sidney shoots Debbie.
• The use of victims with the same names as the original victims, as a way to both taunt and decoy Sidney and company.
• The actual postmodern stuff. Scream 2 is one long look at how the media handles sensationalism and makes idols out of killers. Unlike Natural Born Killers (which I also enjoy), it's a film focused on plot and character first and foremost, with the subtext woven much more tightly into the story itself. Throw in the running gags featuring "Stab," and you've got a ton of nifty stuff to keep an eye out for on repeated viewings.
• The cast. Aside from the returning vets and the folks I've mentioned above, we get Laurie Metcalf, Jerry O'Connell, Timothy Olyphant, Rebecca Gayheart, and Portia de Rossi. All of them are fine, and Duane Martin joins them and adds some nice comic relief.
In the end, Scream 2 is a much more straightforward slasher flick than its predecessor, but it's still a very stylish one, and one that still features some great dialogue and well-directed murder scenes. There are a few moments that are too self-indulgent, but the combination of a solid story, good (and graphic) kills, and the examination of the media reaction to killers all come together to make a damned fine picture.
*Hey, it's not like the series is called "Whimper."
Scream 2 took a lot of heat when it first came out from folks who were disappointed that it didn't break the same "new" ground that its predecessor had. Which is a shame, since Scream 2 is every bit as postmodern as the first movie, but in different ways. Which isn't to say it's as good as its predecessor; in fact, it's an undeniably flawed film, but one that's usually clever enough to justify the moments of self-indulgence on the parts of the parts of Wes Craven and Kevin Williamson.
In fact, the entire film seems to alternate between moments that are ingenious and moments that are dubious, at best. Let's take a look:
Good: The movie opens at a screening of "Stab," the fictional film based on the events of the first Scream movie. A nice (and logical) movement out of the first film.
Bad: At that screening, the very first killing occurs, and it's chock full of stupid. The future Dr. Eric Foreman gets killed in the movie theatre bathroom when he falls for the old, "hear a guy whimpering in a stall just to get the victim to go into the next stall and try to listen" trap. The knife he takes through the ear as a result is impressive, but still ridiculously set up.
Good: The next kill, of Jada Pinkett Smith, is one of the best in the series. The killer does a wonderful Purloined Letter trick, wearing the Ghostface Killer costume at the screening, where there are dozens of others dressed the same way. Jada assumes that her man is the guy sitting next to her in the Ghostface costume, until he starts stabbing her in front of everyone. Even as she screams* and attempts to run, he continues to stab her, and the rowdy audience assumes it's all an act until it's much too late.
Bad: Gale Weathers and Dewey are back to square one, with no sign of the growth her character experienced in the last movie.
Good: Sidney's use of caller ID on one of the morons calling her and pretending to be a killer.
Bad: Bandying around Cotton Weary as a suspect for the entire film.
Good: Sarah Michelle Gellar as a victim. Her entire death sequence in the sorority house was brilliantly choreographed, and she did a great job in a small role.
Bad: The list of good sequels that Randy and company come up with. We've discussed good sequels ad nauseum here, but the point is, there are many more better-than-the-original sequels than just Godfather Part 2.
Good: The murder of Randy Meeks. Yes, I know that lots of folks hate this scene with a screaming passion. Not me. Aside from the fact that it references Slumber Party Massacre, there's also the sheer shock value involved. Randy is the "everygeek" character, the one with the knowledge of horror tropes and methods. Killing him shows that A) even that knowledge isn't enough, B) being in public isn't enough, and C) anyone can die at any time. And yes, he was my favorite character, too. But that's what makes his death so damned effective.
Bad: The fact that Dewey gets stabbed in the back, is presumed dead, and is discovered to have survived at the finale. I love the character too, but it's an annoying running gag.
Good: The way Dewey "dies" in the first place, getting stabbed in a soundproof room as poor Gale looks on in horror, unable to warn him or do anything to help him. Nicely played.
Bad: Oh, who am I kidding. I've pretty much run out of bad, here.
But there's still plenty of good:
• The killing of Sidney's roommate Hallie. It's one of the few quick, clean kills in the entire movie, made all the better by the narrow escape Hallie's just had climbing over the killer after the car accident. As Sid, Hallie, and the camera look back at the wreck and see that Ghostface is gone, there's a pause as everyone realizes exactly what's going to happen, and then we get the kill.
• The reveal. Unlike the sucktastic Scream 3's reveal, the idea that Billy's mom is out there, and that she's seeking revenge, is plausible without trampling on the previous movie. And finding an accomplice on an internet chat room is priceless (and back in 1997, didn't have quite the same sad air of reality that it does nowadays). One rumored alternate script had Hallie as a third killer, but much as I can appreciate the escalation principle, I think that two was as many killers as this movie could handle.
• The wonderful moment in which Sidney shoots Debbie.
• The use of victims with the same names as the original victims, as a way to both taunt and decoy Sidney and company.
• The actual postmodern stuff. Scream 2 is one long look at how the media handles sensationalism and makes idols out of killers. Unlike Natural Born Killers (which I also enjoy), it's a film focused on plot and character first and foremost, with the subtext woven much more tightly into the story itself. Throw in the running gags featuring "Stab," and you've got a ton of nifty stuff to keep an eye out for on repeated viewings.
• The cast. Aside from the returning vets and the folks I've mentioned above, we get Laurie Metcalf, Jerry O'Connell, Timothy Olyphant, Rebecca Gayheart, and Portia de Rossi. All of them are fine, and Duane Martin joins them and adds some nice comic relief.
In the end, Scream 2 is a much more straightforward slasher flick than its predecessor, but it's still a very stylish one, and one that still features some great dialogue and well-directed murder scenes. There are a few moments that are too self-indulgent, but the combination of a solid story, good (and graphic) kills, and the examination of the media reaction to killers all come together to make a damned fine picture.
*Hey, it's not like the series is called "Whimper."
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2007-04-05 02:10 am (UTC)Are you consciously or unconsciously quoting Joe Bob Briggs? Either way, I'm smilin'.
And is that Rose McGowan in that one shot in the theatre, right before Jada falls down dead? (I once interviewed a young woman working as an extra in Hollywood who got to be in that theatre, dressed as one of the "Ghostfaces" and chasing a particular girl over and over for the different takes. I should've asked her if McGowan was there.)
(no subject)
Date: 2007-04-05 02:21 am (UTC)That's the most aggravating scene in the entire movie for me. When the killer is down, you don't run--you FINISH HIM. He's unconscious, maybe dead, in the front seat of the police car. You don't climb over him in terror that at any moment he's going to revive and brutally murder you. You take his head off with his own knife, conveniently lying there next to him. People make this blunder all the time in horror movies and it drives me crazy.
If you're worried about legalties, if he's already dead, the worst they've got you for is desecrating a corpse. If you actually kill him, the seemingly supernatural ability of this guy to take a licking and keeping murdering would give juror all the info I needed to find a necessity defense.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-04-05 02:23 am (UTC)Here are my thoughts on the film, from shortly after it came out. (http://www.sff.net/people/krad/scream2.htm)
(no subject)
Date: 2007-04-05 02:44 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-04-05 03:15 am (UTC)The death of Randy was one of the few times a jump scare REALLY got me. He's backing up towards the van, screaming out invectives about the two original killers, as Sidney and Gale are searching the campus.
Then WHAM.
Fucking awesome.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-04-05 03:18 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-04-05 03:25 am (UTC)These are normal people. To actually take the step and kill someone is probably not something they are able to do. In the blur of action, yes, when the killer is up and about and slashing.
But lying there, unconcious, helpless? There aren't many people who can bring themselves to slitting the throat of a sleeping person, no matter their crimes.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-04-05 05:07 am (UTC)This guy has all the earmarks of a classic horror movie killer, pretty much by definition. Just because he seems helpless is no reason to assume he really is. I--as the hypothetical Hallie--know that. It's like staking a vampire; it might seem excessive, and yeah, he may look helpless when he's lying in his coffin asleep*, but it's the only way to be sure he never threatens my life again.
I'm a normal person, and I like to think that if that's what's necessary to stop a Psycho Slasher, I'd do it. I realize that, legally speaking, it's excessive force. But in this instance, given who/what I'm dealing with, I'd rather take my chances with a jury than with a known lunatic who seems to be nigh impossible to stop. I've got the chance, and I'm gonna take it.
*He may even be helpless at that moment. But he's not helpless, I'm helpless against him.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-04-05 12:47 pm (UTC)And I agree wholeheartedly with your review (now that I can read it; sff.net was down last night). Your point about Dewey's injuries from the previous movie is especially well-taken.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-04-05 01:07 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-04-05 01:07 pm (UTC)And I was unconsciously channellings Joe Bob. :-)
(no subject)
Date: 2007-04-05 01:10 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-04-05 04:24 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-04-05 04:44 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-04-05 07:08 pm (UTC)Fear is a powerful force of dumb things.
It's pretty easy to be an armchair quaterback, especially about horror movies. But until you are in a situation where a masked psycho is killing your friends, you don't knwo what you'd do.
And, even if *you* would do it, not everyone could bring up the presence of mind to do something like that when they are TERRIFIED OUT OF THEIR MINDS.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-04-05 07:42 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-04-05 07:49 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-04-05 07:57 pm (UTC)A woman was sent for a "people on the street" review of the Sixth Sense when it came out, by a local radio station.
She splurted out the ending during the interview.