It’s been a while (precisely 11 years) since we got Scream 4 (2011). I don’t know whether it was because I watched the previous movies quite close to the fourth one coming out or whether it was the “Wes factor” (Scream 4 was his last film before he passed away in 2015), but I really liked it. And since it took me a while to get around and watch this instalment (that’s just titled Scream, not Scream 5, because chaos reigns and nothing matters anymore), I heard many thoughts about this latest addition to the Scream franchise, and most were overwhelmingly positive. So you can imagine, I was excited to watch this film and then surprised when it… didn’t deliver. Yep, I seem to be the only one who finds this film “just ok”.
First and foremost, this movie overestimates how invested your average moviegoer is in this particular world. I am writing this because Scream deals with many characters; who are in some way tied to the “fan favourites”. But I couldn’t care less who was who’s kid, brother, sister, nephew, a third cousin from his dog’s side… This film reminded me, at times a pretty bad telenovela. But that telenovela angle has nothing on the meta-commentary this film was riddled with, and that (ultimately) was its downfall for me.
What’s that, you say? The Scream franchise was always meta, so how come I don’t like it now? Yes, you are 100% correct. The genius behind this franchise (and by the looks of this, it mainly was Wes Craven) was not in its characters; it was more in how those characters played around with the slasher genre they were in. You can say all you want about the previous Scream films, but they all balance that line between slasher and self-aware films pretty well (albeit it’s been a while since I saw them). But Scream went too deep into that. Way too deep, where every “key” scene had to have all the characters aware of the situation and what they should (or should not) be doing, and it became tedious. Yes, the one signature thing about this franchise (besides the Ghost mask) was always the meta aspect, but it was never done “to the bone”. One has to wonder whether it was due to Wes and his brilliance the previous films have always put the actual story first, rather than the meta element. This film felt like the people behind it started with the meta element, and everything else followed.
I don’t know whether I am the only one, but I am starting to get sick and tired of everything being so meta. Come to think of it, wouldn’t that be the best way to honour Wes’ legacy? Because you can tell both directors (Matt Bettinelli-Olpin and Tyler Gillett) wanted to honour Wes in this movie. And it pains to write this, but I don’t think they did a good enough job. Why? Because the reason this franchise was so popular was the meta/self-aware part of it. But that was due to the fact that in the late 90s, not many mainstream films did that. Now, your average YouTuber has to do that to stay relevant. Wes came and not only revolutionised, but he resurrected a genre that was (some pun intended) dying. And why? Because he loved and understood that genre. But due to his love and understanding, he knew audiences “back then” wouldn’t go and watch “just a slasher” because they had seen one too many. What I am trying to say is – wouldn’t it be a bold move to dial down on the meta aspect of this Scream film because of what’s happening in today’s pop culture? Wouldn’t a way better way to honour such a legend as Wes Craven was to do something unexpected, like what he would have done? I don’t have all the details, so this is just me speculating, but I don’t think we would have gotten Scream if he was still alive. And if he had decided to make it, he would have understood the culture shifted what used to be “cool” in the late 90s is no longer as cool; the film would have looked differently. Maybe. That’s the thing, of course; this is a big maybe and my speculation only.
Scream very much reminds me of someone; who is trying desperately hard to stay relevant. Imagine; if someone you know came up to you trying to talk about Pokémon Go or fidget spinners. Sure, those things still exist, but those have had their moments, my try-too-hard-to-stay-relevant-guy. Find something new. Or at least, if you won’t, focus on the story more.
Because I would understand why they wouldn’t drop the meta aspect, fine, but at least focus on the story a bit more; not everything has to be linked to the past somehow. Not only was this done before, but even I (a fan of this franchise who watched all the previous films) don’t remember every single random character who has ever appeared in this franchise. It will be interesting to see whether, on some future rewatch, where I would sit down throughout a weekend and watch all Scream films, this fifth one would play better or not. Because as it is, it was just an “ok” slasher film that only stands out because of its name, banking on that nostalgia hit.
Overall, Scream was a slight disappointment for me. I think the lack of Wes Craven was all over this film, I believe he was an integral part of why these films ever get so popular, and this sequel was… just there, not doing anything new. Well, that’s not true; it was more meta than ever, so winning…? Don’t get me wrong, this is not a bad film, not by any means. Scream is just your average slasher film that thinks it’s not because it pokes fun of itself, not reading the room (read: pop-culture), and not seeing this (being self-aware) is no longer as unique as it used to be. It’s also confusing trying to follow who is related to who, let alone the fact it’s just titled Scream. Whoever started this trend, where sequels are now named the same as the originals and classics of that genre (Scream, Halloween, Friday the 13th etc.) I… don’t like you very much, you.
That’s all for this one! Did you see it? What did you think about it? Let me know!
Until next time,
Luke
Comments on “Scream (2022) Review – A Meta Movie That Does Not Work”