Scream 4

Eleven years is a long time between sequels, especially when the franchise squeezed an entire trilogy into just five years, but this gap between the third instalment and the (maybe) franchise capper Scream 4 has given director Wes Craven and returning screenwriter Kevin Williamson enough time to survey the horror landscape and come up with some fresh observations. Well, sort of. After adopting slasher flick rules and a similar identity to provide commentary on the genre, sequels, and trilogies, Craven and Williamson have now focused their lens on the ubiquitous trend of horror remakes/reboots.

It's a subject that Craven knows first-hand (several of Craven's slasher classics of the 70s and 80s have been remade in the past few years) and it's a logical next step for the Scream franchise. But in eleven years, the concept hasn't grown at all and this latest movie remains simultaneously enjoyable and safely silly, much like its predecessors. There's fun to be had, but the marriage of scares and laughs is rocky at best, with the frights feeling softened and the jokes falling flat. The Scream franchise has always been the light beer equivalent of the slasher genre, which keeps things accessible, but means that it sometimes lacks flavour.

This instalment does get off to a wonderful start with a series of homages to the original movie's famous opening scene. Playing with the movie-within-a-movie franchise titled Stab (they're now up to Stab 7, which means a lot actually has happened in the past eleven years of this fictional world), Craven and Williamson set the stage for some extreme self-reflexivity. The big, bold beginning is a grand way to pull us back into the Scream experience and it's a shame that the movie never quite returns to these heights again.

Once the real title finally hits the screen, the narrative settles into place with series star Sidney (Neve Campbell, who's been almost as absent from the screen as her character) returning to her hometown of Woodsboro, where the mark left by the original movie's massacre is still visible. Sidney soon bumps into (formerly deputy, now sheriff) Dewey (a bumbling David Arquette) and his wife, the retired reporter (but still tough-as-nails) Gale (a steely Courtney Cox). This trio of series survivors is joined by a cast of next generation potential victims that include Sidney's cousin Jill (Emma Roberts), horror buff Kirby (Hayden Panettiere), and dedicated movie geeks Charlie (Rory Culkin) and Robbie (Erik Knudsen).

That list barely begins to cover the entire cast, so Scream 4 is never in any danger of running out of stabbees. And with several movie-loving characters this time around, there's plenty of opportunity to toss some playful horror trivia the audience's way or to reference a pile of horror classics. Some of the references are slightly subtle (a bloody upper body being smashed through a window is reminiscent of Dario Argento flicks without drawing any more obvious parallels at that particular point), but most of them are blatant and simple. The majority of references involve characters simply stating titles (a handful of which are indeed Craven's own movies).

Part of the movie's purpose is to illuminate how creatively bankrupt the genre has become in the midst of a remake/reboot frenzy, so the sheer simplicity of the references is understandable to a degree. But Scream 4 runs into problems when it appears to be no more creative a reboot than the multiple movies it wishes to lambaste. There's a lot of talk about a remake or reboot having to best the original and so there is a promise of more elaborate and vicious kills, but none of this really makes its way into Scream 4's winking frame. Other than the beginning and, to a certain degree, the ending, the movie feels like the same old Scream flick, still unable to strike a truly daring balance between horror and comedy.

So the movie stumbles when it wants to deliver its point with razor-sharp clarity, but in the grand scheme of contemporary horror cinema, even another rehashed Scream sequel is still worth something. And when the movie hits its highest notes, it manages to briefly carve out a rather exciting identity for itself. These highs are short-lived, of course, but Craven knows his way around the horror genre like few others and Scream 4 benefits from the steady hand of a master. He's not at the top of his game anymore (the Craven who gave us the original A Nightmare on Elm Street and The Hills Have Eyes is likely long gone), but that doesn't prevent him from staging a handful of fun slasher sequences while keeping the overall pace under control.

Skewering current genre trends (the Saw franchise's “torture porn” approach is given a playful jab) is a wise way to recapture relevancy for this previously dormant franchise, but it also reminds and reveals how harmless the Scream movies tend to be. Horror and comedy can be melded into one truly funny and frightening combo package (The Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2 is a prime example), but Scream 4 cuts a path through the two genres that is so wide it fails to fully encompass either side. The attempt is still admirable and the movie's beginning remains a blast, but this return to Woodsboro is never as intense or hilarious as it wishes to be. Still fun to watch, Scream 4 becomes a victim of its own intentions. It is so eager to criticize reboots that it ends up blandly becoming one. And so the message is made clear, even if it's obvious and recycled. Remakes and reboots really are unnecessary and sort of silly. This one is no exception.