Scream 4 is a return to the series after several years away and the conclusion of a self-contained trilogy. So naturally, Scream 4 has things to say about itself.
The opening of the film, like 1 and 2, feels like a short film, but in this case, it's a slightly-mindbending struggle as the film metatextually wrestles with itself and asks the question of how to make Scream in a post-Scream world where meta humor has proliferated the genre and horror favors gore. After this opening, we get more information— Scream 4 is talking about horror reboots. And it's a damn clever approach.
The core belief of this film is that a reboot can never completely escape the original, and that the original will always loom over the new story. The film decides to express this in a genius manner by averting a new continuity. To show a reboot caught in the shadow of the past, this film is structured with a whole new younger cast of equivalent characters to the classics who are attempting to have a story in the original continuity where the original characters are still active. As 2 compared a copycat killing spree to a movie sequel, 4 compares a younger generation of people to a reboot that can't escape their predecessors' legacy. The killings are gradually unpeeled to be done in the pursuit of fame and legacy, while being ironically beholden to the older story as a structure, and Gale Weathers' subplot is literally her pushing herself into the younger cast as if reminding the audience she's still there. It's a hilarious way to explore the idea of a new story for a new audience—by refusing to reboot continuity (after all, doing so is a common nobody-pleaser) and by paying respect to the classics and the story that started it. It's also a brilliant move for preserving the story—after Scream 4, you'd be challenged to fully reboot the film series for real because the films already showed the audience how to receive a true reboot!
I also enjoyed the way the film flipped the script in several areas, with the "reboot cast" of younger people having parallels that don't always hold true to the OGs they resemble. The climax of the film felt compelling in all the ways 3's failed to, which is surprising given how the villain comes just as out-of-nowhere in the story.
Maybe Gale and Dewey had too little to do, but that serves the meta-commentary. Scream 4 protects its legacy and secures V's spot in the original continuity by showing just how badly a film reboot can go, done with the most clever script setup yet and a satisfying villain.
Great metafiction, thrilling climax.
Scream 4 is a return to the series after several years away and the conclusion of a self-contained trilogy. So naturally, Scream 4 has things to say about itself.
The opening of the film, like 1 and 2, feels like a short film, but in this case, it's a slightly-mindbending struggle as the film metatextually wrestles with itself and asks the question of how to make Scream in a post-Scream world where meta humor has proliferated the genre and horror favors gore. After this opening, we get more information— Scream 4 is talking about horror reboots. And it's a damn clever approach.
The core belief of this film is that a reboot can never completely escape the original, and that the original will always loom over the new story. The film decides to express this in a genius manner by averting a new continuity. To show a reboot caught in the shadow of the past, this film is structured with a whole new younger cast of equivalent characters to the classics who are attempting to have a story in the original continuity where the original characters are still active. As 2 compared a copycat killing spree to a movie sequel, 4 compares a younger generation of people to a reboot that can't escape their predecessors' legacy. The killings are gradually unpeeled to be done in the pursuit of fame and legacy, while being ironically beholden to the older story as a structure, and Gale Weathers' subplot is literally her pushing herself into the younger cast as if reminding the audience she's still there. It's a hilarious way to explore the idea of a new story for a new audience—by refusing to reboot continuity (after all, doing so is a common nobody-pleaser) and by paying respect to the classics and the story that started it. It's also a brilliant move for preserving the story—after Scream 4, you'd be challenged to fully reboot the film series for real because the films already showed the audience how to receive a true reboot!
I also enjoyed the way the film flipped the script in several areas, with the "reboot cast" of younger people having parallels that don't always hold true to the OGs they resemble. The climax of the film felt compelling in all the ways 3's failed to, which is surprising given how the villain comes just as out-of-nowhere in the story.
Maybe Gale and Dewey had too little to do, but that serves the meta-commentary. Scream 4 protects its legacy and secures V's spot in the original continuity by showing just how badly a film reboot can go, done with the most clever script setup yet and a satisfying villain.