alex-zeppelin
It's overall a decent movie throughout, but the stupid killer Jill ends up being portrayed as a goddamn hero because she set up a bunch of murders she committed to look like she was a victim too. And even by the end of the movie she's sfill viewed as a hero. The last 5 minutes of this flick ruined the entire thing for me. Stick to good horror.
lorcan-61881
In Scream 3,Ghostface yet striked in Hollywood..it was good..yeah,it was'int bad but it was OK. Scream 4 then came about 11 years later with all our original cast members back and Rodger Jackson back as Ghostface. Scream 4 takes place years after Scream 3 and follows Sidney who returns home to Woodsboro from Hollywood for a book signing and soon enough..Ghostface comes back!! AHH! Scream 4 is a dream,when you think about scream 3 and the next one,your like,oh no! Why did'int they stop at 2,but I think Wes Craven learned from his 'crazy' mistakes and made this masterpiece. Scream 4 is good because it has all the craziness from one and two back in to the story and Sidney,Gale and Dewey and some geeky teens,not some fictional greedy celebrity's cause lets face it,all the new characters in scream 3,were a**holes. Scream 4 is an awesome film that I recommend. Oh well! That's the Scream series gone and I AM NOT watching that god awful TV series 'supposidly' based on it!!
skybrick736
Once hearing that Wes Craven was going to give Scream 4 a shot it was hard not to think that it was going to be just another stab at a payday, no pun intended. To delight of many though Scream 4 was a huge surprise that brought back the feel and atmosphere of the first two. The mixture of the old guard and the new class meshed really well together allowing other people to shine besides Courtney Cox and David Arquette. Emma Roberts and Hayden Paneittiere were absolutely stunning on screen and did terrific jobs portraying strong lead females as well. The duo of Erik Knudsen and Rory Culkin also provided great comedic performances and took over the job of "meta" kings that Jamie Kennedy has held in the series. What really took me by surprise was how well Wes Craven executed his ending of his Scream franchise capitalizing on a brilliant twist.
MaximumMadness
There is something of a tragedy when it comes to "Scream 4."No, not for the film itself. Nor of the cast.More of the fact that after having been brought back to the big- screen after a decade, this most recent (and presumably final) installment in the beloved franchise was not met with the same wicked praise from critics, nor the adoration of the masses as the previous films had (mostly) attained.No, it came out and was met with a general sense of apathy. A palpable sense of "Oh, look! Another 'Scream' movie. Maybe I'll watch it on cable or Netflix or something." Largely ignored or even occasionally derided by the same audiences that had once ate up the previous films. Looked at as nothing more than just another quasi-reboot in an era filled with such franchise-revivals.Yes, the fact is sadly that compared to prior entries, "Scream 4" was a borderline flop met with mixed reception from critics and the general movie-going audiences.But does it deserve its less-than-stellar reception? Is it really a film that should have flopped?I don't think so. The second it was over, I was warm. Tingling with nostalgia, amused by the jokes and genuinely thrilled by the twists and turns. Especially after the underwhelming experience with the third film that I had, I found myself saying: "Now THAT'S more like it! That was a real 'Scream' movie for the modern era!" And I hope that as time goes by, more people will start to see it that way.Because to me, while far from perfect, "Scream 4" was a welcome return for a beloved horror franchise with just enough creative fun, subversive and postmodern meta-humor poking fun at the horror genre's newest tropes and ideas, and genuine shocks to give me a big, old sense of satisfaction!Upon returning to her hometown of Woodsboro years later to promote a self-help book she authored, Sidney Prescott and her friends are pulled into a new murder-mystery as it appears a new "Ghostface" killer has emerged, keen on creating a real-world "reboot" of the original murders all those years ago. ...and it seems that Sidney and her young niece Jill are the prime targets!The cast is an absolute blast, and really paves the way for the nostalgic sense of wonder that this film literally oozes. Neve Campbell's return is fabulous (especially as she hasn't been doing a ton of big-screen work lately), and her character is a great centerpiece to the story as is always the case. David Arquette is the same lovable oaf we've come to know and love over the past 20 years. Courtney Cox reclaims the sense of fun and shrewdness that made Gale such a great character, but was lost in the misguided third film. And series newcomers such as Emma Roberts, Alison Brie and especially Hayden Panettiere are just a blast and a half! (Especially Panettiere as the absolutely adorable and wickedly smart Kirby.)Perhaps the best aspect of the film, however, is the return of the series creator Kevin Williamson, who famously (or rather, infamously) didn't write the script for the borderline-poorly- received third film. Williamson is back, though... big time. His perfect balancing of wickedly subversive meta-humor and shocking displays of horror and gore is on full-display for much of the film, and its only compounded by the fact that since the last film was released, there have been a lot of changes in the entertainment world.Now, not only does Williamson have a lot of new riffing to do on modern horror conventions (such as the wave of hyper-violent "torture porn" films, although I personally detest the "torture porn" label; and of course the "reboot" phenomenon that plays a central role to the story), but also on the fact that his brand of hilarious postmodern and meta humor has been embraced by the masses. It's genuinely brilliant to see scenes where Williamson is writing a dissection of postmodern meta-humor by using... postmodern meta- humor. The layers of subversion and irony add a lot to the complexity and hard-hitting nature of the jokes that films-nerds like myself will surely adore.However, all this gushing does come with a bit of a trade-off.Wes Craven was a master of horror. And a darned-fine filmmaker. This cannot be denied. And he will always be sorely missed. But this is the one film in the series where I can't help but feel that he was on auto-pilot. His choice in shots is a bit more basic than in previous films, and his compositions and execution of key scenes just aren't as lush or hard-hitting as in previous films. Perhaps he was just bogged down with other things, but I do find this to be the "flattest" looking of the franchise. Not that it's badly directed. Just comparatively underwhelming when viewed next to the other films. So I do have to dock a point for that.And the other point I'm docking is for the same reason I took a point off in my review for "Scream 2"- despite the freshness and pure geek-joy present in Williamson's writing... he does occasionally fall back onto the same clichés in some scenes that he so deliciously deconstructs in other scenes. (Case in point: A scene in a parking garage that had me rolling my eyes in all the wrong ways.) It's pretty subdued and minimal, but it's just enough for me to drop another point.Regardless, "Scream 4" is a wonderful and welcome return for the franchise. It's a true "Scream" movie through-and-through thanks to the return of the entire core creative team. In particular the return of Williamson. And it just makes me happy to have another good "Scream" movie to watch and cherish.It's a very good 8 out of 10. It'll leave you screaming in all the best ways.
