October 25, 2024 • 42 mins
The special bonus episode of Shelf Criticism no one asked for but everyone wanted, Stephen dives into the latest installment of the Scream franchise, Scream VI. With a mix of nostalgia and critical analysis, Stephen reflects on the series' long-standing impact on his love for cinema and film studies while taking a close look at the latest offering. Despite Neve Campbell's absence and the controversies surrounding some cast departures, Scream VI delivers a gripping addition to the Ghostface legacy, though it may not reach the heights of its predecessors. Expect insights into the standout performances, plenty of trivia, and Stephen’s personal ranking of the Scream films. Whether you’re a die-hard fan of the franchise or just a lover of horror, this episode has something for everyone. And, as always, get ready for some witty observations, DVD details, and a tease for what’s to come in the world of Shelf Criticism.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:00):
Ladies.
(00:02):
Kirby?
Gale.
She's with the FBI.
She's a child.
When did they start letting children into the FBI?
I'm 30.
Well, you look like a zygote.
I have a gun, Gale.
Okay, fine.
Welcome to Shelf Criticism.
(00:30):
Meet your host, Stephen, a scholar of literature and film by day, and by night, a cinematic
archaeologist with a penchant for everything from art house to popular to outright trash
cinema.
Over the past quarter century, Stephen has amassed an eclectic DVD collection, now occupying
five shells of a curio cabinet in his living room.
(00:50):
Each week, he bravely selects one of these titles to dissect.
Join him as he unearths everything from obscure gems to cinematic missteps.
From blockbuster hits to forgotten flops, each film gets the critical once over it probably
doesn't deserve but will absolutely receive.
So grab your popcorn and settle in.
It's time to dive into the diverse world of Shelf Criticism.
(01:21):
Welcome to a bonus episode of Shelf Criticism.
I'm apparently really into the Halloween spirit this year as I rattled off the planned
apps ahead of time, and it only made sense to keep plugging away until that spookiest
and greatest of all holidays comes around and leaves us with only turkey, unbridled
consumerism and unmitigated greed to look forward to.
If you're a Christmas fan, more power to you, but me, honestly, doesn't even crack
(01:42):
my top three.
Matter of fact, talk like a pirate day and Guy Fawkes night, especially Guy Fawkes night,
because well, who doesn't love a good bonfire?
Now those, even I prefer above Christmas.
But that's just me to each his own.
Halloween has always been my favorite day marked on the calendar, and I try to do it
right.
It was only natural with this podcast selecting from rows of DVDs that admittedly were already
(02:04):
a little tilted in favor of the horror genre perhaps above the others to fall right into
line with that.
I'm not even sure when exactly, but at some point I fell in love with the horror genre.
It surprised me as much as anyone else, seeing as how I was the biggest scaredy cat on the
planet when I was a youth.
I may have slept with the nightlight on until I was 14 or so.
But somewhere down the line, I developed a love for the so-called scary movie, and I've
(02:27):
watched it so much that I'm virtually imperturbable now.
I mean I laughed through most of The Exorcist.
Read the book, however, that'll keep you up at night.
Am I savvy at a level of a Randy Meeks, a Kirby Reed, or even a Mindy Meeks Martin?
No, I don't aspire to that level of encyclopedic knowledge, but I like to think I'm a notch
or two above the casual movie goer.
(02:48):
I may not be able to explain the rules in a completely meta sense, but I don't have
to.
Luckily for us, we have a franchise that does that for us.
And speaking of that franchise, today's shelf pick dives into the latest entry.
We're headed back to the slasher genre, donning the ghost face mask, and like Friday the 13th
before it, taking a trip to the city that never sleeps.
Congratulations by the way to New York, who just won their first WNBA championship.
(03:12):
Sorry, just had to toss that in.
You know, Sabrina Ionescu is my gal.
On this episode, we're unraveling the mysteries of Scream 6.
Picking up the DVD, like so many recent releases, this one has a slip cover, which is just essentially
a piece of cardboard identical to the cover copy beneath.
I don't know why they do that.
I mean, actually I do.
It looks better on a shelf, but I just wish they wouldn't.
(03:32):
It's not terribly environmentally friendly for starters.
It's wasteful.
This cover is a bit busy.
In the center, underneath the red bar that reads Blue Ray plus digital code, we have
directly beneath the old worn ghost face mask that Billy Loomis was said to have worn.
And to the right and left, the largest of the faces on the cover, we have Jenna Ortega
and to the left, Melissa Barrera.
(03:53):
To the right, as Tara and Sam Carpenter respectively.
It seems from this, in the film before, that Barrera is meant to be the central character,
the quote, Sydney Prescott of the latter films, if you will.
Yet she and Ortega are portrayed as equals here.
To be fair, Ortega is at least clearly the secondary focus, but one has to wonder if
her breakaway success in projects like Wednesday may have catapulted her to the level she holds
(04:14):
here.
In the middle is the title, Scream 6, with the letters in white, save for the Roman numeral
6, which is in red and makes up two thirds of the M in the word scream.
It's a clever design, remind me a little bit of how the four substituted for the letter
A in scream is in scream four, though the gag here I think works even better.
It looks more natural.
Behind the title are a set of skyscrapers, indicating to us we are no longer in Woodsboro,
(04:37):
Toto, but rather the big city.
Beneath that is the ghost face killer in his mask and outfit.
Level with him are Gail Weathers, played by Courtney Cox, of course, on the right, and
Kirby Reed, Hayden Panettiere on the left, the franchise characters.
Just below them, smaller in appearance are Mindy, Jasmine Savoy Brown, and Chad, Mason
Gooding, who round out the core four with Sam and Tara, of course.
(04:59):
On the DVD back in the left hand corner is a shot of Ghostface with a knife drawn.
Behind him, or her, in big letters is the quote, bigger, bloodier, and scarier, so says
Thomas Ellendis of One Take News, whatever that is.
There's a line of a nondescript skyline beneath with the summary below, the four survivors
from the most recent Woodsboro ghostface killings have moved to New York City for a new start.
(05:24):
Just as they begin to feel a sense of normalcy, they receive that infamous call.
Ghostface is more brutal and relentless than ever, and will stop at nothing to hunt them
down.
Critics are saying Scream 6 is fresh, truly terrifying, and Melissa Barrera and Jenna
Ortega are a force to be reckoned with.
And then in the tiniest of texts, like you almost need a magnifying glass to see it,
(05:47):
we have Heather Wilson, Daily Dead, and David Gonzalez of the Cinematic Reel, who I assume
said those two quotes.
There are photos also, going clockwise, a shot of Gail Weathers on the phone, Sam and
her random love interest slash neighbor Danny holding a ladder for a very specific scene.
What are you kids saying today?
I Y K Y K something like that.
(06:07):
Ghostface with his hand over Mindy's mouth as he stares her down on the subway.
A strange shot of Ortega just standing there looking back at the camera dramatically.
I don't know.
And one of the core four with their hands intertwined.
The special features beneath reads, face your fears with over an hour, that's in all caps,
of heart pounding killer bonus features, go inside the terrifying sequel to the requal
(06:30):
as the cast and crew give you a behind the scenes look at the filming of all your favorite
scenes.
You know, it occurs to me now that I totally did not even look at the special features.
Shame on me.
Oh, well, how I came to own it.
I tease some of this last episode, but the screen franchise, particularly the first one,
but all of them really hold a very special place in my love for cinema, or at least for
film studies.
(06:51):
Debuting when I was fresh into college, I remember leaving the theater in awe.
I was already starting to get the basics of literary analysis, you know, to understand
how you pick apart a novel or a short story or poem, find the deeper meanings.
I'd never heard the term meta used and had no clue what deconstruction was good ways
away from Derrida just yet.
But I did know horror films really well by this point.
(07:12):
And I realized what that flick was doing.
It seems old hat now.
But when Randy Meeks makes his speech about the rules, you know, don't drink, do drugs,
don't have sex, never say I'll be right back.
It was an observation that seemed patently obvious, yet also one I'd never thought of.
I understood that this film was doing an analysis of an entire genre, much as we are also doing
in our literary classes at the time.
(07:33):
It hit me that that film is storytelling, just like written fiction, and it could be
an equally fecund provider of intellectual exploration.
To top it off, however, Scream is also just a genuinely good slasher flick at its core.
Its kills are creative, the mystery is filled with red herrings and clues, and overall,
it's just genuinely scary.
It was like a graduate thesis in film studies, just minus the ponderous pontification and
(07:59):
the indecipherable theoretical claptrap, and also with a lot more guts and gore.
I can't say that I walked out of that theater thinking to myself, I'm going to be a film
scholar.
Honestly, I didn't even know such a field existed yet as my university had yet to expand
the English department in that direction.
But it planted the seeds that would later germinate into what I do today.
As a matter of fact, I found a way to work the aforementioned Randy Meek speech into
(08:22):
my master's thesis, which covered 19th century British Gothic fiction.
Basically, in the repressive Victorian era, according to my thesis, which is not very
good now that I go back and look at it, all the mentions of sexuality are verboten, so
the authors sublimated the horrors into the boogeymen in the same way that the late 70s
and 80s slasher flicks did during the height of the AIDS epidemic, hence the don't have
sex part in those films.
(08:44):
Therefore, when Randy says the rules, I harped on the don't have sex.
I know, bit of a stretch.
Perhaps you horned in, but that's how much of an impact that speech had on me.
The theoretical framework for my thesis was chiefly Michelle Foucault's history of sexuality,
smidge of Chris Davis concept of abjection, but a pretty decent smattering of scream as
well.
(09:04):
Incidentally, since I know many of my listeners are local, the show's theater is showing
the original scream on the big screen this Friday, the 25th.
And since I know podcasts have a long life.
I mean, Friday, October 25th of 2024.
I mean, I wouldn't want anybody listening to this a few years later to show up on Friday,
June 25th of 2027 or something and then curse me and call me a liar.
But if you haven't seen it on the big screen, you should.
(09:26):
I can't wait to take it in once more, especially now that I have so much more knowledge under
my belt and of course also can pretty much quote the entire film verbatim at this point.
My co-host of Real It, the inimitable Mackenzie and I will be at the screening, so if you
do make it, be sure to stop and say hi.
We pretty much all knew a sequel was inevitable.
In fact, the studio had given it the green light before the first film actually debuted.
(09:46):
Scream 2 was much of the same.
And since so many horror films get a sequel, the same meta vibe flowed perfectly into the
follow up.
And like most all sequels, with perhaps the exception of Godfather 2 and naturally House
Party 2, it wasn't as good as the OG.
Still it was decent.
Scream 3 played off the idea of the trilogy and it was the weakest offering yet, though
(10:07):
still rather enjoyable.
And isn't the trilogy usually the weakest?
Godfather 3?
It took us 11 years to get a fourth installment, but it did a wonderful job I felt deconstructing
the reboot concept that was so rampant in Hollywood and still is today.
It would take 11 more years to get the next installment, which is technically just called
Scream by the way, not like that's confusing, Halloween franchise, but most of the fandom
(10:30):
just calls it Scream 5, so I will too.
Here we're introduced to the concept of the Requel, a painful portmanteau that I can't
help but love due to my obsession with dad jokes and bad puns.
These films are a hybrid between a remake and a sequel, blending new blood, now known
as the core fort in Scream, to carry the franchise forward while legacy characters like Sidney
Dewey Gale appear as well.
(10:51):
Released in 2022, it was also the first film I saw in theaters after those dark days of
the COVID lockdown.
For those curious, and I know you are, Knives Out was the one I saw in the theaters before
the world temporarily shut down.
So when the sixth installment sliced its way into movie theaters March of 2023, I was standing
in line on opening night, right?
Not so much.
(11:12):
Why?
I wish I could tell you.
Technically speaking, March is perhaps my busiest month in my profession.
The film came out the week after our university's own film festival, and that's a time when,
much as I love cinema, I usually step back and go on a brief hiatus of film.
It's usually the time I read a novel or two instead.
And that would have also been the week we had the actors from the London stage on campus
(11:32):
who dazzled us that year with their performance of A Midsummer Night's Dream.
And I would have been at the pub keeping them company that Friday night.
I know I have such a demanding job.
But the next week settled down and the week after spring break, so I don't think I changed
out of my pajamas for at least three straight days.
I know.
Gross.
Somewhere in April, I do recall thinking, I need to go watch Scream 6 already.
(11:54):
Maybe a Sunday matinee.
And then I checked the showings and found out it had already been replaced by something
else.
Probably that terrible Dungeons and Dragons film.
No problem.
I thought to myself, I miss seeing it on the big screen, but I have a nice setup at home.
An excessively large TV, surround sound, Blu-ray.
So I pre-ordered it as soon as it was available to.
When the disc arrived, I opened it immediately, mostly just to get out the digital code and
(12:16):
redeem it.
So I knew at some point I was going to be sitting down on the couch, popcorn in hand,
and a 75 pound pooch who thinks she's a lap dog crawling up watching the latest installment.
I can't tell you what happened.
You know how you have that best friend who lives hundreds of miles away, but you still
try to keep in touch and you keep thinking, I'm going to call her soon.
I miss her.
Maybe tomorrow.
Maybe two weeks later it hits you that you never did.
(12:36):
Then her birthday rolls around and you text her at least, but you also swear when everything
settles down this weekend, you're going to call her and have a good nice chat.
Then two years later you go, holy crap.
That's pretty much akin to what happened with me in this film.
So thank goodness for the spooky season and Shelf Criticism for reminding me how I neglected
this offering.
I love the franchise just like I love my best friend.
Sometimes I guess life just happens.
(12:58):
The positive is when you finally do get to talk to that friend on the phone, you laugh,
you cry, you spend an hour chatting away and catching up and you feel like you've only
lost contact for a week at best.
I think that is an apt comparison to how I felt when I finally did kick back, cut out
all the lights and hit play on Scream 6.
When we look at the critical reception, clearly this was not the strongest outing of the franchise.
(13:19):
Not that I or anyone else I think expected it to be.
I thoroughly enjoyed it, but I have adored all six.
Even when I'm well aware that there are weaknesses in some.
What really seems to hold my attention is the meta part.
We all know at some point whether it's Randy, even from beyond the grave, like in that clever
VHS tape of Scream 3, or the nerds of Film Club, or Randy's niece Mindy, we all know
(13:39):
there's a point coming in each film where the aforementioned rules are going to be explained
again.
Watching for where those rules are followed and often times broken, as well as the whodunnit
aspect is really all the film needs to be thoroughly watchable and rewatchable for that
matter.
But that's for me.
The critics might think otherwise.
Or not.
I was surprised to see how favorable this film was reviewed.
(14:00):
76% on Rotten Tomatoes.
I suppose the critics, like a little meta deconstruction of films too, wonder why.
It is kind of part of their job to do something similar, isn't it?
Metacritic gives the film a 61, meaning even the favorable reviews from the critics did
tend to point out some of the drawbacks.
It's worth noting that Metacritic only bases this off 53 reviews, while Rotten Tomatoes
(14:20):
aggregates 313 of them.
The popcorn meter, Rotten Tomatoes' audience score, sends it soaring to a 91%.
Just dang.
Metacritic's users are a bit more subdued, though still mostly favorable.
They give it a 6.7.
For a deeper consideration, I'm going to choose Is Scream Losing Its Voice from the Atlantic
(14:40):
critic David Sims.
For starters, it's a mostly negative review, which will give me a lot to disagree with.
Also it's the Atlantic, which is probably my favorite publication, and I've yet to choose
a critique from it.
Also as an avid Atlantic reader, I read a lot of Sims reviews, and while I respect his
perspective, surprise surprise, he and I seldom see eye to eye.
(15:00):
Sims begins.
In January 2022, when the fifth Scream film came out, more than a decade had passed since
someone had last donned the ghost face mask and terrorized teens with a threatening phone
call and a deftly wielded hunting knife.
That movie, the first Scream, not directed by the series' now deceased auteur Wes Craven,
had a lot of new developments to catch up on in the genre it rips so well.
(15:21):
The rise of elevated horror, almost like we talked about that last episode, isn't it?
The tiresome formulae of legacy sequels and how a killer who's reliant on landlines might
function in the smartphone era.
The result was enough of a hit for executives to greenlight Scream 6, which is rushing into
multiplexes a mere 14 months later.
Perhaps unsurprisingly, the follow-up has less to say.
(15:44):
It is somewhat reminiscent of Scream 1 and Scream 2.
I believe there were only 10 months, don't quote me on that, but it was less than a year
when Scream 2 came out.
And these are fair observations.
I'm glad to hear Sims praising the fifth installment, though he does later also point out the confusing
title, sharing the simple Scream with its original entry.
I always read the criticisms after I've made notes of my own initial thoughts, and this
(16:04):
is not going to be the last time Sims and I are on the same wavelength mentally.
I did wonder, after ruminating about what this new spade of murders in the fictional
world would parallel to the world of film, what we would be dealing with in the meta-analysis,
the reboot and the re-quel having already been established.
Franchise?
I guess there are rules in an overall franchise, but it seemed perhaps a bit of a stretch.
(16:25):
Certainly the horror, particularly since the late 70s, early 80s franchises, has been very
common.
Today we bemoan, and by that I mean me and perhaps a handful of others, how everything
we get now is simply building off another IP in one way or another.
It's nothing new.
Friday the 13th, Halloween, Nightmare on Elm Street, Hellraiser, I could go on.
The question for me is, how many films does it take to make a franchise?
(16:49):
Is the magic number six, as it is here with Scream?
Perhaps the writers were grasping for straws after the re-quel analysis of the last film.
I did see some of what Mindy was saying during the expected rules speech, but it also didn't
feel quite as universal as some of the other concepts the previous films have pursued.
Quite a shame, as this is the major moment I look for in each of the films.
(17:10):
After he notes, just as I had thought, once again, that Scream did what the Friday the
13th franchise did, though it took eight films for Jason to get to Manhattan, Sims contends
that the film, quote, doesn't have quite the same legacy pull as its predecessor.
Hayden Panettiere, who gave the best performance of Scream 4, makes a welcome return as the
smart Alec Kirby, now an FBI agent on the Ghostface case, but Courtney Cox is one of
(17:33):
the only cast members from the original film this time around, reappearing as the dogged
tabloid journalist Gail Weathers.
Instead of featuring a slew of character reprises, the movie sources nostalgia from the script
about a franchise-obsessed killer who collects mementos from the infamous slayings and leaves
them at his own crime scenes.
It's a nonsensical yarn, but an obvious way for the film to glance back at its storied
(17:54):
history, perhaps in search of some emotional weight.
Well, again, he's not wrong.
Kirby did make an impression in the fourth installment, but I would hardly make her the
first person I think of when someone says legacy.
Courtney Cox is, but she's the only one returning now.
Of course, David Arquette's Dewey actually died in the last go-round.
There's the mastermind of that first spree in the reflection of the glass that Sam stares
(18:16):
into, speaking menacingly to her.
There's a lot of lore to keep up with, of course, with all of this, but Sam is, of course,
technically Tara's half-sister and the daughter of Billy Loomis, Skeet Ulrich's character,
who makes that appearance as, I don't know, I'm guessing it's like a hallucination of
Sam's.
Still, his time is limited, and it's understood.
He's just a figment of Sam's tumultuous mind during this time of crisis.
(18:41):
The only other option was, of course, Neve Campbell as Sidney, but we're going to get
to that in a later segment.
Just hold on to that.
So I say all that to say, while only Gail Weathers is present here, as she has been
in every film thus far, I'm not sure how much of a detriment that is.
I mean, maybe to a casual fan, maybe one who caught the first and second on TV once a long
time ago.
Maybe they get bothered by the lack of legacy characters and get frustrated.
(19:02):
But to those keeping up with the franchise, we do know Kirby, Tara, Sam, Chad, Mindy.
Sure.
Besides, what's wrong with new characters?
Are we so opposed to anything not leaning on an existing IP that we can't just have
a crop of new faces to be chased by Ghostface?
Offering us some praise, Sims concludes by saying, quote, Bet-A-Nelly, Ulpin, and Gillette
remain gifted at set pieces.
(19:24):
Those are the directors.
And Scream 6 has more than a few arresting moments.
The opening sequence, always a high point for these movies, features an entertaining
switcheroo and a plum cameo from the Ready or Not star Samara Weaving.
A clever series of murders takes place across two adjacent apartment buildings, and he uses
the spatial geography of the cramped New York housing brilliantly, and an extending suspenseful
scene on the subway is a blast.
(19:46):
But there just isn't enough juice behind the stagecraft.
The Scream movies have thrived because they've always stayed one step ahead of their source
material, but as the franchise grows more bloated, they risk becoming their own punchline.
I feel like the proverbial broken record here, but I also have to give big props to the way
the urban setting was used, agreeing with Sims yet again.
The subway scene in particular is nothing shy of a masterpiece.
(20:08):
Because everyone is aware that another spate of murders is happening using the same mask,
one made famous by the fictitious franchise in the fictitious world of Scream, Stab, right?
Because people are generally horrible, sales of that mask have skyrocketed once the killings
have resumed.
As the film is set around Halloween, the packed subway cars are full of riders who've donned
(20:28):
that same costume.
We know one, at least one, of them is the killer, but which?
It's very well executed, right up to the actual stabbing of Mindy, the train's so crowded,
and everyone's so lost in their own thought and their own world that they don't realize
what's taking place.
As for the opening sequence, when I saw it, I knew this was something I was going to be
talking about, which leads me to my take.
(20:50):
The original Scream was not the first film to pull the ol' switcheroo, to use Sims'
word.
Janet Leigh's Marion Crane in Psycho immediately comes to mind.
Still, I cannot stress what a bold move it was to kill off Drew Barrymore the way they
did in the opening sequence.
Barrymore was a hot commodity at the time, easily recognizable by most moviegoers.
She was even billed on the promotional material, even if it was the final and billing, as I
(21:12):
usually call it.
Also, she is literally pictured on the poster.
She's the actor farthest left, with a forced perspective making her appear largest.
No one saw that coming when it happened in the film.
In the second outing, at the premiere of the infamous Stab, Phil, played by Omar Epps,
and Maureen, Jada Pinkett Smith, both also major celebrities in their own right, were
killed.
(21:33):
I would mention, in the film within a film, as we're watching Stab, we see Barrymore's
character, Casey, we see that scene replayed as it was in the first Scream, stalked by
a fictional account of that murder.
Casey is being played by Heather Graham.
And I would also mention the fact that Sarah Michelle Gellar's character didn't last too
deep into the massacres either, which was maybe not shocking, but notable.
I mean, she was riding the wave of I Know What You Did last summer popularity, and though
(21:57):
it was nascent, her Buffy fame starting to catch on.
Natalie Rutherford would have been known to Melrose Place fans, so not me, when she gets
killed in the third installment.
But the death of Liev Schreiber as Cotton was really a big surprise.
And I'm not even going to try to explain the Russian nesting doll situation that is a film
within a film within a film that opens Stab 7, but we have two fake outs when it comes
(22:21):
to the next Scream.
Again, starring some pretty recognizable names before we finally see Britt Robinson and Amy
Teagarden's characters in the first real deaths, the ones not on the film.
And by film, I mean the Stab films, not the Scream films.
And let's just say this meta stuff is clever, but it can also get confusing when you try
to explain it.
(22:42):
In the fifth flick, Tara is attacked, but the swerve is that she lives.
Back to Scream 6, we open with Samara Weaving, waiting on a blind date in a bar.
Oh, and even more fitting, she happens to be a film studies professor, one who specializes
in horror.
Well, pfft, associate professor, and it's just film studies, so you're safe.
Film studies?
That's cool.
(23:02):
You say that, but try teaching a class on 20th century slashes to a heap of hungover
19 year olds.
Slashes, huh?
What's your favorite scary movie?
Um, not that one.
So why slashes?
Well, I just, you know, I think it's interesting.
You can really examine the culture of the moment by looking at the tropes of the time,
(23:25):
like, um, the masked killer, the final girl, the different rules, don't split up, don't
have sex.
Um, don't answer the phone.
Exactly, exactly, exactly.
It's all cliche, but out of those cliches comes an opportunity for outside art.
A voice for the voiceless, you might say.
Jesus.
Um, yeah, I'm more of a rom-com guy, to be honest.
(23:48):
She gets lured into an alley by her supposed date, only to get knifed.
If anyone actually expected her to live, then I'd guess this was their first experience
with a screen film.
We're following the tradition, just as Sims noted.
However, what I did not expect was to see the killer take the mask off immediately.
Oh, and in case you were keeping score, also a recognizable actor, Tony Revolori, best
(24:09):
known for playing Flash Thompson in the Tom Holland led Spider-Man films.
Turns out his character is a film student in Laura Crane, which is Samara Weaving's
class.
Despite the oddity of having the killer revealed right off the bat, the rest feels pretty familiar.
We know we're headed for some meta commentary and if they're film students, and then his
phone rings.
It's an interesting way to keep the plot fresh and unconventional while still playing with
(24:30):
the convention set up in the very first film.
It never ceases to amaze me how well done each of these openings are.
In this case, I knew we were in for something slightly different when the first killer takes
off the mask and we see his face, but I have to admit it was pretty clever to see how it
all panned out.
It's details like these, playing within subverting expectations, that to me keeps this franchise
far from stale.
(24:50):
Speaking of which, to Sam's final note, I'll just quote this again, as the franchise grows
more bloated, they risk becoming their own punchline.
Well, he and I are going to part ways here.
I'll admit I do often wonder when the filmmakers and screenwriters will run out of steam, but
I don't think it was this film.
Now granted it was one of, if not the weakest outing thus far, but I still found the entire
film tense, enjoyable, and for the most part clever.
(25:13):
If anything, it seems to be trying too hard to, again using Sam's phrasing, quote,
stay one step ahead of their source material.
Despite the franchise speech given by Mindy,
Because nobody just makes sequels anymore.
We're in a franchise and there are certain rules to a continuing franchise.
I had a feeling.
(25:34):
Rule one, everything is bigger than last time.
Bigger budget, bigger cast, bigger body count, longer chases, shootouts, beheadings, you
gotta top what came before to keep people coming back.
Beheadings?
Beheadings.
Rule two, whatever happened last time, expect the opposite.
Franchises only survive by subverting expectations.
If the killers last time were whiny snowflake film nerds with letterboxed accounts instead
(25:57):
of personalities, you can bet the opposite will be true here.
And rule three, no one is safe.
Legacy characters?
Cannon fought her at this point.
Usually brought back, only to be killed off in some cheap bid for nostalgia.
It's not looking too good for Gail and Kirby.
Most of that does come off as accurate.
This is a large cast, but Scream 3 had a larger budget.
(26:20):
If we assume the unfortunate bystander in the bodega dies of his wounds, then it does
have the biggest body count.
If he lived, and there seems to be a lot of that going around in this film, so hold that
thought too, then it ties the fifth installment.
There are shootouts, though guns have been used in other films.
Still it did feel like this one had more of that.
And don't get me started on that beheading crap.
(26:41):
There's a moment where Chad dodges a knife and it slices off a mannequin's head.
I got it.
But even so, he had to go and utter beheading just to make sure the lowest common denominator
picked up on it.
Honestly, if you had to spell that out for a person, then chances are they didn't really
remember every beat of the script and weren't the sort to go back and check those boxes
anyway.
Speaking of which, how needlessly thorough have I been to go back and check all of that?
(27:03):
Like it matters.
And yes, I'm aware longer chases were also mentioned.
And no, I'm not going to go time the scenes from all the films, though honestly, there's
probably someone on a wiki somewhere who has done just that.
Some fans are painstakingly comprehensive.
New characters are brought in and checks note.
Yep.
All of them serve as cannon fodder.
Then there's also the part about the franchise characters.
(27:25):
It sure looked like Gail Weathers had finally met her inevitable fate.
Then she came to.
Ditto for Kirby.
Of the core four, clearly Mindy was a goner, right?
Only she also gets patched up.
This must be one heck of an ER staff.
But surely after the brutality of the wounds given to Chad, the way Tara mourned him as
they were just starting to explore their feelings for each other and setting up this perfect
(27:45):
tragic love story like Ditto and a neus level stuff.
No, he's we all doubt on a stretcher in the end, much like freaking Deputy Dewey.
Matter of fact, exactly like he's Dewey.
Dewey dying in the last film was rough, especially watching Gail's reaction.
But that was part of what made it so impactful in the first place.
No one expected it.
And yet it happened.
(28:05):
Of the original core three, and it doesn't have the same ring, does it?
Then there were two.
I feel like at least one of the Meeks Martin twins should have bit it, if not both.
Yeah, I mean, OK, give us a swerve and keep one alive.
Let us deal with a fallout emotionally in the seventh installment from losing a sibling.
The same I think goes for either Gail or Kirby or both.
In particular, Gail would have made a good choice.
I don't dislike her character.
(28:27):
All I'm saying is keeping all of the principal cast alive feels like a cop out.
At some point, you have to have a sacrificial lamb or two to make it feel like there's
an actual stake in the film.
There's an actual threat.
Randy and Dewey's death both achieved that.
And at some point, these films are going to have to make some of these choices.
Are they really are going to go stale?
And in hindsight, it does appear they could have done that.
But only if they were able to predict the future.
(28:49):
Hold that thought.
First, we have to get to standout performance.
This is a tough one.
I did read some user reviews, granted, who complained that Scream 5 and 6 both were not
well acted.
I just have to disagree.
All the performances were decent.
At least none of them stood out as being awful.
You got veteran actors like Cox and Dermot Moroni who do just fine.
(29:09):
Then the supporting cast holds their own, even if Devon Nicoda has nothing really to
do except snog Mindy once and die.
Good death scene, though, for the record.
Likewise, Danny, Sam's love interest played by Josh Sagara, is completely expendable.
And I think the only one of the new additions to the cast not to be that so-called cannon
fodder.
Liana Liberato and Jack Champion are perfectly serviceable as two of the three killers.
(29:32):
They do play the dual role well, fitting into their hidden personas before making their
heel turns.
The dual leads of Melissa Barrera and Jenna Ortega are commanding presences on the screen.
Both of them are excellent actors and captivating to watch.
However, so is Jasmine Savoy Brown as Mindy Meeks Martin.
As the film nerd Randy Surrogate, she exudes the geeky awareness one would expect.
(29:52):
Yet she's also somehow smooth and confident and maybe even a little sexy?
I don't mean that in an electress old man way.
Please don't think that.
She pulls off what she's going for here, I think.
I don't know her from much else.
I haven't watched Yellow Jackets.
I did remember liking her in The Leftovers.
So why not?
Let's give the standout performance to Jasmine Savoy Brown.
Someone has to let us know the rules, after all.
(30:14):
We'll move on to cultural context.
And here I am reminded in part as to one of the reasons I might have been reticent to
watch this film.
I remember the kerfuffle that ensued when Neve Campbell declined to return.
She felt that the offer given to her was not reflective of her value to the franchise,
and in her words, quote, I honestly don't believe that if I were a man and had done
five installments of a huge franchise over 25 years, that the number that I was offered
(30:37):
would be the number offered to a man.
And in my soul, I just couldn't do that.
I supported her fully in that moment and I still do.
Heck, Sidney Prescott is the franchise.
You fork out whatever dollar amount she asks.
Others agreed, including writer of the original screenplay Kevin Williamson, who encouraged
the studio to give Campbell the money, as well as current star Jasmine Savoy Brown,
who just won the standout performance, who said, if she can walk away, I support that.
(31:02):
Matter of fact, I think I might have had a moment in my mind where enraged while reading
all this in the trades, I swore that I would boycott any screen film, not starring Campbell.
These producers and studio executives cheat penny pinching so and so's.
Clearly I'm either a hypocrite or perhaps my waiting so long to finally watch this was
a subconscious manifestation of my support of Campbell.
(31:23):
I don't know.
I'm not sure all as I record this directly behind me as an autographed poster of her
from the fifth film.
And she didn't even write, not in my movie above her name, not that I'm bragging or
anything, but I guess I caved.
Otherwise I wouldn't be recording this episode, right?
This is the other reason I think this film just isn't as good as most of the others.
Sidney isn't in it and her absence looms so large for a film that literally has a temple
(31:45):
and a shrine to the history of the ghostface killings to be missing the central character
in all of it leaves the entire enterprise feeling a bit hollow.
Just immediately when Gale appears, the question of where Sidney arises and there are several
other mentions of her throughout the film.
I mean the film had a budget of 35 million and made over 166 million.
It just seems like whatever salary Campbell was thinking probably could have been scrounged
(32:08):
up somewhere, but never fear.
In March, Campbell announced that she would be back for Scream 7.
Deadline reported in June that according to the actress herself, this film was going to
be focused on Sidney again, which is why she quote jumped on board.
How exciting it would have been to see Sidney in the core four altogether once more, except
that's not going to happen.
We may get some more Chad Mindy.
(32:29):
I don't know that hasn't been confirmed or denied, but what we do know is that Berera
and Ortega are both out.
Berera has been very vocal on social media and calling for a ceasefire in the Israeli
Palestinian conflict.
In November, Spyglass Media Group announced that it had dropped her from the cast of the
latest installments.
Later that month, they clarified that some of her posts and reshares and again, I'm going
(32:50):
to quote them directly here, crossed the line into hate speech.
Berera responded by saying that this was never her intention.
In an interview with Rolling Stone, she expressed, also directly quoting here, I know who I am
and I know what I said came from a place of human rights and a place of freedom for people,
which shouldn't be controversial.
It shouldn't be up for debate.
I want to pause here and make it clear that I'm not taking sides or endorsing any particular
(33:12):
viewpoint in this complex issue.
I'm just simply trying to present the facts in both perspectives as they've been reported.
But shortly after Berera's firing, Ortega also announced her departure from Scream 7,
which was attributed to scheduling conflicts with the second season of Wednesday.
Variety reported that Ortega's decision had been made months earlier before the SAG-AFTRA
strike began.
According to Berera in a Rolling Stone interview, quote, Jenna is a good egg.
(33:36):
She's a good person and we love each other.
She would show up for me and I would show up for her no matter what.
I'll just leave that sentiment out there for you all to interpret however you wish.
It's also worth noting that the upcoming Scream 7 director, Christopher Landon, tweeted in
the wake of Berera's firing, quote, everything sucks.
Stop yelling.
This was not my decision to make.
And he ended that with a broken heart emoji, though that tweet has been since deleted.
(33:59):
But in the end, I just, I can't help but think of what might have been.
Sidney Prescott, Sam, and Tara Carpenter teaming up once again to take down Ghostface.
It's a kind of Scream dream team we may never see again.
A little bit of trivia before we put this thing on a shelf.
With Campbell's absence in the film, that makes Courtney Cox the only cast member to
be in all six of the franchise, except also Roger L. Jackson, simply credited as the voice.
(34:24):
He's done the killer's disguised voice over the phone in all six as well.
And for you Powerpuff Girl fans, he's also the voice of Mojo Jojo.
I personally know very little about that.
It's a cartoon and I think the character is an ape.
I'm not sure, but I know it has a huge fan base.
So for those of you who find that interesting, there's a little tidbit.
The filmmakers knew right off the bat they wanted Hayden Panettiere back, but they struggled
(34:46):
to find her.
No joke.
She'd taken a four year hiatus from acting and was not represented by an agent at the
time.
Franchise creator Kevin Williamson, while filming in Tennessee, met some of the producers
who had worked with her on Nashville.
And one of them apparently had her current contact information, which is the only way
they got in touch with her.
At the party early in the film, Frankie asked Tara if she's a member of the Omega Beta
Zeta sorority.
(35:07):
This would have been the fictitious sorority that Sarah Michelle Gellar's C.C. Cooper
was a member of in Scream 2.
Incidentally I did find an actual Omega Beta Zeta sorority as I was Googling.
And according to their Instagram page, they were chartered in 2011, whereas Scream 2 of
course debuted in 1997.
I wonder if they know.
Speaking of that party, if you look closely you will see one woman dressed up as Wednesday
(35:28):
Adams.
Need I explain that joke?
As is often the case, a character shares a last name with a character from another horror
film or franchise.
Billy Loomis, for example, in the first film, is named after Dr. Samuel Lewis in Halloween.
Tamara Weaving's character, the film studies professor who is the first to go in this movie,
is named Laura Crane, a reference to Marion Crane in Psycho.
(35:49):
Likewise Sam's love interest is named Danny Brackett.
In Halloween, one of Laurie Strode's friends is named Annie Brackett.
Alright, it's time to shelf this joker.
For those of you new listeners or those who just need a rehash, there are five shelves
in my DVD cabinet, so I simply use the bartender's model.
Best films go on the top shelf just like the good liquor, Rotgut goes on the bottom shelf,
(36:10):
and then of course you have second shelf, middle shelf, and fourth shelf in between.
As always when it comes to shelving films of any sort, but particularly these, I really
have to strive to keep my personal biases out of it.
Mostly.
It's a screen film, and I never met one of those I didn't enjoy, present consideration
included.
It's fun, it's well paced, it's well directed, well executed overall.
(36:31):
There are issues, yeah.
Mainly I do feel like the writers played this one too safe.
I really do like every one of the principal characters, but to have all six make it out
alive, especially with as much damage as they took, it's just a bit of a stretch.
At the very least it's a cop out.
The rules are a bit of a reach and they're not always followed.
And most importantly, a screen film without Neve Campbell is like grits without shrimp.
(36:53):
It can exist, you can sample it, it's not that bad, but when you toss that extra ingredient
in you have something that's decadent and leaves a lasting impression.
Keep in mind that I do enjoy all six, but if I had to rank them, the order would be
first and foremost Scream, the original.
Second would be Scream 4, third would be Scream 2.
And by the way, I just have to throw out here, Scream 2 was the best reviewed critically,
(37:15):
even higher than the original.
I think the critics may have in the first installment missed what it was trying to do,
only realizing it in the second, but I digress.
Number four I would say is Scream 5, the 2022 film just called Scream.
Five, this is where I would put Scream 6, at fifth out of the six installments.
And then of course Scream 3 hits the very bottom.
(37:36):
Scream 3 leaned much more into comedy and okay granted deliberately, but it went way
over the top.
Still, I appreciate it for its commentary on Hollywood and the industry as well as the
genre.
I still rank six above it simply because I think six does a better job of building suspense
and gives us some truly memorable scenes.
That said, it's this low on the list for a reason.
Therefore I'm going to place this on the fourth shelf.
(38:03):
It kills me to do so.
I need to do a rewatch of the original film to be sure, and I am tomorrow night.
But I think the first film might actually hit top shelf for me.
Two and four would easily be fourth shelf.
Again, I speculate prior to rewatch and I do own all six.
So if I keep going with this, we'll likely be talking Ghostface again.
I think all the way down to the 2022 film, which come on, let's just call it five, any
(38:24):
fan of cinema in general should watch them.
Even if you don't like horror, it's a genre that is wildly popular and has a huge impact
on the art form.
If you're a big fan of horror, then you darn well better watch them all, including six.
However, if you're just not that into that genre, you can miss this one and be as knowledgeable
as one needs to be.
And it pains me to say that, but hey, never say I'm not fair.
(38:45):
All right, we've got it shelved.
You know, I try on this podcast to release an episode a week.
Some weeks are slower than others and I've been known to do double duty.
Heck a couple of times I put out like three within a week span, which means I'm ahead
of my initial schedule.
A while back, however, just before I began the October blitz of horror films, I teased
a film that was going to drop right before we started the spooky season and life got
in the way.
(39:05):
Took a little longer than anticipated.
I swear these students, the university that pays me, they all think I need to be doing
stuff for them instead of my side passion project.
How dare they?
But now I'm going back and making good on that earlier tease.
We've already looked at a couple of con films, one I really liked and one that was,
well, it was the hustle.
Still, I made it no secret that it's a genre I enjoy when done well, which is to say not
(39:27):
the hustle.
It's been ages since I've seen next week's shelf pick, but I tend to remember it being
well done also.
Certainly has a star studied cast.
Edward Burns, Rachel Weisz, Andy Garcia, Paul Giamatti, Morris Chestnut, the always impressive
Dustin Hoffman.
It's directed by James Foley, who gave us a couple of other great crime films at close
range after Dark, my sweet, not to mention the testosterone fest that is Glingary Glen
(39:51):
Ross.
All right.
Looking at his IMDb page, I'm also seeing he did two of the 50 shades films.
So yeah, OK.
Well, those others I mentioned aren't bad.
So next week ish, we're going to get our con game back on.
Look for a new gaffe as we swindle our way through 2003 is confidence.
It's currently streaming on Amazon Prime.
(40:11):
So it's your homework to give it a good watch and be sure to take notes or just munch popcorn
and enjoy.
If you do watch it and want to talk about any points, feel free to shoot me an email
at steven at shelf criticism dot com.
That's S T E P H E N.
You can also find the podcast on Facebook at Shelf Criticism.
And don't forget about my other podcast, Real It, where I am joined by my colleague, the
(40:31):
extraordinary Mackenzie.
You can find that just about anywhere you get your podcast fix, as well as our official
website, real it podcast dot com and our social media at real it podcast.
And remember, that's R E E L, as in a film role.
Capping off the spooky season the right way, Mackenzie and I will be in the studio Monday
recording our next episode.
And I intend to have it out well before Hallows Eve.
(40:52):
We'll be discussing Susan Hill's spine tingling book and the 2012 adaptation, The Woman in
Black.
After that, Shelf Criticism is going to take a bit of a breather as the season ends.
However, Real It will soldier on and Owls of Palace Production will have another special
episode somewhere in this penultimate month of 2024.
And lest you break down in tears, Shelf Criticism is going to return in December.
(41:13):
Though not my favorite holiday, as I said at the beginning, there are some Christmas
films in my DVD collection, most of which I have never seen.
So in December, prepare yourselves for Shelf Christmasism.
You got plenty to look forward to.
But until next time, DVD aficionados, remember to treat yourself to a little shelf indulgence
of your own.
Amelia, sing us home.
(41:44):
Shelf Criticism is an Owls of Palace Production.
This podcast is in no way connected with the educational institutions the host is employed
by.
The opinions expressed herein are solely those of the host and do not necessarily reflect
the views of any other organization with which he is affiliated.
Most images displayed are public domain.
Images and stills from films, descriptions of scenes and passages from books are used
(42:07):
for educational and critical purposes and not for profit and therefore fall under the
terms of bad use.
Not every movie needs a post credit scene.
Ladies.
(00:02):
Kirby?
Gale.
She's with the FBI.
She's a child.
When did they start letting children into the FBI?
I'm 30.
Well, you look like a zygote.
I have a gun, Gale.
Okay, fine.
Welcome to Shelf Criticism.
(00:30):
Meet your host, Stephen, a scholar of literature and film by day, and by night, a cinematic
archaeologist with a penchant for everything from art house to popular to outright trash
cinema.
Over the past quarter century, Stephen has amassed an eclectic DVD collection, now occupying
five shells of a curio cabinet in his living room.
(00:50):
Each week, he bravely selects one of these titles to dissect.
Join him as he unearths everything from obscure gems to cinematic missteps.
From blockbuster hits to forgotten flops, each film gets the critical once over it probably
doesn't deserve but will absolutely receive.
So grab your popcorn and settle in.
It's time to dive into the diverse world of Shelf Criticism.
(01:21):
Welcome to a bonus episode of Shelf Criticism.
I'm apparently really into the Halloween spirit this year as I rattled off the planned
apps ahead of time, and it only made sense to keep plugging away until that spookiest
and greatest of all holidays comes around and leaves us with only turkey, unbridled
consumerism and unmitigated greed to look forward to.
If you're a Christmas fan, more power to you, but me, honestly, doesn't even crack
(01:42):
my top three.
Matter of fact, talk like a pirate day and Guy Fawkes night, especially Guy Fawkes night,
because well, who doesn't love a good bonfire?
Now those, even I prefer above Christmas.
But that's just me to each his own.
Halloween has always been my favorite day marked on the calendar, and I try to do it
right.
It was only natural with this podcast selecting from rows of DVDs that admittedly were already
(02:04):
a little tilted in favor of the horror genre perhaps above the others to fall right into
line with that.
I'm not even sure when exactly, but at some point I fell in love with the horror genre.
It surprised me as much as anyone else, seeing as how I was the biggest scaredy cat on the
planet when I was a youth.
I may have slept with the nightlight on until I was 14 or so.
But somewhere down the line, I developed a love for the so-called scary movie, and I've
(02:27):
watched it so much that I'm virtually imperturbable now.
I mean I laughed through most of The Exorcist.
Read the book, however, that'll keep you up at night.
Am I savvy at a level of a Randy Meeks, a Kirby Reed, or even a Mindy Meeks Martin?
No, I don't aspire to that level of encyclopedic knowledge, but I like to think I'm a notch
or two above the casual movie goer.
(02:48):
I may not be able to explain the rules in a completely meta sense, but I don't have
to.
Luckily for us, we have a franchise that does that for us.
And speaking of that franchise, today's shelf pick dives into the latest entry.
We're headed back to the slasher genre, donning the ghost face mask, and like Friday the 13th
before it, taking a trip to the city that never sleeps.
Congratulations by the way to New York, who just won their first WNBA championship.
(03:12):
Sorry, just had to toss that in.
You know, Sabrina Ionescu is my gal.
On this episode, we're unraveling the mysteries of Scream 6.
Picking up the DVD, like so many recent releases, this one has a slip cover, which is just essentially
a piece of cardboard identical to the cover copy beneath.
I don't know why they do that.
I mean, actually I do.
It looks better on a shelf, but I just wish they wouldn't.
(03:32):
It's not terribly environmentally friendly for starters.
It's wasteful.
This cover is a bit busy.
In the center, underneath the red bar that reads Blue Ray plus digital code, we have
directly beneath the old worn ghost face mask that Billy Loomis was said to have worn.
And to the right and left, the largest of the faces on the cover, we have Jenna Ortega
and to the left, Melissa Barrera.
(03:53):
To the right, as Tara and Sam Carpenter respectively.
It seems from this, in the film before, that Barrera is meant to be the central character,
the quote, Sydney Prescott of the latter films, if you will.
Yet she and Ortega are portrayed as equals here.
To be fair, Ortega is at least clearly the secondary focus, but one has to wonder if
her breakaway success in projects like Wednesday may have catapulted her to the level she holds
(04:14):
here.
In the middle is the title, Scream 6, with the letters in white, save for the Roman numeral
6, which is in red and makes up two thirds of the M in the word scream.
It's a clever design, remind me a little bit of how the four substituted for the letter
A in scream is in scream four, though the gag here I think works even better.
It looks more natural.
Behind the title are a set of skyscrapers, indicating to us we are no longer in Woodsboro,
(04:37):
Toto, but rather the big city.
Beneath that is the ghost face killer in his mask and outfit.
Level with him are Gail Weathers, played by Courtney Cox, of course, on the right, and
Kirby Reed, Hayden Panettiere on the left, the franchise characters.
Just below them, smaller in appearance are Mindy, Jasmine Savoy Brown, and Chad, Mason
Gooding, who round out the core four with Sam and Tara, of course.
(04:59):
On the DVD back in the left hand corner is a shot of Ghostface with a knife drawn.
Behind him, or her, in big letters is the quote, bigger, bloodier, and scarier, so says
Thomas Ellendis of One Take News, whatever that is.
There's a line of a nondescript skyline beneath with the summary below, the four survivors
from the most recent Woodsboro ghostface killings have moved to New York City for a new start.
(05:24):
Just as they begin to feel a sense of normalcy, they receive that infamous call.
Ghostface is more brutal and relentless than ever, and will stop at nothing to hunt them
down.
Critics are saying Scream 6 is fresh, truly terrifying, and Melissa Barrera and Jenna
Ortega are a force to be reckoned with.
And then in the tiniest of texts, like you almost need a magnifying glass to see it,
(05:47):
we have Heather Wilson, Daily Dead, and David Gonzalez of the Cinematic Reel, who I assume
said those two quotes.
There are photos also, going clockwise, a shot of Gail Weathers on the phone, Sam and
her random love interest slash neighbor Danny holding a ladder for a very specific scene.
What are you kids saying today?
I Y K Y K something like that.
(06:07):
Ghostface with his hand over Mindy's mouth as he stares her down on the subway.
A strange shot of Ortega just standing there looking back at the camera dramatically.
I don't know.
And one of the core four with their hands intertwined.
The special features beneath reads, face your fears with over an hour, that's in all caps,
of heart pounding killer bonus features, go inside the terrifying sequel to the requal
(06:30):
as the cast and crew give you a behind the scenes look at the filming of all your favorite
scenes.
You know, it occurs to me now that I totally did not even look at the special features.
Shame on me.
Oh, well, how I came to own it.
I tease some of this last episode, but the screen franchise, particularly the first one,
but all of them really hold a very special place in my love for cinema, or at least for
film studies.
(06:51):
Debuting when I was fresh into college, I remember leaving the theater in awe.
I was already starting to get the basics of literary analysis, you know, to understand
how you pick apart a novel or a short story or poem, find the deeper meanings.
I'd never heard the term meta used and had no clue what deconstruction was good ways
away from Derrida just yet.
But I did know horror films really well by this point.
(07:12):
And I realized what that flick was doing.
It seems old hat now.
But when Randy Meeks makes his speech about the rules, you know, don't drink, do drugs,
don't have sex, never say I'll be right back.
It was an observation that seemed patently obvious, yet also one I'd never thought of.
I understood that this film was doing an analysis of an entire genre, much as we are also doing
in our literary classes at the time.
(07:33):
It hit me that that film is storytelling, just like written fiction, and it could be
an equally fecund provider of intellectual exploration.
To top it off, however, Scream is also just a genuinely good slasher flick at its core.
Its kills are creative, the mystery is filled with red herrings and clues, and overall,
it's just genuinely scary.
It was like a graduate thesis in film studies, just minus the ponderous pontification and
(07:59):
the indecipherable theoretical claptrap, and also with a lot more guts and gore.
I can't say that I walked out of that theater thinking to myself, I'm going to be a film
scholar.
Honestly, I didn't even know such a field existed yet as my university had yet to expand
the English department in that direction.
But it planted the seeds that would later germinate into what I do today.
As a matter of fact, I found a way to work the aforementioned Randy Meek speech into
(08:22):
my master's thesis, which covered 19th century British Gothic fiction.
Basically, in the repressive Victorian era, according to my thesis, which is not very
good now that I go back and look at it, all the mentions of sexuality are verboten, so
the authors sublimated the horrors into the boogeymen in the same way that the late 70s
and 80s slasher flicks did during the height of the AIDS epidemic, hence the don't have
sex part in those films.
(08:44):
Therefore, when Randy says the rules, I harped on the don't have sex.
I know, bit of a stretch.
Perhaps you horned in, but that's how much of an impact that speech had on me.
The theoretical framework for my thesis was chiefly Michelle Foucault's history of sexuality,
smidge of Chris Davis concept of abjection, but a pretty decent smattering of scream as
well.
(09:04):
Incidentally, since I know many of my listeners are local, the show's theater is showing
the original scream on the big screen this Friday, the 25th.
And since I know podcasts have a long life.
I mean, Friday, October 25th of 2024.
I mean, I wouldn't want anybody listening to this a few years later to show up on Friday,
June 25th of 2027 or something and then curse me and call me a liar.
But if you haven't seen it on the big screen, you should.
(09:26):
I can't wait to take it in once more, especially now that I have so much more knowledge under
my belt and of course also can pretty much quote the entire film verbatim at this point.
My co-host of Real It, the inimitable Mackenzie and I will be at the screening, so if you
do make it, be sure to stop and say hi.
We pretty much all knew a sequel was inevitable.
In fact, the studio had given it the green light before the first film actually debuted.
(09:46):
Scream 2 was much of the same.
And since so many horror films get a sequel, the same meta vibe flowed perfectly into the
follow up.
And like most all sequels, with perhaps the exception of Godfather 2 and naturally House
Party 2, it wasn't as good as the OG.
Still it was decent.
Scream 3 played off the idea of the trilogy and it was the weakest offering yet, though
(10:07):
still rather enjoyable.
And isn't the trilogy usually the weakest?
Godfather 3?
It took us 11 years to get a fourth installment, but it did a wonderful job I felt deconstructing
the reboot concept that was so rampant in Hollywood and still is today.
It would take 11 more years to get the next installment, which is technically just called
Scream by the way, not like that's confusing, Halloween franchise, but most of the fandom
(10:30):
just calls it Scream 5, so I will too.
Here we're introduced to the concept of the Requel, a painful portmanteau that I can't
help but love due to my obsession with dad jokes and bad puns.
These films are a hybrid between a remake and a sequel, blending new blood, now known
as the core fort in Scream, to carry the franchise forward while legacy characters like Sidney
Dewey Gale appear as well.
(10:51):
Released in 2022, it was also the first film I saw in theaters after those dark days of
the COVID lockdown.
For those curious, and I know you are, Knives Out was the one I saw in the theaters before
the world temporarily shut down.
So when the sixth installment sliced its way into movie theaters March of 2023, I was standing
in line on opening night, right?
Not so much.
(11:12):
Why?
I wish I could tell you.
Technically speaking, March is perhaps my busiest month in my profession.
The film came out the week after our university's own film festival, and that's a time when,
much as I love cinema, I usually step back and go on a brief hiatus of film.
It's usually the time I read a novel or two instead.
And that would have also been the week we had the actors from the London stage on campus
(11:32):
who dazzled us that year with their performance of A Midsummer Night's Dream.
And I would have been at the pub keeping them company that Friday night.
I know I have such a demanding job.
But the next week settled down and the week after spring break, so I don't think I changed
out of my pajamas for at least three straight days.
I know.
Gross.
Somewhere in April, I do recall thinking, I need to go watch Scream 6 already.
(11:54):
Maybe a Sunday matinee.
And then I checked the showings and found out it had already been replaced by something
else.
Probably that terrible Dungeons and Dragons film.
No problem.
I thought to myself, I miss seeing it on the big screen, but I have a nice setup at home.
An excessively large TV, surround sound, Blu-ray.
So I pre-ordered it as soon as it was available to.
When the disc arrived, I opened it immediately, mostly just to get out the digital code and
(12:16):
redeem it.
So I knew at some point I was going to be sitting down on the couch, popcorn in hand,
and a 75 pound pooch who thinks she's a lap dog crawling up watching the latest installment.
I can't tell you what happened.
You know how you have that best friend who lives hundreds of miles away, but you still
try to keep in touch and you keep thinking, I'm going to call her soon.
I miss her.
Maybe tomorrow.
Maybe two weeks later it hits you that you never did.
(12:36):
Then her birthday rolls around and you text her at least, but you also swear when everything
settles down this weekend, you're going to call her and have a good nice chat.
Then two years later you go, holy crap.
That's pretty much akin to what happened with me in this film.
So thank goodness for the spooky season and Shelf Criticism for reminding me how I neglected
this offering.
I love the franchise just like I love my best friend.
Sometimes I guess life just happens.
(12:58):
The positive is when you finally do get to talk to that friend on the phone, you laugh,
you cry, you spend an hour chatting away and catching up and you feel like you've only
lost contact for a week at best.
I think that is an apt comparison to how I felt when I finally did kick back, cut out
all the lights and hit play on Scream 6.
When we look at the critical reception, clearly this was not the strongest outing of the franchise.
(13:19):
Not that I or anyone else I think expected it to be.
I thoroughly enjoyed it, but I have adored all six.
Even when I'm well aware that there are weaknesses in some.
What really seems to hold my attention is the meta part.
We all know at some point whether it's Randy, even from beyond the grave, like in that clever
VHS tape of Scream 3, or the nerds of Film Club, or Randy's niece Mindy, we all know
(13:39):
there's a point coming in each film where the aforementioned rules are going to be explained
again.
Watching for where those rules are followed and often times broken, as well as the whodunnit
aspect is really all the film needs to be thoroughly watchable and rewatchable for that
matter.
But that's for me.
The critics might think otherwise.
Or not.
I was surprised to see how favorable this film was reviewed.
(14:00):
76% on Rotten Tomatoes.
I suppose the critics, like a little meta deconstruction of films too, wonder why.
It is kind of part of their job to do something similar, isn't it?
Metacritic gives the film a 61, meaning even the favorable reviews from the critics did
tend to point out some of the drawbacks.
It's worth noting that Metacritic only bases this off 53 reviews, while Rotten Tomatoes
(14:20):
aggregates 313 of them.
The popcorn meter, Rotten Tomatoes' audience score, sends it soaring to a 91%.
Just dang.
Metacritic's users are a bit more subdued, though still mostly favorable.
They give it a 6.7.
For a deeper consideration, I'm going to choose Is Scream Losing Its Voice from the Atlantic
(14:40):
critic David Sims.
For starters, it's a mostly negative review, which will give me a lot to disagree with.
Also it's the Atlantic, which is probably my favorite publication, and I've yet to choose
a critique from it.
Also as an avid Atlantic reader, I read a lot of Sims reviews, and while I respect his
perspective, surprise surprise, he and I seldom see eye to eye.
(15:00):
Sims begins.
In January 2022, when the fifth Scream film came out, more than a decade had passed since
someone had last donned the ghost face mask and terrorized teens with a threatening phone
call and a deftly wielded hunting knife.
That movie, the first Scream, not directed by the series' now deceased auteur Wes Craven,
had a lot of new developments to catch up on in the genre it rips so well.
(15:21):
The rise of elevated horror, almost like we talked about that last episode, isn't it?
The tiresome formulae of legacy sequels and how a killer who's reliant on landlines might
function in the smartphone era.
The result was enough of a hit for executives to greenlight Scream 6, which is rushing into
multiplexes a mere 14 months later.
Perhaps unsurprisingly, the follow-up has less to say.
(15:44):
It is somewhat reminiscent of Scream 1 and Scream 2.
I believe there were only 10 months, don't quote me on that, but it was less than a year
when Scream 2 came out.
And these are fair observations.
I'm glad to hear Sims praising the fifth installment, though he does later also point out the confusing
title, sharing the simple Scream with its original entry.
I always read the criticisms after I've made notes of my own initial thoughts, and this
(16:04):
is not going to be the last time Sims and I are on the same wavelength mentally.
I did wonder, after ruminating about what this new spade of murders in the fictional
world would parallel to the world of film, what we would be dealing with in the meta-analysis,
the reboot and the re-quel having already been established.
Franchise?
I guess there are rules in an overall franchise, but it seemed perhaps a bit of a stretch.
(16:25):
Certainly the horror, particularly since the late 70s, early 80s franchises, has been very
common.
Today we bemoan, and by that I mean me and perhaps a handful of others, how everything
we get now is simply building off another IP in one way or another.
It's nothing new.
Friday the 13th, Halloween, Nightmare on Elm Street, Hellraiser, I could go on.
The question for me is, how many films does it take to make a franchise?
(16:49):
Is the magic number six, as it is here with Scream?
Perhaps the writers were grasping for straws after the re-quel analysis of the last film.
I did see some of what Mindy was saying during the expected rules speech, but it also didn't
feel quite as universal as some of the other concepts the previous films have pursued.
Quite a shame, as this is the major moment I look for in each of the films.
(17:10):
After he notes, just as I had thought, once again, that Scream did what the Friday the
13th franchise did, though it took eight films for Jason to get to Manhattan, Sims contends
that the film, quote, doesn't have quite the same legacy pull as its predecessor.
Hayden Panettiere, who gave the best performance of Scream 4, makes a welcome return as the
smart Alec Kirby, now an FBI agent on the Ghostface case, but Courtney Cox is one of
(17:33):
the only cast members from the original film this time around, reappearing as the dogged
tabloid journalist Gail Weathers.
Instead of featuring a slew of character reprises, the movie sources nostalgia from the script
about a franchise-obsessed killer who collects mementos from the infamous slayings and leaves
them at his own crime scenes.
It's a nonsensical yarn, but an obvious way for the film to glance back at its storied
(17:54):
history, perhaps in search of some emotional weight.
Well, again, he's not wrong.
Kirby did make an impression in the fourth installment, but I would hardly make her the
first person I think of when someone says legacy.
Courtney Cox is, but she's the only one returning now.
Of course, David Arquette's Dewey actually died in the last go-round.
There's the mastermind of that first spree in the reflection of the glass that Sam stares
(18:16):
into, speaking menacingly to her.
There's a lot of lore to keep up with, of course, with all of this, but Sam is, of course,
technically Tara's half-sister and the daughter of Billy Loomis, Skeet Ulrich's character,
who makes that appearance as, I don't know, I'm guessing it's like a hallucination of
Sam's.
Still, his time is limited, and it's understood.
He's just a figment of Sam's tumultuous mind during this time of crisis.
(18:41):
The only other option was, of course, Neve Campbell as Sidney, but we're going to get
to that in a later segment.
Just hold on to that.
So I say all that to say, while only Gail Weathers is present here, as she has been
in every film thus far, I'm not sure how much of a detriment that is.
I mean, maybe to a casual fan, maybe one who caught the first and second on TV once a long
time ago.
Maybe they get bothered by the lack of legacy characters and get frustrated.
(19:02):
But to those keeping up with the franchise, we do know Kirby, Tara, Sam, Chad, Mindy.
Sure.
Besides, what's wrong with new characters?
Are we so opposed to anything not leaning on an existing IP that we can't just have
a crop of new faces to be chased by Ghostface?
Offering us some praise, Sims concludes by saying, quote, Bet-A-Nelly, Ulpin, and Gillette
remain gifted at set pieces.
(19:24):
Those are the directors.
And Scream 6 has more than a few arresting moments.
The opening sequence, always a high point for these movies, features an entertaining
switcheroo and a plum cameo from the Ready or Not star Samara Weaving.
A clever series of murders takes place across two adjacent apartment buildings, and he uses
the spatial geography of the cramped New York housing brilliantly, and an extending suspenseful
scene on the subway is a blast.
(19:46):
But there just isn't enough juice behind the stagecraft.
The Scream movies have thrived because they've always stayed one step ahead of their source
material, but as the franchise grows more bloated, they risk becoming their own punchline.
I feel like the proverbial broken record here, but I also have to give big props to the way
the urban setting was used, agreeing with Sims yet again.
The subway scene in particular is nothing shy of a masterpiece.
(20:08):
Because everyone is aware that another spate of murders is happening using the same mask,
one made famous by the fictitious franchise in the fictitious world of Scream, Stab, right?
Because people are generally horrible, sales of that mask have skyrocketed once the killings
have resumed.
As the film is set around Halloween, the packed subway cars are full of riders who've donned
(20:28):
that same costume.
We know one, at least one, of them is the killer, but which?
It's very well executed, right up to the actual stabbing of Mindy, the train's so crowded,
and everyone's so lost in their own thought and their own world that they don't realize
what's taking place.
As for the opening sequence, when I saw it, I knew this was something I was going to be
talking about, which leads me to my take.
(20:50):
The original Scream was not the first film to pull the ol' switcheroo, to use Sims'
word.
Janet Leigh's Marion Crane in Psycho immediately comes to mind.
Still, I cannot stress what a bold move it was to kill off Drew Barrymore the way they
did in the opening sequence.
Barrymore was a hot commodity at the time, easily recognizable by most moviegoers.
She was even billed on the promotional material, even if it was the final and billing, as I
(21:12):
usually call it.
Also, she is literally pictured on the poster.
She's the actor farthest left, with a forced perspective making her appear largest.
No one saw that coming when it happened in the film.
In the second outing, at the premiere of the infamous Stab, Phil, played by Omar Epps,
and Maureen, Jada Pinkett Smith, both also major celebrities in their own right, were
killed.
(21:33):
I would mention, in the film within a film, as we're watching Stab, we see Barrymore's
character, Casey, we see that scene replayed as it was in the first Scream, stalked by
a fictional account of that murder.
Casey is being played by Heather Graham.
And I would also mention the fact that Sarah Michelle Gellar's character didn't last too
deep into the massacres either, which was maybe not shocking, but notable.
I mean, she was riding the wave of I Know What You Did last summer popularity, and though
(21:57):
it was nascent, her Buffy fame starting to catch on.
Natalie Rutherford would have been known to Melrose Place fans, so not me, when she gets
killed in the third installment.
But the death of Liev Schreiber as Cotton was really a big surprise.
And I'm not even going to try to explain the Russian nesting doll situation that is a film
within a film within a film that opens Stab 7, but we have two fake outs when it comes
(22:21):
to the next Scream.
Again, starring some pretty recognizable names before we finally see Britt Robinson and Amy
Teagarden's characters in the first real deaths, the ones not on the film.
And by film, I mean the Stab films, not the Scream films.
And let's just say this meta stuff is clever, but it can also get confusing when you try
to explain it.
(22:42):
In the fifth flick, Tara is attacked, but the swerve is that she lives.
Back to Scream 6, we open with Samara Weaving, waiting on a blind date in a bar.
Oh, and even more fitting, she happens to be a film studies professor, one who specializes
in horror.
Well, pfft, associate professor, and it's just film studies, so you're safe.
Film studies?
That's cool.
(23:02):
You say that, but try teaching a class on 20th century slashes to a heap of hungover
19 year olds.
Slashes, huh?
What's your favorite scary movie?
Um, not that one.
So why slashes?
Well, I just, you know, I think it's interesting.
You can really examine the culture of the moment by looking at the tropes of the time,
(23:25):
like, um, the masked killer, the final girl, the different rules, don't split up, don't
have sex.
Um, don't answer the phone.
Exactly, exactly, exactly.
It's all cliche, but out of those cliches comes an opportunity for outside art.
A voice for the voiceless, you might say.
Jesus.
Um, yeah, I'm more of a rom-com guy, to be honest.
(23:48):
She gets lured into an alley by her supposed date, only to get knifed.
If anyone actually expected her to live, then I'd guess this was their first experience
with a screen film.
We're following the tradition, just as Sims noted.
However, what I did not expect was to see the killer take the mask off immediately.
Oh, and in case you were keeping score, also a recognizable actor, Tony Revolori, best
(24:09):
known for playing Flash Thompson in the Tom Holland led Spider-Man films.
Turns out his character is a film student in Laura Crane, which is Samara Weaving's
class.
Despite the oddity of having the killer revealed right off the bat, the rest feels pretty familiar.
We know we're headed for some meta commentary and if they're film students, and then his
phone rings.
It's an interesting way to keep the plot fresh and unconventional while still playing with
(24:30):
the convention set up in the very first film.
It never ceases to amaze me how well done each of these openings are.
In this case, I knew we were in for something slightly different when the first killer takes
off the mask and we see his face, but I have to admit it was pretty clever to see how it
all panned out.
It's details like these, playing within subverting expectations, that to me keeps this franchise
far from stale.
(24:50):
Speaking of which, to Sam's final note, I'll just quote this again, as the franchise grows
more bloated, they risk becoming their own punchline.
Well, he and I are going to part ways here.
I'll admit I do often wonder when the filmmakers and screenwriters will run out of steam, but
I don't think it was this film.
Now granted it was one of, if not the weakest outing thus far, but I still found the entire
film tense, enjoyable, and for the most part clever.
(25:13):
If anything, it seems to be trying too hard to, again using Sam's phrasing, quote,
stay one step ahead of their source material.
Despite the franchise speech given by Mindy,
Because nobody just makes sequels anymore.
We're in a franchise and there are certain rules to a continuing franchise.
I had a feeling.
(25:34):
Rule one, everything is bigger than last time.
Bigger budget, bigger cast, bigger body count, longer chases, shootouts, beheadings, you
gotta top what came before to keep people coming back.
Beheadings?
Beheadings.
Rule two, whatever happened last time, expect the opposite.
Franchises only survive by subverting expectations.
If the killers last time were whiny snowflake film nerds with letterboxed accounts instead
(25:57):
of personalities, you can bet the opposite will be true here.
And rule three, no one is safe.
Legacy characters?
Cannon fought her at this point.
Usually brought back, only to be killed off in some cheap bid for nostalgia.
It's not looking too good for Gail and Kirby.
Most of that does come off as accurate.
This is a large cast, but Scream 3 had a larger budget.
(26:20):
If we assume the unfortunate bystander in the bodega dies of his wounds, then it does
have the biggest body count.
If he lived, and there seems to be a lot of that going around in this film, so hold that
thought too, then it ties the fifth installment.
There are shootouts, though guns have been used in other films.
Still it did feel like this one had more of that.
And don't get me started on that beheading crap.
(26:41):
There's a moment where Chad dodges a knife and it slices off a mannequin's head.
I got it.
But even so, he had to go and utter beheading just to make sure the lowest common denominator
picked up on it.
Honestly, if you had to spell that out for a person, then chances are they didn't really
remember every beat of the script and weren't the sort to go back and check those boxes
anyway.
Speaking of which, how needlessly thorough have I been to go back and check all of that?
(27:03):
Like it matters.
And yes, I'm aware longer chases were also mentioned.
And no, I'm not going to go time the scenes from all the films, though honestly, there's
probably someone on a wiki somewhere who has done just that.
Some fans are painstakingly comprehensive.
New characters are brought in and checks note.
Yep.
All of them serve as cannon fodder.
Then there's also the part about the franchise characters.
(27:25):
It sure looked like Gail Weathers had finally met her inevitable fate.
Then she came to.
Ditto for Kirby.
Of the core four, clearly Mindy was a goner, right?
Only she also gets patched up.
This must be one heck of an ER staff.
But surely after the brutality of the wounds given to Chad, the way Tara mourned him as
they were just starting to explore their feelings for each other and setting up this perfect
(27:45):
tragic love story like Ditto and a neus level stuff.
No, he's we all doubt on a stretcher in the end, much like freaking Deputy Dewey.
Matter of fact, exactly like he's Dewey.
Dewey dying in the last film was rough, especially watching Gail's reaction.
But that was part of what made it so impactful in the first place.
No one expected it.
And yet it happened.
(28:05):
Of the original core three, and it doesn't have the same ring, does it?
Then there were two.
I feel like at least one of the Meeks Martin twins should have bit it, if not both.
Yeah, I mean, OK, give us a swerve and keep one alive.
Let us deal with a fallout emotionally in the seventh installment from losing a sibling.
The same I think goes for either Gail or Kirby or both.
In particular, Gail would have made a good choice.
I don't dislike her character.
(28:27):
All I'm saying is keeping all of the principal cast alive feels like a cop out.
At some point, you have to have a sacrificial lamb or two to make it feel like there's
an actual stake in the film.
There's an actual threat.
Randy and Dewey's death both achieved that.
And at some point, these films are going to have to make some of these choices.
Are they really are going to go stale?
And in hindsight, it does appear they could have done that.
But only if they were able to predict the future.
(28:49):
Hold that thought.
First, we have to get to standout performance.
This is a tough one.
I did read some user reviews, granted, who complained that Scream 5 and 6 both were not
well acted.
I just have to disagree.
All the performances were decent.
At least none of them stood out as being awful.
You got veteran actors like Cox and Dermot Moroni who do just fine.
(29:09):
Then the supporting cast holds their own, even if Devon Nicoda has nothing really to
do except snog Mindy once and die.
Good death scene, though, for the record.
Likewise, Danny, Sam's love interest played by Josh Sagara, is completely expendable.
And I think the only one of the new additions to the cast not to be that so-called cannon
fodder.
Liana Liberato and Jack Champion are perfectly serviceable as two of the three killers.
(29:32):
They do play the dual role well, fitting into their hidden personas before making their
heel turns.
The dual leads of Melissa Barrera and Jenna Ortega are commanding presences on the screen.
Both of them are excellent actors and captivating to watch.
However, so is Jasmine Savoy Brown as Mindy Meeks Martin.
As the film nerd Randy Surrogate, she exudes the geeky awareness one would expect.
(29:52):
Yet she's also somehow smooth and confident and maybe even a little sexy?
I don't mean that in an electress old man way.
Please don't think that.
She pulls off what she's going for here, I think.
I don't know her from much else.
I haven't watched Yellow Jackets.
I did remember liking her in The Leftovers.
So why not?
Let's give the standout performance to Jasmine Savoy Brown.
Someone has to let us know the rules, after all.
(30:14):
We'll move on to cultural context.
And here I am reminded in part as to one of the reasons I might have been reticent to
watch this film.
I remember the kerfuffle that ensued when Neve Campbell declined to return.
She felt that the offer given to her was not reflective of her value to the franchise,
and in her words, quote, I honestly don't believe that if I were a man and had done
five installments of a huge franchise over 25 years, that the number that I was offered
(30:37):
would be the number offered to a man.
And in my soul, I just couldn't do that.
I supported her fully in that moment and I still do.
Heck, Sidney Prescott is the franchise.
You fork out whatever dollar amount she asks.
Others agreed, including writer of the original screenplay Kevin Williamson, who encouraged
the studio to give Campbell the money, as well as current star Jasmine Savoy Brown,
who just won the standout performance, who said, if she can walk away, I support that.
(31:02):
Matter of fact, I think I might have had a moment in my mind where enraged while reading
all this in the trades, I swore that I would boycott any screen film, not starring Campbell.
These producers and studio executives cheat penny pinching so and so's.
Clearly I'm either a hypocrite or perhaps my waiting so long to finally watch this was
a subconscious manifestation of my support of Campbell.
(31:23):
I don't know.
I'm not sure all as I record this directly behind me as an autographed poster of her
from the fifth film.
And she didn't even write, not in my movie above her name, not that I'm bragging or
anything, but I guess I caved.
Otherwise I wouldn't be recording this episode, right?
This is the other reason I think this film just isn't as good as most of the others.
Sidney isn't in it and her absence looms so large for a film that literally has a temple
(31:45):
and a shrine to the history of the ghostface killings to be missing the central character
in all of it leaves the entire enterprise feeling a bit hollow.
Just immediately when Gale appears, the question of where Sidney arises and there are several
other mentions of her throughout the film.
I mean the film had a budget of 35 million and made over 166 million.
It just seems like whatever salary Campbell was thinking probably could have been scrounged
(32:08):
up somewhere, but never fear.
In March, Campbell announced that she would be back for Scream 7.
Deadline reported in June that according to the actress herself, this film was going to
be focused on Sidney again, which is why she quote jumped on board.
How exciting it would have been to see Sidney in the core four altogether once more, except
that's not going to happen.
We may get some more Chad Mindy.
(32:29):
I don't know that hasn't been confirmed or denied, but what we do know is that Berera
and Ortega are both out.
Berera has been very vocal on social media and calling for a ceasefire in the Israeli
Palestinian conflict.
In November, Spyglass Media Group announced that it had dropped her from the cast of the
latest installments.
Later that month, they clarified that some of her posts and reshares and again, I'm going
(32:50):
to quote them directly here, crossed the line into hate speech.
Berera responded by saying that this was never her intention.
In an interview with Rolling Stone, she expressed, also directly quoting here, I know who I am
and I know what I said came from a place of human rights and a place of freedom for people,
which shouldn't be controversial.
It shouldn't be up for debate.
I want to pause here and make it clear that I'm not taking sides or endorsing any particular
(33:12):
viewpoint in this complex issue.
I'm just simply trying to present the facts in both perspectives as they've been reported.
But shortly after Berera's firing, Ortega also announced her departure from Scream 7,
which was attributed to scheduling conflicts with the second season of Wednesday.
Variety reported that Ortega's decision had been made months earlier before the SAG-AFTRA
strike began.
According to Berera in a Rolling Stone interview, quote, Jenna is a good egg.
(33:36):
She's a good person and we love each other.
She would show up for me and I would show up for her no matter what.
I'll just leave that sentiment out there for you all to interpret however you wish.
It's also worth noting that the upcoming Scream 7 director, Christopher Landon, tweeted in
the wake of Berera's firing, quote, everything sucks.
Stop yelling.
This was not my decision to make.
And he ended that with a broken heart emoji, though that tweet has been since deleted.
(33:59):
But in the end, I just, I can't help but think of what might have been.
Sidney Prescott, Sam, and Tara Carpenter teaming up once again to take down Ghostface.
It's a kind of Scream dream team we may never see again.
A little bit of trivia before we put this thing on a shelf.
With Campbell's absence in the film, that makes Courtney Cox the only cast member to
be in all six of the franchise, except also Roger L. Jackson, simply credited as the voice.
(34:24):
He's done the killer's disguised voice over the phone in all six as well.
And for you Powerpuff Girl fans, he's also the voice of Mojo Jojo.
I personally know very little about that.
It's a cartoon and I think the character is an ape.
I'm not sure, but I know it has a huge fan base.
So for those of you who find that interesting, there's a little tidbit.
The filmmakers knew right off the bat they wanted Hayden Panettiere back, but they struggled
(34:46):
to find her.
No joke.
She'd taken a four year hiatus from acting and was not represented by an agent at the
time.
Franchise creator Kevin Williamson, while filming in Tennessee, met some of the producers
who had worked with her on Nashville.
And one of them apparently had her current contact information, which is the only way
they got in touch with her.
At the party early in the film, Frankie asked Tara if she's a member of the Omega Beta
Zeta sorority.
(35:07):
This would have been the fictitious sorority that Sarah Michelle Gellar's C.C. Cooper
was a member of in Scream 2.
Incidentally I did find an actual Omega Beta Zeta sorority as I was Googling.
And according to their Instagram page, they were chartered in 2011, whereas Scream 2 of
course debuted in 1997.
I wonder if they know.
Speaking of that party, if you look closely you will see one woman dressed up as Wednesday
(35:28):
Adams.
Need I explain that joke?
As is often the case, a character shares a last name with a character from another horror
film or franchise.
Billy Loomis, for example, in the first film, is named after Dr. Samuel Lewis in Halloween.
Tamara Weaving's character, the film studies professor who is the first to go in this movie,
is named Laura Crane, a reference to Marion Crane in Psycho.
(35:49):
Likewise Sam's love interest is named Danny Brackett.
In Halloween, one of Laurie Strode's friends is named Annie Brackett.
Alright, it's time to shelf this joker.
For those of you new listeners or those who just need a rehash, there are five shelves
in my DVD cabinet, so I simply use the bartender's model.
Best films go on the top shelf just like the good liquor, Rotgut goes on the bottom shelf,
(36:10):
and then of course you have second shelf, middle shelf, and fourth shelf in between.
As always when it comes to shelving films of any sort, but particularly these, I really
have to strive to keep my personal biases out of it.
Mostly.
It's a screen film, and I never met one of those I didn't enjoy, present consideration
included.
It's fun, it's well paced, it's well directed, well executed overall.
(36:31):
There are issues, yeah.
Mainly I do feel like the writers played this one too safe.
I really do like every one of the principal characters, but to have all six make it out
alive, especially with as much damage as they took, it's just a bit of a stretch.
At the very least it's a cop out.
The rules are a bit of a reach and they're not always followed.
And most importantly, a screen film without Neve Campbell is like grits without shrimp.
(36:53):
It can exist, you can sample it, it's not that bad, but when you toss that extra ingredient
in you have something that's decadent and leaves a lasting impression.
Keep in mind that I do enjoy all six, but if I had to rank them, the order would be
first and foremost Scream, the original.
Second would be Scream 4, third would be Scream 2.
And by the way, I just have to throw out here, Scream 2 was the best reviewed critically,
(37:15):
even higher than the original.
I think the critics may have in the first installment missed what it was trying to do,
only realizing it in the second, but I digress.
Number four I would say is Scream 5, the 2022 film just called Scream.
Five, this is where I would put Scream 6, at fifth out of the six installments.
And then of course Scream 3 hits the very bottom.
(37:36):
Scream 3 leaned much more into comedy and okay granted deliberately, but it went way
over the top.
Still, I appreciate it for its commentary on Hollywood and the industry as well as the
genre.
I still rank six above it simply because I think six does a better job of building suspense
and gives us some truly memorable scenes.
That said, it's this low on the list for a reason.
Therefore I'm going to place this on the fourth shelf.
(38:03):
It kills me to do so.
I need to do a rewatch of the original film to be sure, and I am tomorrow night.
But I think the first film might actually hit top shelf for me.
Two and four would easily be fourth shelf.
Again, I speculate prior to rewatch and I do own all six.
So if I keep going with this, we'll likely be talking Ghostface again.
I think all the way down to the 2022 film, which come on, let's just call it five, any
(38:24):
fan of cinema in general should watch them.
Even if you don't like horror, it's a genre that is wildly popular and has a huge impact
on the art form.
If you're a big fan of horror, then you darn well better watch them all, including six.
However, if you're just not that into that genre, you can miss this one and be as knowledgeable
as one needs to be.
And it pains me to say that, but hey, never say I'm not fair.
(38:45):
All right, we've got it shelved.
You know, I try on this podcast to release an episode a week.
Some weeks are slower than others and I've been known to do double duty.
Heck a couple of times I put out like three within a week span, which means I'm ahead
of my initial schedule.
A while back, however, just before I began the October blitz of horror films, I teased
a film that was going to drop right before we started the spooky season and life got
in the way.
(39:05):
Took a little longer than anticipated.
I swear these students, the university that pays me, they all think I need to be doing
stuff for them instead of my side passion project.
How dare they?
But now I'm going back and making good on that earlier tease.
We've already looked at a couple of con films, one I really liked and one that was,
well, it was the hustle.
Still, I made it no secret that it's a genre I enjoy when done well, which is to say not
(39:27):
the hustle.
It's been ages since I've seen next week's shelf pick, but I tend to remember it being
well done also.
Certainly has a star studied cast.
Edward Burns, Rachel Weisz, Andy Garcia, Paul Giamatti, Morris Chestnut, the always impressive
Dustin Hoffman.
It's directed by James Foley, who gave us a couple of other great crime films at close
range after Dark, my sweet, not to mention the testosterone fest that is Glingary Glen
(39:51):
Ross.
All right.
Looking at his IMDb page, I'm also seeing he did two of the 50 shades films.
So yeah, OK.
Well, those others I mentioned aren't bad.
So next week ish, we're going to get our con game back on.
Look for a new gaffe as we swindle our way through 2003 is confidence.
It's currently streaming on Amazon Prime.
(40:11):
So it's your homework to give it a good watch and be sure to take notes or just munch popcorn
and enjoy.
If you do watch it and want to talk about any points, feel free to shoot me an email
at steven at shelf criticism dot com.
That's S T E P H E N.
You can also find the podcast on Facebook at Shelf Criticism.
And don't forget about my other podcast, Real It, where I am joined by my colleague, the
(40:31):
extraordinary Mackenzie.
You can find that just about anywhere you get your podcast fix, as well as our official
website, real it podcast dot com and our social media at real it podcast.
And remember, that's R E E L, as in a film role.
Capping off the spooky season the right way, Mackenzie and I will be in the studio Monday
recording our next episode.
And I intend to have it out well before Hallows Eve.
(40:52):
We'll be discussing Susan Hill's spine tingling book and the 2012 adaptation, The Woman in
Black.
After that, Shelf Criticism is going to take a bit of a breather as the season ends.
However, Real It will soldier on and Owls of Palace Production will have another special
episode somewhere in this penultimate month of 2024.
And lest you break down in tears, Shelf Criticism is going to return in December.
(41:13):
Though not my favorite holiday, as I said at the beginning, there are some Christmas
films in my DVD collection, most of which I have never seen.
So in December, prepare yourselves for Shelf Christmasism.
You got plenty to look forward to.
But until next time, DVD aficionados, remember to treat yourself to a little shelf indulgence
of your own.
Amelia, sing us home.
(41:44):
Shelf Criticism is an Owls of Palace Production.
This podcast is in no way connected with the educational institutions the host is employed
by.
The opinions expressed herein are solely those of the host and do not necessarily reflect
the views of any other organization with which he is affiliated.
Most images displayed are public domain.
Images and stills from films, descriptions of scenes and passages from books are used
(42:07):
for educational and critical purposes and not for profit and therefore fall under the
terms of bad use.
Not every movie needs a post credit scene.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.
True Crime Tonight
If you eat, sleep, and breathe true crime, TRUE CRIME TONIGHT is serving up your nightly fix. Five nights a week, KT STUDIOS & iHEART RADIO invite listeners to pull up a seat for an unfiltered look at the biggest cases making headlines, celebrity scandals, and the trials everyone is watching. With a mix of expert analysis, hot takes, and listener call-ins, TRUE CRIME TONIGHT goes beyond the headlines to uncover the twists, turns, and unanswered questions that keep us all obsessed—because, at TRUE CRIME TONIGHT, there’s a seat for everyone. Whether breaking down crime scene forensics, scrutinizing serial killers, or debating the most binge-worthy true crime docs, True Crime Tonight is the fresh, fast-paced, and slightly addictive home for true crime lovers.