Film Review: Scream 7 (Spyglass Media Group/Project X Entertainment/Paramount Pictures)

By: Jesse Striewski

I’ve been a fairly loyal fan of the Scream films over the years, having gone to see each and every one of them on the big screen since the release of the original way back in 1996. But if you recall my scathing review of the last (and arguably worst) entry, Scream VI a few years back in 2023, I was convinced that the series had run its course indeed.

But there’s always a chance for redemption, and for the most part, Scream 7 hits the mark that’s been largely missed with the majority of the sequels that have come since. Writer/Director Kevin Williamson, whose imprint on the series has been there going all the way back since the original (this marks his first time directing, and first time returning as a screenwriter to the series since Scream 4 in 2011), invokes the same sort of atmosphere and “whodunit” type quality that Wes Craven gave us way back when that’s been largely missing since 1997’s Scream 2.

It’s no secret that this time around Neve Campbell returns as Sidney Prescott (now Prescott-Evans) after missing in action for that last horrid entry. This time around, she’s in the role of wife and mother as her husband Mark (Joel McHale) and teenaged daughter Tatum (Isabel May) are terrorized by another Ghostface killer (or killers). And for the first time in far too long, we’re actually given some characters whose well-being the audience truly cares about again, too.

There’s plenty of nods to the earlier films, with Courtney Cox once again returning as Gale Weathers, and – without giving away too much here – other franchise alumni, including Matthew Lillard, David Arquette Laurie Metcalf, Scott Foley, and of course the all-too familiar voice of Ghostface himself, Roger L. Jackson, each show up one way or another, yet it never comes off as too overly nostalgic. Even Mason Gooding and Jasmin Savoy Brown as twin brother and sister Chad and Mindy from the past two films return for the proceedings here as well.

Sure there’s some cliche or predictable elements that still work their way in, and the big reveal ending is definitely one of the weaker points (though still nowhere near as as bad as that over-the-top car crash of an ending we got in part six). But I heard someone else describe Scream 7 as a “reset” for the series, and after the direction it was heading with the “whiny sisters” (whose sudden absence is honestly not felt one bit here) plotline the past two films were following it is indeed a welcomed return to form. Far from perfect, but a much-needed step above its predecessor.

Rating: 3.5/5 Stars

Film Review: Scream (Spyglass Media Group/Paramount Pictures)

By: Jesse Striewski

I went into the new Scream relaunch/reboot (requel?) admittedly not expecting much at all. But to my surprise, it was actually a much more enjoyable ride than I had imagined; far from a cinematic masterpiece by any means, but an improvement over its past two disastrous predecessors combined nonetheless (they couldn’t just seriously throw a “5” at the end of the title though?! Come on, stop taking yourself so seriously Hollywood).

In this round (which directly follows the events of 2011’s Scream 4), a new group of Woodsboro teens, many with their own unique connections to the original town killings, become the targets of yet another Ghostface killer (or killers?), with estranged sisters Sam (Melissa Barrera) and Tara Carpenter (Jenna Ortega) at the center of it all. When Sam and her new boyfriend Richie (Jack Quaid) enlist the help of former sheriff Dewey Riley (David Arquette), it quickly leads to more faces from the original reuniting and coming to the rescue, including Sidney Prescott (Neve Campbell) and Gale Weathers (Courteney Cox). Even Skeet Ulrich is somehow able to make a brief return as Billy Loomis, but I won’t elaborate any further to avoid spoiling anything.

Long time fans of the series should appreciate all the sly references to the original (as well as other Wes Craven films, including A Nightmare on Elm Street) thrown in, while younger generations should appreciate the more modernized take. The acting isn’t always the greatest, and the gore is at times excessively over the top and unnecessary, but again, this is far from Shakespeare here.

All in all, what directors Tyler Gillett and Matt Bettinelli-Olpin have assembled here is a fairly spot-on homage to Craven’s original work (“For Wes” is promptly displayed over the end credits), and at times I found myself so lost in the plot, I honestly felt like I was that kid sitting in the theater with my friends back in the ’90s all over again. This ship finally seems to be steering in the right direction again; let’s hope those calling the shots keep it that way.

Rating: 3/5 Stars