SCREAM 4 (2011) (a review)

SCREAM 4 (2011) (a review)

This is the restart of the SCREAM franchise that re-teams the original writer (Kevin Williamson) and director (Wes Craven). It also brings back Neve Campbell, Courtney Cox, David Arquette and brings in a new group of teens -- Emma Roberts, Hayden Panettierre, Rory Caulkin. This is a movie that was plagued with problems -- apparently they brought in other people to rewrite Williamson and Craven was unhappy about a number of things. The original SCREAM was a big hit. This one wasn't.

The story: Sydney Prescott (Neve Campbell) comes back to Woodboro to promote a book only to have a new Ghostface killer killing off high school students.

Was it good?

No.

Look, there were a lot of problems but for me it came down to something simple. The first movie worked because it had a brilliant idea -- it has a young girl unsure if she should have sex with her boyfriend and then externalized it in the context of a horror movie to being a story about a young girl not sure if her boyfriend is a killer. Yes, the movie had some scares and a lot of humor and the whole deconstruction thing, but the reason it worked, why we rooted for her and became involved with that simple parallel. It's the Buffy method -- understand the emotion your character is going through and find a cool way to externalize it.

This movie had none of it. Sydney really isn't dealing with anything -- in fact none of the characters seemed to be dealing with anything -- and the eventual reveal was kind of boring. The original is all about trusting the boyfriend so when they reveal that he is the killer...well, that was pretty cool. Here, when it is finally revealed it just comes out of nowhere and feels lame. In fact, it would have been better to reveal the killer from the beginning. That at least would have added some tension that was lacking since every scene with them we would know they were the killer planning the next crime right in front of the people trying to stop them.

But this was just lame.

*** AVOID ***

4.3.2.1 (2010) (a review)

4.3.2.1 (2010) (a review)

This is the story of four girls, best friends, who all have their own individual stories that overlap and combine as they become involved in a crime ring that includes stolen diamonds. A girl-centric version of PULP FICTION? A thriller version of SISTERHOOD OF THE TRAVELLING PANTS? Or just a weird sort of jumbled mess? Stars Emma Roberts, apparently trying to break away from her sweet HOTEL FOR DOGS image.

The story: four friend sit in a diner eating before heading off for their own individial adventures -- one is going to an audition (and to lose her virginity), one is dealing with her parents' non-acceptance of her lesbianism, one is being forced to work in a convenience store after her father breaks his leg, and the other is dealing with her mother leaving her father (and her). However, outside the diner, a man running from the police stores stolen diamonds in one of their purses and now through these stories the girls will be pursued by criminals to get the diamonds back.

Was it good?

Not really, but it wasn't horrible. Most movie suffer because they don't try to do anything -- they are just running on plot. This movie tries to do TONS of things. Some work okay, others don't work at all.

The first problem is that none of the individual stories is particularly good. Even the best one -- a girl goes to America to audition for some acting coach and meet with with a guy she wants to lose her virginity to, but then after having sex with her he robs her, so she tracks him down and beats him up some only to have him get out and attack her, so she runs and he catches her, but then a local girl calls her friends to rough the guy up -- doesn't really go anywhere. Maybe the idea is that all these girls learn to stand up for themselves, but it seems like the only way they stand up for themselves is with physical violence and it seems weird to say the way to find empowerment is to commit assault. For instance, with the virginity-and-robbery guy, she doesn't call the police and doesn't get her stuff back (as far as I can remember). So...yeah, the guy will get roughed up, but she's still out all her stuff, her money and her virginity.

The other three stories seem to have even less to them. One has Emma Roberts working in a store where there's the arrogant good looking guy and the nice guy, but it doesn't really go past that. The store gets robbed and you're back to the crooks.

Now I guess the overlapping stories was supposed to be one of the cool elements, and the stories did a good job of interweaving. There are multiple times you see the same event from a different perspective and every time it adds to the story...not an easy thing to do. At the same time, because the individual stories go basically nowhere, the movie as a whole feels repetitious. If the idea was to do female empowerment (something repeated a few times), then they needed to watch more SEX AND THE CITY. In S&tC they will have one key issue -- like, is lying good for a relationship -- and then each of the four women will deal with it in a different way. Here, there isn't any clear theme, no central thematic question. That lack of clarity hurts the movie overall and the writing of the individual stories.

In the end, while there was stuff to like, there wasn't enough good -- and definitely not enough great -- for me to recommend it. But I wouldn't actually tell people to avoid it either as I think a lot of people will find it interesting.

*** NOT RECOMMENDED ***