Scream 4 (2011) User Reviews

It's a pretty good movie.

[Sleepin_Dragon · 7/10 · 8 August 2021]

I couldn't believe my eyes when I saw that Scream 5 was in the pipeline, it instantly prompted me to revisit the films. This film could have easily been a disaster, but in all reality, it's a pretty fun watch.

I'm not sure there's much here for the casual viewer, it is one to please fans of the originals, and of course there is a new set of rules. I can't say I warmed hugely to any of the new cast, the joy comes from the original lineup.

The start was very imaginative, and good fun, the ending definitely came out of left field, but it grabs your attention. Lots of scares and thrills.

Here's to Scream 5.

7/10.

Very good, especially for die-hard fans

[MatthewKerr · 7/10 · 27 March 2011]

THIS REVIEW IS SPOILER FREE: READ ON FOR MY REVIEW ON SCREAM 4 (2011) I was pleasantly surprised. This was a great movie, especially for fans of the original. It makes up for the awfulness of Scream 3, and includes many very talented new actors and actresses. I was very surprised to walk into the screening theater and see a fantastic horror film. As soon as the Dimension logo appeared on screen, my heart began to race. The opening scene was brutal and hilarious, and it was great to see all of the original characters back on the screen again. I found the Wes Craven cameo, and was laughing as I spotted it out. This movie was great to watch, even though there were some things that needed to be fixed. Very minor problems though. There were some parts in the dialogue that seemed unrealistic (Ehren Kruger re-writes), but it wasn't a huge deal. Also, the ending was kinda long, but it was also very suspenseful. I would most definitely recommend this to a friend in search of a good horror movie.

A Slasher that is going back to the style of the 1st, yet it's still predictable

[rgkarim · 7/10 · 15 April 2011]

It's been a while since I have seen a slasher, and Scream for that matter, yet here it is years later and finally we are getting back to the roots of the classic slasher. The movie starts out with a couple of funny scenes that lash out at the recent slashers that have been produced and how predictable and cheesy slasher films are, but then dives into the cliché of slashers starting with two helpless victims. After that, we start to get back into the classic killing spree that was seen in the first movie with the addition of a lot more gore. Yes, I'm sure we all know that slasher movies are becoming more famous for the increased amounts of blood that are constantly finding their way into the movies these days, as well as the increasing use of the F word.

So what is good about this movie? In my opinion the best part of this movie is the constant slams on horror movies and how lame they can be. The movie does a good job at mocking the genre and pointing out the goods and bads the genre has to offer, which is very satisfying to hear that even directors in this day and age can insult the genre. The second thing I liked about it, was the cast did a good job reviving the series. Yes you had the airheads and geek victims that are famous in the genre, but the main cast does a good job of playing the concerned victims who fear for their lives. The classic characters of Arquette, Cox, and Campbell are still strong and play their roles well as the returning survivors. The new cast also does a good job diving into the series, playing the roles of popular cheerleaders, AV geeks, and bad girls who want to have fun. Although a little overacted, the new generation has potential for making horror genres return to a classic style instead of turning into the crap we have seen it evolve into. A third positive would be the twist that this movie had to it. As I watched the movie, I tried to figure out the identity of the killer, or killers of the movie. I started to narrow down the victims and figured out the identity of one of them rather easily. However the other killer was quite a surprise, and was a nice twist to the movie instead of just a cheap identity that we had seen in the last two screams.

Okay so what about the bad stuff of this movie. Well the first thing I have to say is, the excessive amounts of blood seen in this movie. It seems that as technology improves, more directors think we need to see lots of blood and intestines. That's not my cup of tea to tell the truth and so I could have done without the excessive spill of red liquid. The second weakness in my opinion is the use of the F word. Again I think that this word is the only vocabulary word the movie world knows and I am getting quite annoyed with hearing it used as much as it is. However, if you are not offended or annoyed by the word you won't be too turned off by this movie. A third thing that I felt was weak, was the predictability of this movie. Yes it's easy to tell who is going to die and who isn't, that's what this movie makes fun of, but I found it really easy to predict when things were going to try and scare you. The camera angles, the music, and so much more gave it away and I was not surprised or scared by any of the tricks they tried to pull, though one lady screamed at just about every thing in the movie. Finally the fourth big weakness is the explanation for why the main killer is on the loose. It was lame and kind of cheaply written, and could have been much better had they taken more time to write it. Her accomplice had a better motive for killing a few of the victims, but still it wasn't the best.

Although it is predictable, Scream 4 is starting to return back to the classic work of slashers. It's aggressive humor, colorful cast, and new spin on the mind of the killer made it much better than I had originally intended. However, I still don't like the predictability, the phony bologna acting on some parts, and the weak motif for killing, which suggests that more work is needed before we can return to the old favorites. If Wes Craven decides to do another remake, then I suggest he work on adding new twists and stop making them so predictable.

I recommend this movie for die hard fans of either Scream or Horror films, as well as for those who just can't get enough blood in their day. This may also be a movie for fans who like to make fun of horror movies or are looking for a way to kill time in the day. Regardless I give this movie a 7 at the highest. Enjoy.

Enjoyable and better than the third but not on par with the first two in the series

[chrichtonsworld · 6/10 · 24 April 2011]

Before I begin with the negative I want to point out that I really enjoyed this movie. As slasher movies go this one is pretty solid. However compared to the first two movies in the series it is a bit underwhelming. There weren't as many surprises as one would expect from a movie like this. The killings and chase sequences lacked the the thrills that makes the viewer jump up.This could be because we don't really care for the characters as we barely know them. The whole interaction between the characters was very limited and felt rushed.The deaths were basic stabbing stuff. Not once did you actually thought OMG,horrible! Don't know about you but you have to have at least one scene like that.Also I think Wes Craven was so right to fear that after the Scary movie series that Ghost Face would not be effective any more. And he is right. Every time Ghost Face appeared you just couldn't take it very seriously. Speaking of which. While there were some funny moments it wasn't nearly as sharp as the comedy used in Scream 1. Still I did like the ending very much.Even if more red herrings could made the ending have more impact.Overall Scream 4 still manages to be entertaining and enjoyable as long as you realize it isn't as strong as the first two Scream movies in the series.

Wes Craven, Kevin Williamson and Neve Campbell still make the difference - a fun, nostalgic, and witty sequel that doesn't f*** with the original

[Benedict_Cumberbatch · 15 April 2011]

I'm 23 years old. 12 years ago, I watched the original "Scream" (1996) and it was the first horror movie I enjoyed. It was a landmark in the puberty years of many movie-buffs-to-be who grew up in the late 1990's (good times!). SCREAM 2 & 3 were released in 1997 and 2000, respectively, and although entertaining, didn't hold a candle to the original (which is fine, most sequels don't). "Scream 3", in particular, lacked Kevin Williamson behind the script, and not even Wes Craven could turn what Ehren Kruger wrote into gold (meaning, a good flick; it did make a lot of money, though, and Parker Posey made it hilarious at moments).

So, eleven years later, a new SCREAM movie comes out, reuniting the original director, writer and the three survivors of the franchise, heroine Sidney Prescott (my first movie crush, Neve Campbell, still naturally beautiful and always a competent actress), Dewey (David Arquette) and Gale (Courteney Cox). Die hard fans, like me, have been waiting for this for a decade, and it paid off. Actually, it works so well because it was made 11 years after the last installment. The movie is far from perfect, obviously, but stands as the best of the sequels; "Scream 2" was above the average but came way too soon, and the third one was a wasted opportunity.

The tongue-in-cheek humor works for the most part, and Williamson knows how to parody a trend that he (re)created himself, including the ridiculousness of torture porn from the likes of SAW and its annual sequels - "movies with no character development, in which you don't care who lives or dies". That is the strongest link in this franchise: we've come to care about Sidney, Dewey and Gale, making the SCREAM movies work equally as slashers and satires. Whether or not SCREAM 5 & 6 will be made, it all depends on how much money this will make; I'm satisfied with this 4th chapter, although I won't deny I will still see another one if Craven, Williamson, and Campbell are involved. That said, it was a nostalgic flick that made me feel like I'm a preteen again. It may be a "new generation with new rules", but the iPhone generation oughtta know: "The first rule of remakes: you don't f*** with the original". Bravo, Sidney!

Great fun and I was pleasantly surprised

[mad_mandonna · 7/10 · 15 April 2011]

Who could forget the first time Drew Barrymore met her end after being hunted down by ghost face in the original scream film some 15 years ago. Its been a decade since scream underwhelmed everybody with its lacklustre third instalment and with a fourth on the way I was sceptical about how the fourth would go and how it would affect the introduction to the review I would to write about it.

In my second paragraph, I can now write about how much I enjoyed the film and how I can now use my summary in that Scream 4 (or Scre4m)was "great fun and I was pleasantly surprised". I can't begin to tell you how true this statement is, the plot manages to weave a tidy little knot of a mystery that comes to a surprising and comical climax. The body count is large, making killings in this instalment come thick and fast. Though with a reduced age rating, scream 4 is far more gruesome than the previous threesome and a lot more in keeping with the current horror movie gore fest. To finish off the second paragraph of my review I will conclude that Scream manages to stick to its guns, but modernise itself not unlike the remakes it satirises.

Paragraph 3 contains scenes of critical nature. Now the film is paced very well, however there are a lot of characters to get through. And despite its self aware nature the two-dimensional characters are so underplayed that its hard to feel much for them as they quickly get stabbed to death. The only characters you feel much dread for is Gale, Dewey and Sidney as familiar faces that you don't want to meet there bloody doom,however the new cast have so little characterisation that you really couldn't care less if their stabbed to death and left to dry on their parents lawns. The film also wasn't as scary as the original and despite the "kids" knowing the rules of the horror movie they were starring in they all seem to go outside to investigate a strange noise when they know they're all being hunted by a killer. Whether this is done on purpose, as to mock other horror films is a possibility, but to be honest it would make the film a lot less predictable if they didn't make there predecessors mistakes.

So my conclusion is gonna be as sharp and concise as a horror movie should be. Scream 4 is entertaining, funny and thrilling. And one of the last lines of one of the survivors is bloody great.

"The first rule of remakes: don't f*** with the original"

[polarcola · 8/10 · 13 April 2011]

I literally just came back from a midnight screening of this and I had an amazing time. Craven's managed to reclaim the franchise with a worthy instalment that's a fantastic sequel as well as a quality slasher film in its own right. Honestly speaking, there aren't too many surprises to be had in Scream 4. No matter how mordantly self-aware the movies are (and believe me, Scream 4 gets a little tediously indulgent in its postmodern cleverness), there's an inevitable predictability to some of the proceedings but anybody who's a genre-savvy horror fan will appreciate how brilliantly everything is executed. The opening sequences, for example, are one of the best parts of the movie and are a perfect reintroduction to the franchise and while the bulk of the story lags a little, it's redeemed by the ballsy ending.

The acting is great with the core trio (Campbell, Arquette and Cox) delivering their usual, strong performances and the rest of the cast, however limited their respective roles, are just as entertaining. All you TV buffs there will get a kick out of seeing actors from Heroes, Veronica Mars, True Blood, Mad Men and Community share the silver screen and camp it up. More importantly, the film is hilarious and just a whole lot of ridiculous fun. Craven isn't afraid to take the story to some beautifully insane places and the ending was, to me, perfect.

All in all, it's a great, irreverent slice of horror that's hilarious and true to the franchise. Highly recommended.

A worthwhile watch for any fans of horror, or the Scream franchise.

[dabartman1138 · 6/10 · 22 April 2011]

I only semi-recently started to familiarize myself with the Scream franchise, but I loved it instantly. Creating genuine scares by avoiding all the clichés of horror movies, and turning the genre on its head with its self-mocking humor, and also by turning the killer not into a born psychopath with an elaborate back story or a supernatural, but someone dressed in a mask and robe, who uses his love of horror movies as his weapon against his victims. This helped create the mystery factor for the films, leaving you guessing til the end.

Unfortunately, as great as the franchise as a whole is, the sequels that followed the superb original did not live up to the same revelation in the end. The killer(s) was/were, if not predictable, then just the opposite to the point where you realize they didn't build up to it at all, leaving it to be a bit anti-climactic.

I'm happy to report that this is not the case with Scream 4. Even after an eleven year absence, Wes Craven and Kevin Williamson prove that they are still at the top of their game, and intelligent and original horror can still exist, even in these dark times full of repetitive sequels and remakes, something that the film comments on heavily.

The basic premise of the film is that Sidney Prescott returns to Woodsboro after ten years to publicize her new book on her experience with the killer. As soon as she returns, the killings begin again, and her cousin Jill begins to step into Sidney's shoes.

Where Scream 2 and 3 fail, this one succeeds. While I appreciated how they tried to put the premise of the first film in a different environment, it mostly felt like they were trying to live off the original, rather than build off it. While Scream 4 is constantly aware that it is repeating aspects from the original, making this impossible to be seen as a standalone, it does what any good sequel should do. It manages to take the premise of the original, and up the ante. Speaking of which, another thing that is upped besides the stakes is the body count and gore level. While the deaths for the most part are not nearly as elaborate as the original, they don't feel like the repetitive stab cycles in the 2 and 3. They are more brutal, and certainly show that violence in horror films has certainly gone up.

If there was any one weak aspect in this film, it would be the character development, or lack thereof. The three veteran actors from the trilogy, Neve Campbell, David Arquette, and Courtney Cox reprising their roles as Sidney, Dewey, and Gale Weathers respectively, play their roles very well, even amongst all the younger stars who more often then not, are in the spotlight, and it feels like they've definitely changed since the events in Scream 3. However, in this film itself, it felt as if they were just there as devices to the plot, and given no real character arcs. However at the same time, there wasn't much they could really do, since a lot of the focus had to be on the younger cast members, who actually put up some pretty good performances, though cannot be compared the cast of the original, but still fare a mile better than the characters introduced in the previous sequels.

I really liked how the actors from the two generations interacted, adding to the commentary on how not just horror movies have changed over the years, but our culture as well. With all that said, I suppose this is more of a character based movie than a character development one. Interesting how that works.

I felt this was the only one of the sequels to truly stay with the spirit of the original, while still making it work for today's audiences. The best example of it having the impact of the original has got to be the ending, which I will not elaborate on. All I'll say is that this is the only one since the original where the revelation of the killer(s) surprised me, as opposed to the "it was I, the butler!" conclusions of 2 and 3.

To sum it up, no fans of Scream or horror films could be disappointed.

Inferior entry

[ashfordofficial · 5/10 · 23 February 2022]

Just like most of the horror "reboots", Scream 4 was an inferior entry to the past three Scream movies.

I find this films' extensive usage of clichéd formulas and the exaggerated obsession with internet fame was a bit over the top for me. That's why I couldn't connect with this film unlike previous installments, and also too crowded, too brutal and gory.

Best sequel since the original

[TheLittleSongbird · 9/10 · 15 July 2011]

By all means it is not as good as the classic original, but it is better than the two sequels before it, the second was worthy, the third while not bad as such was a disappointment. On its own and as a sequel, Scream 4 is terrific. I loved the opening, it was bloody and funny and thankfully the rest of the film lived up of the opening. The production values are of high quality still, and the music and sound effects are as haunting and as unsettling as ever. The script has a number of funny lines too, the scares are genuinely intense, the story is well paced and entertaining, Wes Craven's direction is excellent and the characters are still credible with GhostFace still iconic and effective. The acting is great, Haydn Pannettiere is very good, and those from the previous movies who return turn in good performances as well. All in all, terrific and the best sequel since the original film. 9/10 Bethany Cox

Gotta be a Scream fan to enjoy...but I liked it

[ecjones1104 · 7/10 · 16 April 2011]

I will say, Scream 4 was pretty generic, you saw certain things coming a mile away, but I still loved Scream 4, as I loved Scream 1-3 before it. I'm glad the movie contained the original cast, and the regulars were still their normal old selves.(Won't go further into that one) Honestly, even though I was a fan I really hope they don't make a fifth. This specific type of horror movie is in the past, and just doesn't keep up to pace with the genre anymore. I wish that the fourth movie hadn't been made at all, just in that the third gave a plausible ending and a motion that the characters themselves were ready to move on. I don't think the plot of Scream 4 was good enough to compete with that.

Total and utter s**t!

[thombombadil · 2/10 · 16 April 2011]

As a massive fan of the "Scream" series (the third instalment not so much), I was over the moon when the fourth was announced last year, and waited very eagerly, yet patiently, for its release... What a complete waste of my time.

"Scream 4" is an embarrassment to the cast and crew, particularly Kevin Williamson and Wes Craven. It steps far beyond the line between "clever" and "cringeworthy, dumb and pointless" in the direction of the latter. It attempted to mock the majority of horror movies, including its own predecessors, far too hard, making it difficult to take seriously or even watch at all.

The character development of "the new generation" was poor, meaning that it was hard to feel sorry for any of them given the circumstances that surrounded them. Most of the new characters were easily unlikeable. It felt as though their inclusion was purely filler, in order to provide a good number of potential victims for Ghostface.

The direction was horrific at times - characters showed little (if any) remorse for their perished peers. No suspense was created toward or during Ghostface's appearances. It was as though even the writers were unsure what they were trying to achieve. They failed miserably in finding the perfect balance of humour and horror, instead meshing the two together as one big, annoying mess.

The music was used at inappropriate moments and was confusing, in that it didn't really provide a specific feel for the movie. It was even goofy at times, spoiling the atmosphere completely.

The film was terribly structured. The last half an hour (concluding the film) was clumsy and laughable, and the choice of killer(s)(just to throw you off) and the motive(s) was ridiculous and unbelievable.

Poor pacing, no tension, non-existent scare factor, some bad casting, awkward jokes, overly self-referential and a very big anti-climax. Just bad. Some reviewers are saying that fans will appreciate it, but I believe that they will be most offended by this train wreck.

Don't waste your time.

The Franchise Is Back and in Good Form

[gavin6942 · 7/10 · 25 September 2011]

Ten years have passed, and Sidney Prescott (Neve Campbell), who has put herself back together thanks in part to her writing, is visited by the Ghostface Killer.

Not only do we have the original writer and director, and the original cast (for the fourth film in a row), we have such great new talent as Alison Brie, Kristen Bell and Anna Paquin. Wow.

Anyone who saw the first three films knows the original was great, the second was alright and the third was a weird mess. Expectations for a fourth had to be low, right? Well, even if you set them high, they were possibly met. I think this is the best film since the original, and I would be just fine pretending the second and third films never existed.

A Little Anemic

[josephpoulter · 6/10 · 24 May 2022]

There really isn't enough interesting or original ideas here to make a return to Woodsboro necessary, but it's always pleasant to spend time with the beloved trio of Dewey, Gale, and Sidney. The new cast of teen characters are a mixed bag with some having more charm than others, but the tone of the film doesn't hit the sweet spot of some of the other films in the series.

Don't F**K with the original.

[Matt_Layden · 7/10 · 15 April 2011]

Sidney has written a book about how she overcame her horrible past and returns to Woodsboro, ten years after her last attack. Gale and Dewey are married, she's trying to write fiction and he's now the Sheriff. Death arrives the same time Sidney does, people start dying and bodies start piling up. Now Sidney has to look after her cousin Jill, as well as her friends.

The original scream, without a doubt, redefined the genre. So many imitators popped up after that movie came out and the subsequent sequels became exactly what the original was parodying. With each sequel in a horror franchise, the quality seems to be watered down, since we are treated to the same stuff over and over again. This happened to the Scream trilogy. I dug the second one, but the third was a horrible mess. The third works on paper, but not in execution. So here comes the fourth Scream film, trying to recoup what it had lost, but can a 4th film in a series really be fresh and exciting?

I must say that Scre4m did surprise me, I liked it more than I thought I would. In fact, I think it's probably the best since the original. The film feels like the first two, mashed into one. Smart move not to try and copy the third. There are scenes that imitate the original and the sequel, it has a nostalgic feel to it. What Scre4m manages to do is bridge the decades together rather well. It feels like a 90's slasher, but updating for this generation. Mission accomplished to Craven and Williamson.

It's great to see Campbell, Cox and Arquette reprise the roles that made them famous (ignoring the fact that Cox was in friends). Sidney has become a stronger woman, Dewey is more confident as the Sheriff and Gale, is still a cold hearted bitch. It's these three characters that we care about, we gives a crap about the new young cast. They're just there to get sliced and diced. I must say that Dewey does seem to have less screen time here, he's always coming in at the last second. He was never in any real danger, it felt off to me.

This is probably the goriest out of all of them. It has to be, if it wants to compete with the films today. Simple stabbing deaths aren't going to cut it. The film acknowledges this, as well as all the crap that happens in remakes and sequels. I had an inkling as to who the killer(s) was before the reveal, I was never 100% confident though. We are still treated to the same thing that has happened in the previous films. Killer(s) reveal, then a spiel of their motive and of course the climax. Scre4m hits all the same notes the previous films did and it doesn't feel stale.

I think fans of the series will really like this one. Characters do really stupid things, like opening doors and leaving their car when the killer is right outside, instead of staying locked in and calling the cops. Yet this is a series that thrives on that. We the audience, know they will be stupid, Wes Craven knows this, even the characters themselves know this. The film has humour and doesn't take itself too seriously. It manages to stay true to the original films and make a fresh new start.

World Premiere

[Niek_verbiest · 8/10 · 12 April 2011]

If you liked the first 3 movies you will like this one too. It has the same feel as the other Scream movies, but i don't want to spoil any story so i won't say anything about that.

I am a fan of the scream movies but not a HUGE fan that is why i would rate it an 8. Story wise (like every horror movie) it could sometimes be a bit better, but I found this story better then the typical horror movie. The kills were more realistic and the gore levels were appropriate in the scenes in my opinion.

If your a fan of horror movies i would really recommend it though. And if your a fan of Scream movies go see it!

A step-up from the mess of Scream 3 even if this fourth entry doesn't quite fulfill on its promise

[IonicBreezeMachine · 6/10 · 9 February 2023]

10 years after the events of the last Ghostface murder, Dewey Riley (David Arquette) and his wife Gale Weathers (Courtney Cox) have settled in Woodsboro with Dewey now the sheriff and Gale a writer of crime fiction. Sidney Prescott (Neve Campbell) returns to Woodsboro as the final stop on a book tour for her best selling book, but eventually another copycat of the Ghostface murders starts yet again with the murders targeting a new generation of Woodsboro High School students centered around Sidney's cousin Jill Roberts (Emma Roberts).

In 2008, The Weinstein Company had announced their intention to create a fourth entry in their Scream franchise despite Scream initially having been intended to serve as the series capper. Series creator and writer of the first two films Kevin Williamson returned to write the fourthquel in 2010 with Wes Craven soon confirming his return shortly thereafter. As with the previous films, the script went through numerous revisions and re-writes with several versions of the script handed to the cast and crew to prevent leaking who the identity of the killer was. Scream 4 aimed to tie into mass sequelization and remakes that had populated the horror genre throughout the 2000s. While The Weinstein Company and Williamson had hoped the film would inspire enough success for a new trilogy of films (with Williamson even hired to pen Scream 5 prior to 4's release) the film was a commercial disappointment upon release making $97 million worldwide against its $40 million budget of which only $38 million came from the United States (a step down from Scream 3's $160 million). Critical reception did tend to skew positive even if most admitted it didn't hit quite as hard as the commentary of the first two, but taken for what it is Scream 4 is enjoyable if not particularly necessary.

Despite Scream 4 marketing itself prominently with the tagline "New decade. New rules.", most agree that it's only in the first 20 minutes that it pays off on that promise with the very funny and misdirecting opening sequence of a "film-within-a-film-within-a-film" being a funny commentary on the ludicrous nature of sequelization (with a number of shots taken at the Saw franchise). After the opening credits, the movie is just another Scream movie albeit one that incorporates elements of social media while also providing commentary on 2000s horror remakes popularized by Michael Bay's Platinum Dunes or Rob Zombie's Halloween films. While on the surface it seems like a solid enough target as the movie does deliberately call back to plot points and elements from the first Scream 4 and calls attention to the fact they are similar but bloodier and flashier, there's two things working against the film. The first is that despite "inverting" the formula, the audience themselves have gotten wise to that formula so there's not the same level of punch or impact that the material once had with the first two entries. The second is the reason the film didn't resonate at the box office because Scream 4 is largely a send-up of horror trends that were very much on the way out by 2010. With 2009's Paranormal Activity becoming a hit and films such as Saw IV or A Nightmare on Elm Street 2010 posting diminishing returns, Scream 4 was touching on horror trends that were no longer at the forefront of horror audiences' appetites by the time it was released. While the film does touch upon the prevalence of cameras in today's society and the concept of internet fame it feels like a missed opportunity for the film not to take a few shots at the "found footage" gimmick and would've helped give it more relevance in terms of its providing commentary beyond those opening 20 minutes. Despite the material not really justifying continuation of the series, I did like the cast and performances including the new characters who were the best new additions we've seen since the first film. I particularly liked Hayden Panettiere's performance as horror fan Kirby and Erik Knudsen and Rory Culkin were both enjoyable playing fans of the Stab series who are worthy successors to Randy Meeks.

Scream 4 is much better than Scream 3 and it does its job, but it's the kind of movie that starts off bold before settling into a groove albeit a comfortable one. If you're a fan of the series third movie notwithstanding then there's certainly plenty here for you to enjoy so long as you keep your expectations in check.

Best Scream Sequel

[Sober-Friend · 8/10 · 10 May 2017]

This is much better then most horror sequels. This film has moments that "Scream" fans will get a huge kick out of. The story does go a little too crazy however at the end. It does perform as an excellent chapter in the "Scream Series". If you have never seen a "Scream" film that is okay. This film works on its own and you do not have too know anything of the previous films.

In this film On the fifteenth anniversary of the original Woodsboro murders, high school students Jenny Randall and Marnie Cooper are attacked and brutally murdered by a new Ghostface.

The following day, Sidney Prescott returns to Woodsboro to promote her new book, Out of Darkness, with her publicist Rebecca Walters. After evidence is found in Sidney's rental car, Sidney becomes a suspect in the murders and must stay in town until the murders are solved. Sidney's teenage cousin Jill, who is dealing with the betrayal of her ex-boyfriend, Trevor Sheldon, gets a threatening phone call from Ghostface. She and her friends Olivia Morris and Kirby Reed, are questioned about their calls by Dewey Riley, who is now the sheriff of the town, while one of his deputies, Judy Hicks, assists him in the case. Meanwhile, Dewey's wife, Gale Weathers- Riley, is struggling with writer's block. She gives up the writing and decides to investigate the murder instead.

This film was so good I ended up buying it. Now if your looking for something knew in this film then you will be so disappointed. If you want to see a film that will scare you then RENT THIS.

I hope one day we will get a "Scream 5"

An OK Time, But It's Not All It Could Have Been

[deandraslater · 6/10 · 26 June 2019]

The Scream series returns, but it's missing something that's hard to put my finger on. There's something so stale about much of the film. Campbell, Cox, and Arquette seem as game as ever, but they're mostly sidelined to make room for an unexciting group of new blood. Besides Hayden Panettiere as Kirby, these new teen characters don't make much of an impact at all and seem like a far cry from the usual victims that occupy a Scream film. One new addition in particular named Olivia feels more like a vampy cheap 80's slasher character who only exists to get killed. She has no personality whatsoever. This is the big issue with the film - we don't care when people die.

Because of a lack of characters to root for and because the main trio rarely feels like they're in any real danger, it's hard to care a lot and the film turns into less horror comedy and more pure spoof. There are moments in this film that feel much more like a Scary Movie sequel than a Scream sequel and that's a shame. In the other Scream films, there was always a huge helping of humor, but there were also big dramatic stakes and tons of suspense and scares to balance it out. Scream 4 tries to go too heavy on the humor and it doesn't work at all.

The film does come to life a bit during the finale where the killer is unmasked and the film finally hits just the right balance of humor and horror. The killer's motivation is truly both the funniest and most disturbing part of the film.

With a few tweaks, Scream 4 could have really been something special, but as is, it's simply too goofy.

Return to Woodsboro

[maxineedwards-78784 · 6/10 · 24 April 2023]

Sidney Prescott returns to Woodsboro to promote her new memoir and a new series of murders start up in her honor as the police begin to suspect someone is trying to remake the events of the original murder spree.

Scream 4 lacks the suspenseful bite of the first two films and isn't funny enough to work as a camp comedy/live action Scooby Doo episode like the third film which leaves it in a strange place, tonally. Performances are mostly strong with Campbell, Cox, and Arquette as charming as ever and Roberts sinking her teeth into her character and not letting go. The film's attempts at being clever don't feel as sharp as the previous films, but there are a few inspired moments.

Showed this series was worth continuing

[vancet-27187 · 7/10 · 19 July 2022]

Scream 4 may not have been as strong as it could've been but it's undeniably a big improvement over Scream 3 and showed that this series was worth continuing.

A great fun ride

[deandreljett · 7/10 · 21 April 2021]

SCRE4M or Scream 4 is an amazing follow up to the first 3 films, and takes it to a whole another level, tho I love all the Scream films, Scream 4 is my least FAVORITE of the bunch but it's overall great, and hopefully we get a 5CREAM or Scream 5 sooner.

I really liked Scream 4

[JediNinja · 9/10 · 13 April 2011]

I recently saw the movie Scream 4. I really liked it. Coming in to the movie, I was like "Well, how many sequels have been any good?" But I really liked this movie. The movie had great suspense with intense twists and turns. This movie will take you through all kinds of emotions. You'll laugh. You'll cringe. You'll jump out of your seat. Everything. There is one scene in particular that will probably give you nightmares for a while. The cast was awesome. A great blend of young future stars and seasoned veterans. Kudos to Wes Craven and everybody involved with this movie for doing such a good job. I really liked this movie and I think that you'll like it too. I highly recommend this movie.

In Defense of Scream 4

[eyesmalloy · 7/10 · 22 April 2011]

There have been over a dozen horror remakes, reboots and reimaginings in the past decade and most of them were pretty bad. Sitting in the theater on opening night, I had mixed emotions about Scream 4. I hoped it would bring the series back to the level of the original, but feared it would only stray further. As I left, I found myself pleasantly surprised. It was a lot of fun and had a knockout ending. The next day I found it had a solid 7.7 on IMDb. Since then, I've read post after post in which fans have not only bashed the movie (which is fine) but spoiled the ending (which isn't). In my opinion, Scream 4 deserves better.

Scream 4 is a genuine sequel. The original cast reprise their roles and do a great job. Since it is eleven years later, everyone is at a different point in their lives. Sydney is a writer, Dewey is Woodsboro's sheriff and Gale is married to Dewey trying to write her first novel. The characters are older, stronger and smarter. Then there's the new cast. While most slasher sequels offer little more than another batch of doomed sex-crazed teenagers, the Scream teens have always been pretty intelligent with significant time taken to develop their characters. For the most part, this continues in Scream 4. Best of all, original screenwriter Kevin Williamson rejoins director Wes Craven to create a story that's equally fresh and familiar. Yes, Scream 4 not only packs plenty of surprises; it turns the original trilogy on its head!

The Scream series openings have always prided themselves on being shocking and clever and this one is no different. From there the film proceeds to reintroduce the three stars as well as the newbies. Most of the new characters have pivotal roles, some of whom are deliberate reincarnations of past characters. This might make some nostalgic for the days of Tatum and Randy, but I think most will find the new characters interesting enough on their own. The passing of time is captured through the use of technology including Facebook and Twitter, webcams, and smart phones. Like its predecessors, Scream 4 makes several references to other horror films including Saw IV, Shaun of the Dead, and that hilariously long list of remakes used in the trailer. Finally there are the Stab movies, the series within a series that began in Scream 2. In Scream 3, Stab 3 is in production, and by Scream 4, they are up to Stab 7.

While I won't reveal anything about the ending, I will say that it's awesome. In fact, Scream 4 in general is a lot of fun. You'll notice a few scenes that are obvious counterparts to the original, much like what Wes Craven did in New Nightmare. Scream 4 is brutal, funny, clever and scary. If you liked the first three Screams, you'll probably like this one too. If you accept that times and "rules" have changed you're sure to have a blast. I think the main reason some fans have a problem with Scream 4 is that it does not follow the original rules. Others have complained about ridiculous or illogical moments. All I can say to that is...Dude, it's a Scream movie! They all had those moments! Though the films have always been smart, they all came with a side of cheese. Perhaps the best thing about the Screams is that they make fun of horror films while being horror films. So relax, have some Jiffy Pop, and don't take it all so seriously. After all, it's just a movie.

Horrible

[patrick303 · 1/10 · 21 April 2011]

This was the cheesiest movie I have ever laid my eyes upon. I felt raped of my money when I left the theaters. I wanted to cry because it was so bad. I gave it a chance. I did! I swear! But it just didn't work out in the end. I will let you see it for yourself but I recommend waiting for it to come out on HBO or better yet, something like TNT. Ghost face must not go on anymore! For the sake of this country's cinematic reputation. We need to start producing real horror movies. Not children's play things. These sequels do nothing further the actual franchise. I teach high school seniors and all of the students who saw this movie felt the exact same way. They voiced that they wanted their money back. It was not scary, I was not on the edge of my seat, there were no jumpy moments, it was all very predictable and sadly so. I wanted it to be so good because there is a lack of good horror movies out and WES CRAVEN produced the damn movie. Is he going senile? I mean that is the guy who created Nightmare on Elm Street (the original) isn't it? Then he turns around and churns this out. Wake up Craven! WE NEED YOU!