LogFAQs > #911674121

30. Scream (series) (23.5 points)
Nominated by: V_charon (1/5 remaining)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aPXUOW2-Wsg" data-time="

Importance: 10
Fear: 6.5
Snake: 7

I don't believe there's been a horror movie franchise as iconic and widespread as Scream has been since its release in 1996. Saw and The Conjuring franchise may build strong cases, but they don't match the ubiquitous iconography, star power, and memorable satire the Scream franchise packed in spades. Ghostface has practically become synonymous with the Halloween season. I like what Ghostface represents in the series; any person could literally be Ghostface. He's not a character with deep backstory and lore like Freddy Krueger or Jason Voorhees, he's a disguise that's a reflection of our inner evils. Even more importantly however, the Ghostface identity is a commentary on how horror icons end up under the ownership of their fans and even become "real" in a sense. This is what Craven was getting at in New Nightmare, and its showcased even better in the Scream series.

Scream made Neve Campbell an overnight star, as well as giving huge breaks to actors like David Arquette, Liev Schreiber, Timothy Olyphant, and Rose McGowan. The films' meta discussions on horror films, tropes, and industry practices tore the tired slashers of the 80s and 90s a new one, as Wes Craven built and expanded upon his ideas found in New Nightmare to offer up a reflection of sorts for the director, who had built his name on horror films. Interestingly though, Scream wasn't just a total mockery of horror; it was also a love letter to the house Craven helped built, that ingeniously reveled in the tropes its characters loved to mock. This is what I think helped make Scream as great as it was.

Like any respectable horror franchise, Scream had a few sequels, each progressively losing the original's vision as it went on and on. There's no way Scream 2 could've been as clever and original as the first, but it does have some good commentary on sequels and some really great performances, especially from the aforementioned Olyphant. Scream 3 has its moments, especially when its colored by the real-life Columbine incident, but it feels extremely tired in comparison, becoming fully what the original mocked so hard. It's also the only film in the series not written by Kevin Williamson, and it shows. Scream 4 is honestly just forgettable, which is an even worse fate. Still, I don't think there's any outright bad film here. Craven's directorial eye keeps the original trilogy mostly level and the returning actors never feel like they're phoning it in. Even Scream 4 may have just been ill-timed; crowd-sourced films like Veronica Mars and the ever increasing relevance of Netflix revivals may have rescued Scream 4 from the doldrums of obscurity if had only come out a few years later, especially if timed with the Scream TV series. (Side Note: I would touch upon the Scream TV series a bit here but admittedly I haven't watched it outside the first handful of episodes.)

Craven created a franchise here that rivals and even surpasses his original Nightmare on Elm Street series. Scream captured a particular zeitgeist of the time that makes it timeless, crafting an undeniable formula for success that has never been replicated since. Sometimes scary, sometimes hilarious, Scream has become a top name in horror for all the right reasons.
---

If the suspense doesn't kill you, something else will!
http://tinyurl.com/zqwzc9a - https://i.imgtc.com/3qwvxhc.jpg