Paul Evans People often talk about how poor sequels are in comparison to the originals, but with Scream that is far from the case, the original in my eyes is a classic, it helped redefine the Slasher movie, return it to the fore front of cinema for several years. Scream 2 in some ways is better then the first, the script is a little tighter, it's not afraid to have a cheeky laugh at its own expense, the killings are perhaps bigger and bolder, and they find a way to shut Sarah Michelle Gellar up, who could ask for more.Some of the cinematography is excellent, it's a very good looking film. I think Neve Campbell's stage dance is one of the film's best moments, it works on so many levels, menace and confusion, it is very nicely done, similar to those great moments in the opening sequences at the cinema too, we as an audience are allowed to see what's going on in the midst of the noise and distraction.It loses points for making Dewey a complete and utter idiot, every time I watch this now I can only see his character from Scary movie, but there's little difference between the two. The killer(s) certainly comes as a surprise.A very good Slasher movie.

Scream Fan Theory Scream 2. As much as you may love the original Scream, you may not enjoy Scream 2 nearly as much. Most fans consider the first superior; it has a 6.1 compared to Scream's 7.2 on IMDb, a 61% on Metacritic to Scream's 63%, and it rarely beats the original in both forums and rankings of the films. (To be fair, it does have 2% higher on Rotten Tomatoes, at 81%, to Scream's 79%.) After all it is a sequel, which deems it a dumping ground for many fans of the genre, including Randy.Randy's argument in Scream 2 is simple: sequels are often paint-by-the- numbers Hollywood cash grabs (looking at you, Friday the 13th Part 2), following the original verbatim, with no original screams or laughs. Scream 2 initially does follow the structure of the original. The victims of the second movie match those in the first movie to a limited extent, leading Gale to invent the copycat theory, which states that the killer is patterning himself after the original film.Williamson is, in the meta style beloved by fans of the franchise, stating that Scream 2 is, prior to his death, inferior to the original. After this point in the film the copycat theory falls apart, as Randy was obviously not killed in the original. Starting at this point, the film becomes far more exciting: all bets are off, as the death of the franchise's most beloved supporting character kicks off a whirlwind building to an epic chase in a theater which comprises roughly the second half of the film.One of the more often discussed points of Scream 2 is that Mickey's love for sequels foreshadows that he is the killer. Sidney believed Billy and Stu killed because they "had seen one too many horror movies"; she may also have believed that Mickey simply took his love of sequels too far, leading him to join the serial killer network described by Mrs. Loomis near the end of the film and promptly join her on the murderous rampage which claimed the lives of eight innocent students. In effect, Mickey symbolizes support for the sequel in the horror genre, and when he kills Randy, who represents disdain for sequels (going so far as to claim they ruined the horror genre), Williamson sends a much-needed "fuck you" to those who, although fans of the first film, disregard the second.Furthermore, as sequels are often deemed unoriginal, enjoying them may imply that sequel lovers are themselves less original. In Scream 2, this is certainly true, as Mickey's motivations are hardly unique, both in that he agrees with the moral majority which believes horror movies create psychos and in that he fills in for Stu's role in the first film, in acting as the sidekick who is first to go. Williamson would be hard-pressed to cite an example of Mickey expanding meaningfully on the Scream mythos as he functions as a killer. In effect, Mickey himself also represents the convention of the horror sequel: a paint-by-the-numbers cash grab (as I described earlier). Thus, Mickey's death essentially represents the death of the unoriginal sequel; much as Scream hoped to end horror clichés such as "I'll be right back" and investigating a strange noise, Scream 2 hopes to end unoriginal sequels.I have heard criticisms that Mickey's character is too on-the-nose, in that he is a film director ranting about the psychological effects of horror films. However, this critique falls apart quickly when we compare it against the incredible reveal in Scream 1, in which Billy states the famous line, "movies don't make psychos, Sid. Movies make psychos more creative". The Scream franchise has never been particularly subtle, ranging from the thinly veiled allusions to Columbine in Scream 3, the aforementioned scenes in both the original and the sequel, and the rant about the increasingly contrived additions to the Stab franchise (time travel is a major plot point of Stab 5) which implies the pointlessness of any Scream film past Scream 3. And I have never heard any of those films criticized for their bluntness.Scream 2 understands the genre deeper than even the original film. Its first major point of analysis is its middle finger to detractors, its second the (naive) death of unoriginal genre sequels. However, there is another key insight.It occurs when Mrs. Loomis shoots Mickey. In order to understand why this death matters, we have to understand what Mrs. Loomis represents. Out of all seven killers within the movie franchise, nine counting the MTV television series, Mrs. Loomis is the only one not affiliated with the genre in some way or form. Billy and Stu are casual fans who took pointers from the genre. Billy mentions The Exorcist, and Stu mentions watching a few horror movies, likely slashers such as Halloween, Friday the 13th, and A Nightmare on Elm Street- and taking notes. Mickey is a film student, obsessed with proving that sequels can be better than the original. Roman is a film director who abandons his in-movie movie Stab 3 for the real movie Scream 3 and set in motion the events of the first film, after creating a "family film" documenting the affair between Maureen Prescott and Hank Loomis, Billy's father. Jill enjoys watching Shaun of the Dead with Kirby. Charlie flirts with Kirby about minute details of Texas Chainsaw Massacre, films everything, and asks his classmates randomly what their favorite scary movie is, awkwardly Ghostface without Piper is familiar with horror tropes, as we learn in her reveal in which she rants about the sexist assumption that the killer had to be the son of Brandon James, and finally, Kieran does not seem to be aware of the genre, but he is a bit of an exception already, having been the only Ghostface to be killed by another Ghostface and be part of 2 separate killing sprees.

adonis98-743-186503 Two years after the first series of murders, a new psychopath dons the Ghostface costume and a new string of killings begins. Scream 2 is directed by Wes Craven once more and stars Neve Campbell, Courteney Cox, David Arquette and Jamie Kennedy and what truly surprised me about this movie is how they basically make fun of terrible horror sequels without the film being terrible and actually it's as good as the first one if not better it also has a bigger cast this time Sarah Michelle Gellar, Liev Schreiber , Timothy Olyphant, Jada Pinkett Smith and Jerry O'Connell and although it's basically the same once more it's not a bad re-telling of the same plot there's some shocking plot twists especially with Kennedy's character and the film itself is directed by Wes Craven once more which it makes you wonder on how did it got a 56% Audience Score on RT? And just like the first film the beginning of the movie is again an awesome powerful scene.

skybrick736 The genius of Scream 2 is the callbacks and homage it pays to former horror sequels and to the original Scream. Scream is iconic for its self-reflection, its placement in the horror genre, and the rules, which horror movies abide by. My own set of rules to a great sequel differ than the film. The rules are simple but are sadly not achieved as often as they should be. First, continuity, have a story that follows the events from the original or just limit the plot holes and have it be logical. Scream 2 passes the first rule with a big check-mark. Second, bring back major players, which Scream 2 exceeded at by starring Neve Campbell (Sidney), David Arquette (Dewey), Courteney Cox (Gale), Jamie Kennedy (Randy), and Liev Schreiber (Cotton). The third and final rule is a trickier concept to handle by filmmakers, which is maintaining the same atmosphere that made the original fantastic but to steer the story in a new direction. Wes Craven fulfilled all these rules, especially the third by preserving the character's personality, comedic moments, music theme, film style, and general mood and feeling of the film. Craven also connects the dots perfectly beginning to end on killer identity and motive and concluding with a satisfying ending. For all the reasons above, if I was in a film class and had to name a sequel that surpassed its original, one that would definitely come to mind is Scream 2.