Axing the Carpenters’ storyline:

Firstly, the controversy of Spyglass Media Group firing Mexican actor Melissa Barrera (the actress behind Scream 5-6 protagonist Sam Carpenter), due to pro-Palestine social media expression concerning the Israel-Gaza conflict; according to Screen Rant, Barrera stated on her Instagram story in November 2023:

“Gaza is currently being treated like a concentration camp. Cornering everyone together, with nowhere to go, no electricity, no water…People have learnt nothing from our histories. And just like our histories, people are still silently watching it all happen. THIS IS GENOCIDE & ETHNIC CLEANSING.”

These statements caused her to be axed from Scream 7, with Jenna Ortega joining her defiance against the studio by leaving the production.

A spokesperson for Spyglass Media Group, the company behind Scream, stated the following with Variety:

“Spyglass’ stance is unequivocally clear: We have zero tolerance for antisemitism or the incitement of hate in any form, including false references to genocide, ethnic cleansing, Holocaust distortion or anything that flagrantly crosses the line into hate speech.“

Scheduling conflicts & heritage:

For Ortega, she was already in a difficult position because of scheduling conflicts with Netflix series Wednesday, filming Season 2. For fans of You, it also prevented her character of Ellie being reprised within S5. She originally wanted to return back in You S4 but couldn’t due to being in Romania for the filming of Wednesday S1, linked here.

I imagine this firing of a beloved co-star (particularly as both Barrera and Ortega are ethnic minorities by being Latinas, with Ortega being 75% Mexican and 25% Puerto Rican) would perhaps be the catalyst for her voluntary departure. Moreover, it wouldn’t be a huge loss in leaving as she was already working on Wednesday.

Back in October 2016, Ortega discusses how proud she is of her heritage by stating:

“I am 75 percent Mexican and 25 percent Puerto Rican. My great-grandma on my mother’s side migrated from a small ranch near Sinaloa, Mexico. She came to the United States as an illegal immigrant in hopes to make a better life for her four daughters. She wanted them to speak to perfect English…to not draw attention and be deported, so they went to English-speaking schools and were only allowed to speak English, so she could learn the language while trying to get her papers.

My mom’s father was born in Puerto Rico, [where he] moved to New York with his family when he was a baby, and then he moved to California during his high school years. My father is 100 percent Mexican, but his family moved to California generations before he was born. Spanish died down in his family, so he is not fluent. We are not really sure which part of Mexico [his] family is from.

Since [he] does not speak Spanish, trying to teach my siblings and me the language when we were little was a struggle. My mom is bilingual because her grandmother babysat her often and taught her Spanish. The plan was for her to speak it to us and for my father to speak English so that we could learn both languages. The problem was, my father could not understand what my mom would tell us in Spanish, and his constant questioning became too much for her.”

In conclusion, I can understand why Ortega joined Barrera’s defiance against the studio, as I’m sure she felt a sense of injustice from how the studio handled things.

However, as a fan, I’m partly disappointed as the original Scream 7 plan sounded very interesting. Essentially, what would happen is Tara would die sometime within the film (I think as the opening kill), which would cause Sam to snap and become the new Ghostface. This doesn’t feel too far fetched due to the hallucinations of Billy Loomis in Scream 5 and 6.

Meanwhile, at the same time, I believe there would be another Ghostface with their own agenda and that Mrs Carpenter would feature in the film. I think it would end up with Sidney having to finish off Sam, as she succumbs to her dark urges. For a full breakdown on this, check out Beyond The Mask’s video about the original plan here.

Desperate, nostalgic measures:

From this, a rewrite fee of around $500,000 to replace the Carpenter sisters’ storyline was required. Moreover, Scream 7 was constantly changing its director involvement, starting with Scream 5 & 6‘s Radio Silence – comprised of Matt Bettinelli-Olpin and Tyler Gillett – until they were replaced by Christopher Landon (director of the Happy Death Day films).

This was due to them exiting in August 2023, in order to focus on vampire flick Abigail (funnily enough starring Barrera), with a longer explanation linked here.

However, Landon was forced to leave in December of the same year after receiving death threats concerning him and his family. This was because of Barrera’s firing, where he was even forced to involve the FBI. He commented that he “got messages saying, ‘I’m going to find your kids, and I’m going to kill them because you support child murder'”. Due to being the director, he was seen as a scapegoat for the studio’s actions and someone that audiences could pin the blame on.

Rather, he stated that he had no involvement in said decision and believes people’s lack of understanding about how Hollywood operates triggered this tunnel vision. For more information about Landon’s perspective on the situation, click here.

Taking up the director’s chair:

To handle the aftermath was original Scream writer Kevin Williamson, with this being his second directorial piece after 1999’s Teaching Mrs. Tingle. Now, I’ve never watched this film but on Rotten Tomatoes, its audience score sits at 31% and an average of 2.8 stars, suggesting to me there is less good than bad. Unfortunately, I feel this way too about Scream 7. Furthermore, on IMDB, it has a 35 Metascore, a rating 5.3/10 and 2.7 stars on Letterboxd.

IMDB asserts that those handling the script were Guy Busick, James Vanderbilt and Williamson respectively. However, Williamson was not the main author of this narrative and instead a co-writer, who entrusted Busick’s screenplay and collaboration with producer Vanderbilt to produce a successful new entry.

Busick was a writer on both Scream 5 and 6, requiring a vital script change after the exit of the Carpenter sisters. Him and Vanderbilt came up with the story this time around; suffice it to say, the global consensus for this is that it has led to a significant downgrade.

While I am glad they brought back Neve Campbell once given the salary she felt “equate[d] to the value [she has] brought to the franchise”, the film’s 3rd act diminished this return heavily.

So, in summary, Scream 7‘s production was problematic due to:

• Melissa Barrera and Jenna Ortega’s departure ($500,000 script rewrite), which backed them into a corner and forced negotiations with Neve Campbell (in doing so, this felt like nostalgia baiting in retrospect)
  
  
• Radio Silence’s departure to work on Abigail
  
  
• Christopher Landon being forced to quit as director due to death threats
  
  
• Kevin Williamson not being the main writer but instead directing the film (his second time in this role); Busick was forced to write a story without the Carpenter sisters

• Melissa Barrera and Jenna Ortega’s departure ($500,000 script rewrite), which backed them into a corner and forced negotiations with Neve Campbell (in doing so, this felt like nostalgia baiting in retrospect)
  
  
• Radio Silence’s departure to work on Abigail
  
  
• Christopher Landon being forced to quit as director due to death threats
  
  
• Kevin Williamson not being the main writer but instead directing the film (his second time in this role); Busick was forced to write a story without the Carpenter sisters

Now that you’ve got a fair understanding of the troubling situation behind this film, I will discuss my thoughts on the film without spoiling.

The Opening:

To begin, Scream 7‘s opening feels very much like a return to form, with this couple Scott and Madison visiting the Macher house seen previously in Scream and Scream 5. However, this time it has become an Airbnb that people who are fascinated by both the franchise’s events (in-universe) and the Stab films can come and immerse themselves in. In doing so, it reminded of Scream 6 via Ritchie’s shrine to the prior films, with plenty of callbacks to the other films.

Within this, there is some subtle social commentary on how we romanticise murderers within fiction through vicarious experience. For Scott, he is a superfan and finds the true crime aspect incredibly interesting. Meanwhile, Madison is apprehensive and dismisses the idea of having a ‘favourite’ serial killer. The narrative also begins referencing Stu and contemplating the notion of if he survived the original film’s events; this is something the film constantly toys around with, even to the end of the runtime.

I found myself quite liking these two, especially the boyfriend Scott as he not only feels like comic relief – contrasting the darker elements of this film – but is also relatable through his silly antics and tendency to photograph everything he sees. Although, they don’t live for very long, as Ghostface ruthlessly kills them both.

For those wondering if this is a spoiler, it is something which is revealed in the trailer via the high angle tracking shot of Ghostface raising his knife to stab her as she falls from the chandelier. Their deaths match the same level of brutality we saw in Scream 5 and 6, something which I do prefer, as it makes the killers appear more menacing.

Ghostface in this opening is also captured in a much more ‘boogeyman’ lens, mirroring that of Halloween‘s Michael Myers, through the stalker approach he adopts. He is more patient and behaves like he is in control, much more than his prior acts of erratic chasing.

My biggest criticism of this opening in retrospect is how isolated and disconnected it felt to the narrative. With every film so far up to this point, the opening is a setup for Ghostface’s behaviour and dissection of his motives. For instance, Casey Becker and Steve Ulrich’s deaths in Scream established the threat that was Ghostface and how he was targeting teenagers.

In Scream 2, the deaths of Maureen Evans and Phil Stevens was because Mickey Altieri wanted to kill Maureen due to her sharing the same first name as Sidney Prescott’s mother (the first Ghostface victim). You see what I’m getting at?

I suppose it could be to either inform the audience that the franchise is leaving Woodsboro behind (as this film is set in fictional town Pine Grove) or to elevate the Stu Macher plotline. They do mention it in passing (such as Gale talking to Sidney and why she is there) but it feels more like a throwaway line rather than something holding weight to the story.

Act 1:

Regardless, the film does start off strong with this opening, transitioning to our new scream queen Tatum Evans/Prescott, played by Isabel May. She and her boyfriend Ben have a moment. Shortly after, we reunite with Sidney, who is much more confident and cocky but maintains her fundamental personality. This film feels like it rewards diehard fans through the references to past films, especially with how they characterise her.

We also meet her husband Mark – played by Joel McHale from Community – who is someone I quite like through his lack of hyper-masculinity. After, Tatum walks to school and we meet her friends Chloe and Hannah, who to be honest are quite forgettable. They are just here to increase the body count rather than do anything meaningful plot-wise.

At the same time, we are shown Sidney running her coffee shop called The Little Latte. In this place, we meet two new characters via Lucas and Jessica (I’m a big fan of Anna Camp after seeing her in You S5). We get the first meaningful phone call from Ghostface, which to be honest is pretty good due to its subversions but I think we have had much better calls in prior films (this sentiment is shared with the opening phone call and how very lacking it was in terms of charm or personality).

Additionally, the film also dabbles in the theme of AI and how this heightens the paranoia within the characters, especially with Sidney. However, I do believe this theme runs out of steam and becomes repetitive by the time the film concludes. What I will say is it allows for the return of iconic characters that I would love to see again. Plot holes be damned.

The one thing people have been saying about Sidney is that she is more overprotective in this film and while I do agree, I don’t think she is as controlling as perhaps what was intended. After all, she doesn’t sit with her in class or home-school Tatum out of fear that Ghostface could reach her.

Notably, we do get a homage to Sidney in Scream 2 via the parallels of Tatum and Sidney partaking in a theatre production. However, instead of being the central figure in the spotlight, Tatum is a shy, insecure mascot who stumbles and doubts herself. This is a change I like and I imagine May potentially found this connected her to the character more through similarities. In interviews I’ve seen, Isabel states how she is an awkward person and so I think being allowed to exhibit this on-screen must have made the role much easier to pull off.

Once we return back to the Evans residence, we get to see that memorable sequence of Tatum and Sidney crawling between the wall. We also get to see just how much of a power couple Mark and Sidney are, going toe to toe with this more agile, swift version of Ghostface. Again, the killer feels more cocky to match Sidney’s newly established confidence. But Sidney is fully prepared to deal with this – reminding me of Halloween 2018’s Laurie Strode through her strategic mindset – and hatches a plan to escape the home relatively unscathed.

The act concludes with the return of Gale Weathers, Mindy and Chad, a reunion that is certainly memorable for both old and newer Scream fans. I do like the continuation of Gale’s fragility from the attacks over the years, as the assault in New York has left her with some nerve damage in her hands.

But what I will say is that despite the trio’s initial presence making me very excited, their overall impact on the story and lack of agency was very disappointing, especially for the 3rd act. Moreover, the reveal of this killer was somewhat interesting in retrospect but still doesn’t really feel satisfying to understand, due to a lack of substantial screentime.

Act 2:

Act 2 is all about uncovering the mystery behind who the killers are this time around, leaving Sidney and Gale to visit Fallbrook Psychiatric Hospital (but everyone in the film keeps calling it Fallbrooks, which is a slight plot hole I suppose) on the hunt for the supposed re-emergence of Stu Macher. Whilst there, they meet an orderly named Marco, who discusses the first Ghostface of this film.

In addition, he mentioned that Stu had signed in there as a John Doe around the late ’90s but had been released 2 weeks prior. This rattles Sidney and leaves her even more adamant that he has returned. This sparks an idea within her to lure out the second Ghostface in hopes of tracking him.

During this, Tatum is with Chad and Mindy, where they decide to round up a suspect list to determine who the killer is, with Tatum mentioning the curfew implemented as a safety measure but that she may have an idea.

Tatum arrives at Parker’s Tavern (a restaurant owned by Chloe’s parents) with Chad and Mindy, meeting up with Lucas, Chloe and Ben. In the sequence, Mindy has another meta commentary (although somewhat diluted compared to the requels discussion in Scream 5 and franchise discussions in Scream 6), this time focusing on the idea of scream queens. They also have her behave weirdly out of character by referencing her friend Sam Carpenter in arguably a very disrespectful way. It is up to interpretation but I saw it as a dig at the actress for not returning.

Afterwards, Tatum decides she wants to be with her mother. During this, Sidney and Gale are contacted by Ghostface, who says he has made it to the Tavern that Tatum and the others are at. In a panic, Sidney goes after Tatum, fearing she is in danger. As Tatum and Ben are leaving, her suspicions begin to grow and she distances herself from him; in doing so, she and Ghostface confront one another, forcing her to run. Also, don’t ask me where the police on patrols are meant to be, since we only got one tracking shot of a police car a while back.

Back at the restaurant, Chad and Mindy’s worries grow as they believe Lucas and Chloe may be Ghostface. So, they try to leave but are faced with a locked door (unsure why they don’t just smash the window of the door and climb out but I suppose it’s because they aren’t definitively sure?). More carnage ensues and we are treated to one of the most brutal yet silliest kills in the franchise. A lot of online discourse has been that this film feels like a Stab film and I can start to see why.

This version of Ghostface within Act 2 feels a little less competent than that of Act 1, creating this cognitive dissonance regarding the persona. But at the same time, he was also brutal when he managed to get the murdering done, being far more physical than just the basic knife stab. Knowing who killed who amplifies the violence being displayed, especially within these scenes.

There is also a moment in this that feels like weird editing, where Ghostface and one character become one and the same. It definitely broke my immersion since the cuts weren’t like Ghostface had run away and then hid, only for another character to be subjected to an attack. No, it was much more like a few seconds of consistent framing, as Ghostface is still behind the victim.

Then, the victim stabs another character who becomes a stand-in for Ghostface. I’ll explain more in my spoiler review as I understand this can be hard to grasp without having watched the film but this just felt like cheap shock value more than anything. The shot I’m addressing is partly shown in the trailer but isn’t heavily focused on.

I also felt the sense of plot armour here, as some characters felt invincible against the masked killer, almost like he himself knew who they would need for any upcoming sequels. This was such a let down compared to films like Scream 5, which took risks and didn’t play it safe (e.g – killing off Judy from Scream 4, beloved character of Dewey).

Once we return to Tatum, she is being chased by Ghostface, with her running down the empty streets and calling out for help. After a certain point, she is able to fight back and demonstrate her worthiness as a final girl, becoming the fighter she aspired to be like early on in the film. We get to see the iconic moment shown in the trailer of Sidney guiding her daughter on the phone to take out the killer. This sequence takes place in Little Latte, Sidney’s workplace. However, Tatum does make a very stupid decision which leads to unforeseen consequences.

Act 3:

The film’s final act takes place back in the Evans residence, with Sidney forced to hunt down Ghostface. This leads to the ultimate killer reveals and motives, which are…well. Random. And feel bizarre. Unlike previous films, which dedicate a good portion of screen time to meeting the killers to some extent, this film feels like it picked them out of a hat and decided that they were the best option.

Now, I can understand the argument of “Well, Nancy Loomis also had very little screen time”. This is true but her motive was a strong one and had actual weight to it. Here, one of the motives feel odd whilst another is actually really compelling in hindsight. However, they are definitely the weakest of the franchise. A fight ensues and it ends with Sidney once again victorious. There is a touching moment between her and Tatum which I won’t spoil but all in all, probably the weakest finale.

Now, for this, I won’t be broadly rehashing the same things I talked about in my non-spoiler review. So, if you want a vague enough summary of the plot’s events, read that first. For this, we will just discuss the narrative and other formal elements.

Killer reveals & motives:

To start, the killers, comprised of Karl Gibbs, Marco Davis and Jessica Bowden.

Karl:

Initially, we are informed that it is Karl. A funny scene which reminds me of my feelings on this reveal was when Gale says “Who is that?”; seriously, who is Karl? We saw him for ONE scene in Little Latte, when Sidney gives him his drink. According to the wiki, he was obsessed with the Stab films, fuelling his fascination with Sidney. We learn when Sidney and Gale go to Fallbrook Psychiatric Hospital that Karl killed 3 women around 20 years ago. There is a picture frame he has of Stab’s version of Sidney via actor Tori Spelling, who we see in Scream 2.

Besides that, there isn’t much to say.

Marco:

Next, we learn explicitly after Tatum is rushed by two Ghostface assailants that there are two more accomplices: Jessica and Marco. The latter’s motive is honestly terrible, where we learn he was a Google security specialist, which is what allowed him to easily create somewhat convincing deepfakes concerning characters like Stu, Nancy, Roman and Dewey. We learn that he too was obsessed with Stab and Sidney Prescott alongside Jessica and Karl. This means that the constant setup and teasing to fans of Stu’s potential return was shut down and essentially scrutinised for suggesting such an idea.

Now, I’m aware that some people prefer Stu to be dead, believing that the hit to the TV was enough to kill him off. However, I think it would be plausible enough for him to return and be the next killer, something which I assumed when the deepfakes changed his appearance from having some scars to none at all. This made me think and still think that the first video call with Stu was real and that the others were all AI-generated. After all, this franchise isn’t afraid to retcon itself. Just look at Scream 3 and how Roman essentially orchestrated the events of the first 2 films.

I constantly imagine a world where we could’ve and still could get a film where Stu returns as the true mastermind – torturing Sidney from the shadows – and Sam succumbing to her darker tendencies, donning the Ghostface persona. That team up would be so emotionally charged and hold huge narrative stakes. But because of Barrera’s firing and the choice to deceive audiences that Stu may be alive, we live in a world where Scream 7 is a shallow sequel and the brand is currently a shell of itself.

Jessica:

Moving on, let us talk about Jessica. To be clear, I am in the minority here of actually appreciating her motive the more I think about it: it is the most extreme form of a parasocial relationship. The idea is in essence that she read Sidney’s book Out of Darkness, something introduced in my favourite Scream sequel Scream 4. Here, Jessica was tired of her abusive husband and the book inspired her to take him out.

Within this, she identified Sidney as a true scream queen and a final girl, dabbling in some meta commentary by addressing the cultural conventions of modern horror. But then she grew frustrated by Sidney’s absence in the public eye, a clear nod to the events of Scream 6 and Neve Campbell’s exit (to be honest, I think this was a good way to tie up this loose plot thread and also add to Jessica’s motive).

To me, this suggests a symbiotic bond between Ghostface and Sidney that many fans will believe in, similar to that of Laurie Strode vs Michael Myers in Halloween. When Jessica asks why she wasn’t there, Sidney says she didn’t want to be stuck in a cycle of trauma and live her life. Jessica dismisses this as a fantasy, saying that “trauma is your life”.

From this, Jessica checked herself into Fallbrook Psychiatric Hospital, which is where she met Marco and Karl. Her plan within this film was to make Tatum the new final girl, giving her trauma by murdering Sidney.

Overall, I think Jessica has the best motive, followed by Marco and then Karl. However, I don’t think these are AMAZING motives considering when we could’ve gotten Stu (and maybe Sam) as the killer. It felt like Kevin Williamson brought him in to make fun of the Stu fans and dismiss those who theorise that he may be alive. After all, every diehard Scream fan (especially those who like Stu) knows that he was meant to return in Scream 3 but didn’t due to the Columbine massacre.

Who killed and/or attacked who?

I suppose we should hypothesise about who killed and/or attacked who in Scream 7. So, here is the following list on what I think happened regarding the attacks and kills:

1. Scott and Madison = Marco
   
   
2. Hannah and Aaron = Jessica (if we listen to the phone call between Sidney and Ghostface, he remarks how she was missed in NYC; this reminds me of Jessica’s frustrations about Sidney not showing up in Scream 6‘s events)
   
   
3. Evans residence attack (Mark injured) = Karl (revealed when he is run over by Gale’s Range Rover)
   
   
4. Karl = Gale (he got bonneted)
   
   
5. Mark’s attack = Jessica (I believe as Sidney’s neighbour, she may have been around a few times and would therefore be able to recognise the house’s layout. Additionally, Marco would still be in the hospital, where he met Sidney and Gale)
   
   
6. Tavern attack (Mindy & Chad injured | Chloe and Lucas killed) = Jessica (when Sidney mentions that she has a son to look after, Jessica dismisses this and says he was just as weak as her husband; I also doubt that Marco would even consider killing Lucas without her permission)
   
   
7. Street attack (Ben killed) = Marco
   
   
8. Marco = Sidney
   
   
9. Jessica = Sidney + Tatum

The characters:

I think when it comes to this film, we easily have the weakest supporting cast. All of Tatum’s friends are just there to be added to the chopping block. This is arguably because of the heavy focus on Sidney and her story that the side characters are neglected.

McKenna Grace’s Hannah is only around for the first 20 minutes of the film, if that – this reminded me of FNAF 2 and how quickly she was killed off there too. Chloe is only here so we can get Chad and Mindy to do something by putting all of the new high school kids into one area: Chloe’s parents’ restaurant. And to be added to the kill count. Lucas gets a fun, brutal kill that quickly turns silly through a CGI head (crazy how he was killed by his own mother here).

It was during this sequence that the weird editing thing I addressed in my non-spoiler review within Act 2 happened. Essentially, Chloe is being attacked by Ghostface but she manages to fight him (or Jessica, I believe) off, with these quick cuts between her and the person behind. She then goes to grab the hunter’s knife. During this altercation, Chad and Mindy are trying to leave the restaurant but are forced to go through the kitchen.

Here, Chloe stabs Chad accidentally in the shoulder, with Ghostface suddenly appearing, removing the knife and then dropping him to the side (plot armour, much?). Then, Mindy hits Ghostface, causing him to slash her in the chest (ironic as this happened in Scream 6). The way this is framed makes it seem jarring and odd that Chloe would stab Chad. If she was hiding behind a corner and assumed it was Ghostface but it was Chad, then I could buy into this mistake. But it felt strange to watch. Because of this, the twins are side-lined for the rest of the film until the very end.

Gale:

Similarly, Gale Weathers. Gale is a phenomenal character which a lot of fans (like myself) love. But she barely took agency after the event in the TV station. At the end of Act 1, she runs over Karl with the Range Rover. That was great. She has backtalk with fake Stu on the phone and then encourages Sidney to help her find out who is doing this.

They go to Fallbrook and figure out who Karl was and determine if Stu is alive. After, they stage an interview to catch Ghostface live on TV so they can track his location. But once a heated altercation between the two occurs and then Ghostface does ring, Sidney runs away and Gale doesn’t do anything.

There’s no phone call shown of Gale trying to reach out to her or anything of the sort. What I assume canonically happened are one of two scenarios:

• Scenario A – Due to the nerve damage in her hand, Gale was afraid of actually going after Ghostface due to fear of being unable to fight back
  
• Scenario B – Gale drove to the Tavern to find Chad and Mindy, where she attended to them (but didn’t ring Sidney to ask where she was?)
  

Personally, I think Scenario B makes more sense but even this feels flimsy, as why wouldn’t Gale ring her? Why aren’t we shown what she is doing? I understand this is meant to be Sidney’s film but you could’ve had Gale turn up late and be a part of the hostage exchange in Sidney’s backgarden. Instead, we have her show up at the end of the film once the conflict has transpired and complaining about being left behind.

Sidney:

I love Sidney Prescott. I think she is on par with Laurie Strode in terms of being my favourite final girl. However, in this film, the heavy focus on her story means that she is absolutely kicking so much ass. But upon reflection, it also means that the killers become incompetent once the mask is off. Why doesn’t Marco check Sidney to make sure she hasn’t got any more weapons? If these are people who have studied her and have been obsessed with the Stab films, then they should know that she always ensures she has a backup plan.

For instance, in Scream 3, when she is forced to use a metal detector on herself by Roman but pulls a spare gun out from her boot and shoots him. That kind of ingenuity. These killers don’t really catch on to her having tricks up her sleeve. Sure, I can chalk it up to Jessica not being mentally stable with how she talks about Sidney. But Marco appears to be calculating and methodical, except when we get to that final scene.

Moreover, so much screentime is given to our favourite scream queen that the other characters are one-note. They should have took the approach of Scream 4 and give the high school cast a chance to breathe and develop a personality. But because of the film’s desire to keep the pace fast and energetic, it sacrifices meaningful story beats that could’ve been given to them. Why do I care if generic high school male #3 is killed? We never learnt his motivations. I’m exaggerating but this is the type of treatment the film offers to its side characters.

If you aren’t a legacy character that’s been here since the original, then you have nothing to offer audiences in this story.

And that brings me to the big umbrella topic which has shaped this film: nostalgia. We can see it in the visuals. The title card that mimics the original Scream until changing to a more modern look. The parallels of Pine Grove to Scream 4‘s version of Woodsboro. The suburban environment feeling very similar to Scream 4 and 5. The use of AI to bring back older characters (e.g – Stu, Roman, Nancy Loomis, Dewey).

This film weaponises nostalgia as a means to get people into cinema seats, rather than provide them a film which is substantial and worthy of the Scream name.