"Someone has taken their love of sequels one step too far."
Budget:$24,000,000
Revenue:$172,363,301
Release:12/12/1997
Genres:Horror | Mystery
Original language:English
Spoken languages:English
Countries:United States of America
Overview:
Two years after the Woodsboro murders, Sidney Prescott acclimates to college life while someone donning the Ghostface costume begins a new string of killings.… Expand
Wonderful bedfellow to the first film.
I'm just not buying into the bad rating for this film, in 1996 Wes Craven's Scream reinvigorated an ailing genre and got fans back into the horror groove. The love for that film, I feel, tends to skew opinions of the second instalment in what became the Scream foursome, Scream 2 seams perfectly from its starting point to up the daring ante, and plonk tongue even further into its cheek in the process.
Sidney Prescott has moved on from the horrendous murders in Woodsboro and is at college getting on with her life, but the peace and hope for a bright future is quickly shattered because the Scream killer is back for more carnage...
The film's opening perfectly sets out the tone for the entire picture, we see a cinema full of fake knife wielding youths dressed as the Scream killer, the film they are watching is Stab, the story of the Woodsboro murders. It's a wry commentary moment from Wes Craven, but in truth it's just one of many he makes in the film, the in jokes about sequels never gets tired, and the boo jump scare moments are all there to enjoy. Red Herrings come and go, and all the great characters who survived the first film are back again. Dewey & Gale get fleshed out a bit more, and one time caged innocent (and chief suspect) Cotton Weary is now a major character just begging us to find out if he's hero or villain.
This is a sharply scripted piece of work, it knows its aims and delivers what it sets out to do, it benefits from a brilliant sound mix to emphasise the mayhem, and Craven is something of a master in racking up the tension. To laugh and be scared is the order of the day, so sit back and enjoy a film that to me proves that not all sequels suck. Oh the ending does not disappoint at all either I have to say.
Scream 2 is a very worthy and enjoyable companion piece to the first film, very much so. 8/10… Expand
50%
CinemaSerf
Geronimo1967
Created:2/13/2023
Updated:2/13/2023
So, moving along two years from the first carnage, "Sidney" (Neve Campbell) has moved into the Omega Beta Zeta frat house and is getting on with the her life. Well, that is what she hopes anyway but after a few minutes of this derivative and unimaginative sequel, we are back to square one when she learns on television that the grim reaper is back taking out fans at a sneak preview of "Stab!" - a film based on her first terrifying experiences. Then her friends start to drop, one by one - slasher style. Can she and reporter "Gale Wethers" (Courteney Cox) stay alive long enough to find out just who - or whom - is behind these ghastly crimes? I'm sorry, but this is just a straight and pretty shameless rip off of the first film. It's entirely devoid of menace or originality and the concluding twenty minutes are borderline farce. Wes Craven has a magic touch when it comes to gory action-horror films, but here he left it on the bathroom floor. This is just poor and repetitive and despite a competent cast just left me yawning after twenty minutes. Two hours is simply ninety minutes too long. I'm certain there will be a "Scream 3" - but I don't hold out high hopes.… Expand
60%
Nathan
TitanGusang
Created:3/5/2023
Updated:3/5/2023
**_Scream 2_ starts off strong with a fantastic first act, but slowly stumbles into mediocrity with a lackluster finale.**
The beginning of this film was exhilarating, it was so messed up seeing how infatuated people were with this real-life killer and their seeming lack of awareness that a woman was being brutally murdered in their presence. They crank up the gore from the original, leading me to believe that we were going to be in for a treat, but I was wrong. The first act was really strong, and I enjoyed the college campus setting with some exhilarating scenes in the sorority houses. But towards the end of the second act, the film starts to drag on, with too much down time spent on character development and lackluster chase scenes. I think the main killer’s motivation is pretty weak. They try to pull off a _Friday the 13th_-type reveal with Billy Loomis’s mom, but it just doesn't land. She abandoned her child before the first film, and all of a sudden, after he becomes a killer, she wants to get revenge on the victim? It just does not make sense. I did enjoy Mickey, as he was the only interesting new addition to the film. This story had a lot of potential, but I can't help but feel it was slightly wasted.
Our performances were mixed this time around. Neve Campbell and Courtney Cox were fantastic; they are the true stars of the franchise, and their characters have such a nice arc here that I really appreciated, especially Cox. Jamie Kennedy was also great as the only character who truly realizes what is going on in this horror film, his commentary going forward will be missed. David Arquette was again pretty weak; I do think it mainly had to do with poor writing, as the crimpling walk he had to perform felt weird and in poor taste. Jerry O’Connell was corny and forgettable. Liev Schreiber’s character stinks. Timothy Olyphant was the only new addition that I genuinely enjoyed.
The direction from Wes Craven was still great overall, with some fantastic scenes, particularly in the sorority house, that I thoroughly enjoyed. This may be personal taste, but I still think this franchise can push the horror and gore more. I feel they are giving us a tease in every film of what they are truly capable of.
Overall, _Scream 2_ left a lot on the table for what could have been a really great sequel. It is still somewhat enjoyable, but it is hard to deny the massive step back it took from the original.
**Score:** _63%_
**Verdict:** _Decent_… Expand
Dimension FilmsUnited States of America
Konrad Pictures
