Originally Posted by hanshotfirst113 (Post 11710753)

"Old man take a look at my life, I'm a lot like you, 24 and I think there's so much more."
Neil Young and the Stray Gators

"I don't give a damn for the same-old played out scenes, I don't give a damn for just the in-between, I want the heart, I want the soul, I want control right now."
Bruce Springsteen and the E-Street Band

HE'S BACK! Yes, fellow horror fans, Wes Craven has returned to the franchise that made him an icon for the 90s generation of post-modern, self-aware, and in tow he brings Kevin Williamson, the scribe who scripted the first two outings, with alleged rewrites from Erhen Kruger, the screenwriter of the third installment as well as Transformers 2&3. But at this point, self-awareness has reached it's peak and culture has practically started eating itself. Is Williamson's smart-aleck brand of horror already out of date? Does Craven, pushing up on 70 now, still have the guts, especially after a string of misfires like the Cursed and the god-awful My Soul to Take?

The good news is that the answer to the latter is largely yes. More brutal than many a young horror director, Craven still puts he gore and brutality onscreen with a viscera that the 80s MPAA never would've allowed, though as imaginative as some of the kills are, there is a point where stabs in the guts get a bit old. Still, Craven and horror alum Peter Demming, the ASC ace who managed to keep up with Sam Raimi's manic direction in Evil Dead II and the romping Drag Me To Hell, deliver the goods with some rollicking, generally suspenseful, and satisfying set pieces and Craven's ever reliable spooky skill indicate that the PG-13 rating was, happily, never in anyone's mind.

And Craven happily manages to get in a delicious dig as one character defeats a villain and cries "You know the thing about remakes? Don't 'mess' with the original!" washing away the memory of the appalling, terrible, abortion of Nightmare on Elm street that recently raped the legacy of a great film in the name of a dollar. Sadly, THIS is where the film SHOULD direct its energies and neglects to. The opportunities to satirize the current industry and it's obsession with remakes (and even the audiences' complicity), but Williamson's script is sadly a bit sluggish, and despite references to the likes of Don't Look Now and Suspiria and Peeping Tom make me wonder if Williamson just Googled something or has actually SEEN the films. An injection of artsy spookiness would do the franchise wonders if they want to keep this tired series going. Craven's obvious skill at orchestrating suspenseful and fluid camera work beg for a film that let's him cut loose with his surrealist edges like he did in Nightmare on Elm Street and New Nightmare.

The pairing of Williamson and Craven was once inspired largely inspired, largely because of Williamson's ear for dialogue, something that Craven often handled in a clunky way in his own scripts, in spite of his strong ideas. But Williamson can't help but feel a bit like a relic of the 90s (with the current wave of 80s nostalgia, he should be popular again in a decade or so), and as one character cries "How meta can you get?!" and expects the audience to buy into her claims that she doesn't know what it means. Happily, the film manages to mix it up, bringing along the classic cast with some hot new stars, but it just doesn't feel as hip as it once did. For horror fans, Scream 4 is a fun trip back in time that doesn't completely manage to recapture the glory of what once was, but still brings to mind fond memories of the good old days, and it's a good time. Craven, happily, still has it, and in spite of the films flaws, there's lots of fun to be had. But Williamson's Scooby-Doo/Agatha Christie mysteries and ironic dialogue show that he's still got some ideas, but he needs to refine them. The whole affair is comfortable, but never exceptional, with Courtney Cox's plastic-laden face somewhat emblematic of the film's sense that things are getting a little old.

Still, it hard to deny that even with the film's many flaws, this is a pretty good time for genre fans. Craven, always intellectual and outspoken in use of the horror genre as a political allegory, as well as never shy about his opinions on pointless sequels and greedy producers, doesn't have anywhere the cutting commentary on the movie business that the film begs for, it's a little slow, and it's getting old, but there's still fun to be had. But they're going to need to spice things up if they want to keep them going.

Originally Posted by Matthew Chmiel (Post 11711263)

I can longer see R rated horror movies? :confused:

Originally Posted by Dr. DVD (Post 11711165)

^ Little late to the party , aren't we?

Originally Posted by Solid Snake PAC (Post 11711265)

Been holding that load for a whole, eh?

Originally Posted by Dr. DVD (Post 11711292)

What I meant was the teenage demographic that makes a hit of most movies can't do so. The original Scream movies came out in the final years of the time theaters didn't really check to see if you were legitimately of age.