Scream 3 Review

Disclaimer: Contains spoilers!

Plot Summary: A new masked killer targets the cast of the upcoming "Stab 3" movie in an attempt to lure Sid out of seclusion.

Review: I have never understood the animosity against this entry except that people wanted more from, what they believed, was the final installment. I can understand those sentiments, but I think this film offered just as much as "Scream 2" while touching on new themes. It is worth mentioning that the creation of the first two entries in this franchise were mostly uneventful, but the production of "Scream 3" was plagued with all manner of problems. There was a major disconnect between the direction the studio wanted to take the film versus the writer's and director, Wes Craven's, vision of the concluding chapter. The script had been reworked at least once and completely overhauled at one point, the studio wanted to tone down the violence like little bitches, and they were ardently in favor of pushing a more conventional story style with heavy focus on the satire rather than the blend with violence of the past entries. With all these things, and more, considered, "Scream 3" gets a much worse wrap than it deserves while its positive aspects are severely overlooked.

Let's focus on what worked this time around. This was the only entry in the franchise that had any scene even remotely scary through the use of Sid's mom appearing as a ghost. While these scenes aren't exactly terrifying, the attempt was much appreciated. The use of Hollywood as the setting, while not the most original, was a welcomed transition of taking the characters farther each time; though, I can see why this may come off as over the top. Although this is technically a retread into the movie within a movie concept, "Scream 2" only loosely examined the idea while this film uses it as the central theme. It goes a step further satirizing the filming process, how studios, actors, and directors can be, and a general sense of how heartless and shallow Hollywood is; some of the best parts of this film are those that make light of Hollywood and the shenanigans accompanied to the genre. Also, the revelation that Gale was meant to be the killer in "Stab 3" was great! Unlike the first two films, this killer had a real plan and is more concise in following through with said plan. If you actually take a hard look at the deaths, the killer's only goal was to get to Sid, since she's in seclusion, and kill her rather than dicking around like the other killers all implemented. To explain it properly: he kills Cotton and his girlfriend because they won't reveal Sid's location. Realizing he can't find Sid's whereabouts, Sarah is killed to shut down the movie in order to gather everyone together. He only kills Stone because he won't stay in the house when he intends to blow everyone up at once. When the explosion fails to kill Dewey and Gale, he goes after them because he needs them dead to lure out Sid. Once Sid does take the bait, the killer once again concocts a plan to get them all together to kill everyone at once. The killer even intended to blame Sid, of all people, for the killings! Starting to get the idea here? Compare that to Billy and Stu killing randomly just to pass blame off on Sid's dad or Mrs. Loomis and her roundabout way of getting revenge on Sid! This calculated approach worked more realistically for me and they still managed to follow the same formula from the other films. Lastly, the backstory on Sid's mom worked as a way to approach this whole "trilogy" notion. The killer's motive was probably the best and most realistic of the bunch despite its haphazard presentation and asinine connection. The motive being personal also felt like a more satisfying note to end the franchise on rather than the intended ending to have Sid as the leader of a cult or some bullshit like that. You might have noticed I only refer to the killer as singular which was a decent twist since most were expecting there to be two, or even three, killers. Learning that this killer set everything into motion from the beginning brings the story full circle emphasizing this idea that it's personal and, as such, comes off more satisfying.

Okay, so now let's address where this movie went wrong. Obviously toning down the violence in favor of increased comedic moments is moronic and for such "pc" reasons at the time. Thankfully, the use of cameos by "Jay and Silent Bob" or mild jokes don't bother me as much as it apparently bothered quite a few fans. The opening, while still good, was not on par with the first two films and the death of Cotton hardly made me feel as though Gale, Dewey, or Sid were in any real danger. Now had it opened with Gale or Dewey dying, we might all be viewing this entry much differently. The killer being "superhuman" was dumb and contrived since this was emphasized too many times. Had he been shot once and it was revealed he had a bulletproof vest, that might have been fine, but it happened too many times. Plus, that's not how a bulletproof vest works but okay. The return of Randy through videotape was too contrived, forced, and stupid. I love Randy, don't get me wrong, but it felt so out of place and none of what he says has any relevance to the plot except as a means to get the characters to focus more on why the killer is doing what he's doing...which they should have already been doing! Speaking of which, Roman being revealed as the killer could have been done so much better. I know I just got done praising it, but it's not the motive that is the problem, it's just him being such a whiny bitch boy that felt lame. In fact, this idea that he's "directing" the killings and that he had no idea things would turn out the way they did was cool, but the sibling route felt like the kind of "I'm all outta ideas" approach that shit like Freddy, Jason, and "Halloween" all went in! Plus, Roman seemingly dying only to come back had already been done! Why on earth would you rely on the same trick twice? These idiotic choices are why I think so many people were left feeling disappointed with what should have been the best unmasking; I suppose at least the buildup was decent. Not killing off Sid, Gale, or Dewey by the end felt like a cheat as well since it felt as though one of them should have gone bye bye. And, finally, the last scene is embarrassingly stupid. So Sid's door opens on its own and she smiles and walks away?! What? That's not even a normal reaction.

Overall, I can see this being more of a mixed bag for people, but it feels just as good as part two for me. It suffered from its own set of problems that the other films didn't, but it presented plenty of ideas better than the other films. Roman was easily the smartest killer of the bunch and if we believe he influenced Billy, then it makes him even more of a mastermind. The other reason I liked Roman so much compared to the rest is because he acted alone unlike the others that needed help. The intrigue and mystery are good and the satire is nowhere near as comedic as some critics describe. This film makes for a worthy conclusion to the franchise, but, for better or worse, the franchise continues. So check it out, and, maybe if you're an individual who hated this entry, watch it with the commentary on to gain a better perspective.

Notable Moment: I liked the part when Sid is wandering around the "Stab 3" set, and, while reminiscing, she is attacked by the killer. The use of the stage designs were fun since Sid was trying to escape as if it were her real house.

Final Rating: 7/10