Connect with us

Editorials

‘Scream 2’ at 25: Why the Horror Sequel Has Aged So Well

Published

on

“Sequels suck! Oh please, please! By definition alone, sequels are inferior films,” Jamie Kennedy’s beloved Randy says in his opening scene of Scream 2. Which is exactly the kind of meta dialogue we’ve come to expect from the Scream franchise and exactly the kind of self-awareness that has kept the franchise consistently great.

Scream 2 is rumored to have gone through many script changes, after a version of the script leaked online. The killers were rumored to be changed last minute as well. It was also released 8 days short of exactly one year after the first film—all ingredients that would normally help sink a movie, especially a horror movie sequel. And yet, the movie is highly regarded as one of the best.

Scream 2 and The Legacy of Horror Sequels

Horror sequels aren’t always known for being great either. Sometimes they abandon their original characters in favor of a completely new set of slasher victims (A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy’s Revenge), sometimes they kill off their original final girl in the opening (Friday the 13th Part 2), and sometimes they continue the story to mixed results (Halloween II). Scream is a franchise that seemed to know what it was and what it wanted to say right out of the gate. That’s why all the jokes about sequels in this sequel never feel out of place. Randy barks at anyone who will listen about what making a sequel means.

The opening of Scream 2 has Jada Pinkett Smith and Omar Epps as a doomed couple going to an advanced screening of a new horror movie called Stab. Scream fans recognize the name Stab as well as they recognize the names Sidney and Gale. Pinkett Smith’s death happens as a fictionalized Stab version of the first film’s opening kill plays on screen. Maureen is bleeding out, being stabbed to death, while a crowd cheers on as Heather Graham’s version of Casey Becker dies on screen behind her. Pinkett Smith’s Maureen is killed in front of the entire theater, the audience realizing too late that it’s not part of the show.

Meta Commentary in Scream 2

Her death is both over the top and heartbreaking. We’re revisiting the first film’s opening kill by way of new characters watching a movie of it. For most of that opening, her character is complaining about how stupid folks in horror movies are. She doesn’t even want to see the movie but then becomes a victim of a horror movie while watching a horror movie. Commentary on commentary.

Advertisement

In a lesser-written series, the Stab of it all would’ve had the franchise collapsing in on itself. But not Scream. Stab’s presence would only become stronger and more meta as the series went on—culminating with Ghostface, instead of quizzing his opening prey about horror movies, quizzing Jenna Ortega’s Tara in 2022’s Scream on the Stab franchise.

Tori Spelling’s Meta Casting

In the first Scream, Neve Campbell’s Sidney Prescott jokes she’d probably be played by Tori Spelling if they ever made a movie of her life. And then who plays Sidney in the Stab movie? None other than Tori Spelling playing herself. It’s another thing that, when writing it out, feels like a sloppy Scary Movie bit. But the film sells it. And sells her and Luke Wilson’s scene together reenacting a scene from the first film as well.

Not only is all the Stab stuff incredibly iconic, but so are the returning characters. We see a more realistic portrayal of trauma survivors. Randy and Sidney are still friends but neither has spoken to Gale Weathers or David Arquette’s Dewey, which only makes Randy’s death feel crueler. This movie implies the trauma did not turn our beloved Gale into a toned-down version of herself—in fact, it’s made her lean into her confidence and ambition. She wrote a book that was turned into a movie, she’s become more famous than ever. Her opening scene is her on the phone discussing why the Stab movie is going to break records now that a killing happened at a screening. She looks great, walks fast, and has iconic red chunky highlights that still look fantastic all these years later. Gale Weathers has never looked better in a Scream movie than she looks in Scream 2.

Unforgettable Chase Scenes

This movie also gives us not one but two of the best chase scenes of the entire franchise—Gale Weathers zig-zagging her way through a sound booth to avoid getting stabbed and Sarah Michelle Gellar’s Cici Cooper being stalked in her sorority house. Casting Sarah Michelle Gellar as a horror movie victim who dies early on in the movie is a subversion of a subversion. When this movie came out, the second season of Buffy the Vampire Slayer was airing—a show where the blonde cheerleader who fit the ‘horror movie victim’ trope was actually the final girl hero of the series. So, casting her in this minor role felt incredibly intentional. It also worked because, as anyone who has watched Buffy knows, Gellar has the range. Her scene is 6 minutes of pure horror movie perfection. She’s alone but she’s not—she’s basically acting against no one and sells the hell out of the entire scene. She puts up a good chase, but, in the end, is stabbed and thrown off the balcony of her sorority house.

The movie also progresses our beloved final girls—Sidney Prescott and Gale Weathers. At this point in the series, they still only tolerate each other. But this time, Sidney slaps Gale instead of punching her during their first encounter. After this movie, they’ll start actually caring about each other. Their link being both their shared trauma and Dewey. It’s what brings them together in the newest Scream as well. The movie also ends with Gale, instead of getting her story, deciding to ride in the ambulance with Dewey to make sure he’s okay. It’s a small but important character beat. Gale’s still a hard, ambitious reporter but she also genuinely cares for Dewey.

Advertisement

The Unhinged Killer Reveal

Then there’s the killer reveal. Laurie Metcalf as Mrs. Loomis is truly a site to behold. She’s basically a Scooby Doo villain—her eyes are wide and bulging as every line is delivered with the utmost seriousness. It’s camp but also fits the Scream series. Almost every movie has a Ghostface reveal that comes along with a character giving an unhinged monologue where they’re spitting out every word. And Mrs. Loomis is no different until Emma Roberts’s Jill in Scream 4, she was the most unhinged Ghostface reveal. While the Oscar-worthy performance is all over the place in the best way possible, you also genuinely think Sidney is in danger when Mrs. Loomis is around.

The reason Scream is one of the best horror franchises still to this day is because it has never had to reboot itself. It’s never taken a complete u-turn and tried to make Ghostface supernatural or recast or killed off our final girls. The series puts time into Gale, Sidney, and (sadface) Dewey. This sequel showed us that the series could both take itself seriously while still staying completely over the top.

It’s why Scream 2 remains a superior horror sequel, even in the age of well-made horror sequels and revivals.

Ian Carlos Crawford grew up in southern New Jersey and has an MFA in non-fiction writing. His favorite things are Buffy, Scream, X-Men, and pugs. His writing has appeared on sites like BuzzFeed, NewNowNext, Junkee, and other random corners of the internet. He currently hosts a queer Buffy and Marvel focused pop culture podcast called Slayerfest 98 and co-hosts a horror podcast called My Bloody Judy.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Editorials

The Final Girl Was Never Me, Rewriting Survival in Black Horror

Published

on

I learned early on that I was not supposed to make it to the end of a horror movie. As a kid, I was drawn to slashers before I fully understood them. The VHS covers promised danger, chaos, and a kind of freedom that felt transgressive. Horror was loud, bloody, and thrilling in ways other genres were not. But the longer I watched, the clearer the rules became. The girl who survives is careful. She is observant. She is often white. She is someone the camera stays with, someone whose fear is treated as meaningful, even noble. Everyone else exists to prove the stakes. Black characters, especially Black girls, rarely make it past the first half of the movie.

The Final Girl as a Moral Framework

The final girl is not just a character archetype, she is a moral system. In classic slashers, survival is tied to innocence, restraint, and respectability. The final girl is allowed to be scared, but not unruly. She can scream, but only when it is justified. She can fight back, but only at the climax, after enduring enough suffering to earn it. Her survival reassures the audience that order can be restored. Those values were never built with Blackness in mind.

When Black characters appear in these films, they are rarely framed as people the story wants to protect. We are friends, sidekicks, background figures, or early warnings. Our deaths are fast and functional. Sometimes they are shocking. Sometimes they are played for humor. Rarely are they treated as losses the film wants us to mourn. The camera does not linger. The narrative does not slow down to grieve.

Watching Yourself Disappear as a Black Horror Fan

As a Black horror fan, I learned to accept this without ever being asked to. Loving the genre meant learning how to watch myself disappear. Horror trained me to identify with survivors who did not look like me, whose fear was treated as universal, while Black pain was treated as inevitable. Even knowing it was fiction, the pattern settled in. Who gets to live tells you who is expected to matter. This is why the final girl feels fundamentally different when she is Black.

When Black filmmakers and writers began reshaping the genre, the shift was not cosmetic. Films like Candyman, Get Out, and later Black-led horror did not simply place Black characters into existing formulas. They questioned the formulas themselves. The threat was no longer just a masked killer or a supernatural force. It was history, memory, and systems that follow Black characters no matter where they go. In these stories, survival is not about purity. It is about awareness.

Advertisement

Survival Through Awareness, Not Obedience

Black final girls do not survive because they obey the rules. They survive because they recognize the trap. Their fear is layered with cultural knowledge and lived experience. When danger appears, it is rarely surprising. It is familiar. The horror comes from seeing it made literal.

When a Black woman runs in a horror movie now, she is not just running from a monster. She is running from everything that has told her she should not be there, that she is disposable, that her fear does not deserve space. Her survival feels radical because it contradicts the genre’s long history of erasure.

Complexity, Joy, and Humanity in Black Horror

What makes this evolution powerful is that Black horror does not limit itself to suffering. Even when it confronts violence and trauma, it also makes room for humor, desire, anger, and joy. Black characters are allowed to be complex without being punished for it. They can be loud, flawed, scared, and still deserving of survival.

For me, the first time I saw a Black character positioned as someone the story wanted to protect, it was disorienting. I did not realize how much I had internalized until that moment. I was used to bracing myself for disappointment, for the early exit, for the confirmation that this ending was not meant for me. Seeing a Black woman make it to the final frame did not just change how I watched horror, it changed how I understood its power.

Survival as Defiance in Black Horror Cinema

Horror has always been about fear, but fear is shaped by context. For communities that already live with heightened vulnerability, survival fantasies carry a different weight. Black horror understands this. It treats survival not as a reward, but as an act of defiance.

Advertisement

When Black creators take control of the genre, they do more than add representation. They reframe what horror is allowed to care about. The final girl no longer exists to reassure the audience. She exists to endure, to remember, and to refuse erasure.

Loving Horror While Watching It Change

I still love classic slashers. I still enjoy their excess and chaos. But I watch differently now. I notice who the camera follows, whose pain is given time, whose death is treated as unavoidable. Horror did not always love us back, but Black creators are teaching it how.

The final girl was never me, until she was. And the genre is stronger for it.

Continue Reading

Editorials

Choosing Shock Value Over Writers Is Very Telling

Published

on

There is a huge difference between a movie being remembered for being good and a movie being remembered because it’s controversial. As a writer, I can forgive an okay film with an amazing script. However, I find it frustrating when it feels like no one believed in the project, so just leaned into the controversy. Stunts were pulled, shock value was sought after, and I am now wondering when the creatives stopped believing in their project.

Animal Cruelty as Shock Value in Horror Cinema

Cannibal Holocaust, a pivotal step toward found footage horror films as we know them today, is remembered for all of the scenes of sexual assault and the murder of actual animals. This takes away from its historical significance because the first thing I remember about it is watching a turtle get murdered and ripped apart. I have a similar issue with Wake in Fright. It’s hard to remember Donald Pleasence, Gary Bond, or the queer implications of this thriller because the filmmaker had kangaroos executed for this film. The scene feels like it goes on forever, and I’m yet to understand why murdering animals needed to be part of the process. 

I finally watched Megan is Missing a couple of years ago, and the exploitative nature of the assault of a fourteen-year-old is what stays with me. Whatever Michael Goi’s intentions were, they were lost because the shock factor of that moment outweighs everything else.

When Shock Value Replaces Meaningful Horror

It feels gross and like yet another male filmmaker mishandling assault on camera. Meanwhile, the film was serving its purpose and had other truly disturbing imagery that would have gotten a reaction out of audiences. It also would have allowed for more discussion about the film as a whole, instead of that scene that becomes the conversation. It’s another instance of male filmmakers mishandling the weight of sexual assault on film.

Things Aren’t Getting Better

However, the movies mentioned above are from different eras. We’d like to think filmmakers by now understand that shock factor doesn’t equal a quality movie. We would be wrong to assume that, though, because Dashcam (2021) didn’t stop at basing a character on an awful person. They actually cast the Trump-loving, anti-vax, and very vocal bigot Annie Hardy to play the character. This led to horror fans familiar with her brand of ignorance being turned off before the movie was even released. It also undid a lot of the goodwill that director Rob Savage earned with his previous movie, Host. To make matters worse, Savage repeatedly defended the choice all over the internet. At one point, he tried to blame her behavior on mental health, and people pointed out that doesn’t excuse racism, antisemitism, and homophobia.

Advertisement

Some of Annie’s Infamous Tweets

This is an especially head-scratching situation in this case. The team was riding the steam of a very popular found footage film. They were also primed to make a video game called Ghosts that had a successful crowdfunding campaign. People would have shown up for this before casting for shock value became the priority. We have had multiple films similar to this that sidestepped using known monsters. What was the reason? The idea came about because of her show, but any actress could’ve pulled that off. It was irresponsible to attempt to give this woman an even bigger platform . It was also the ultimate sign that no one was serious about this project.

Have We Tried Trying?

While making chaotic choices is one way to be memorable, is it worth it? In theory, someone(s) spent a lot of time and energy writing these stories. Wouldn’t actual storytellers prefer people to compliment their work instead? Celebrating their imagination, uniqueness, and skill instead of yelling about controversy and shock value. This isn’t a censorship thing. I’m used to being unimpressed with movies and asking,What was the reason?As a writer, I also know that there are ways to elicit responses from people without traumatizing them. We are literally tasked with putting characters and situations on the page that make people think and feel. Which is why going through the process of getting an idea greenlit and then leaning into something ghoulish like animal cruelty is baffling. Instead of casting a known Twitter bigot, you could just write a character based on assholes of that ilk. 

Whenever I see films coming out that seem more interested in courting controversy than trying to find their audiences, I pause. I cannot help but wonder who really decided this. Clearly, someone didn’t believe in the script and felt that upsetting people for the wrong reasons was the move. That outdated idea that any press is good press snuffed out whatever spark initially got people on board for the film. It is sad that someone(s) didn’t believe in the power of the written word. They doubted the effectiveness of storytelling and decided to go big in the wrong ways. Instead of stepping it up in the script department and figuring out if the proposed stunt is a band-aid for something missing on the page, they decided to go nuclear. They shocked us in the worst of ways, and now we are stuck on impact rather than intention.

How Did We Get Here?

I’m not trying to sound like a boomer, but the rise of social media has made this worse over the years. Studios seemingly want controversial content rather than actual art. The pursuit of going viral has replaced the idea of trying to actually do or say something. It’s all about adding AI to movies to spark outrage and make it trend. The worst people you know are getting cast in movies, so they can cry witch hunt when accountability enters the chat. Shocking the people for the wrong reasons seems to sadly be at main goal too often. 

How did we get here? I’m seriously asking. I mean, we know capitalism and people who don’t value art buying studios are a huge part of it. However, I feel like there is a missing piece of this puzzle. Maybe it’s just collective brain rot, and I want it to be more than that because I know the power of a good script. Hell, I know the power of a mid script in the hands of the right person. I want to believe in writers even if their vision is in the shadows of a circus. 

Advertisement

Is The Shock Value Worth It?

What do I know, though? I’m just a girl, sitting in front of a computer, asking the industry to believe in writers again. Back scripts that actually say something instead of figuring out how get them canceled. Make movies that spark conversation for legitimate reasons instead of incredibly head-scratching decisions that pull focus. Some of us deserve smart movies that challenge us for the right reasons. That’s why we flock to the original ideas, live for international films, and look to indie filmmakers. We crave disrupters who manage to break the cycle of crap we constantly get spoon-fed.

That’s what inspires me to keep beating my head against the wall. It’s what gives me hope that I’ll get to make things one day. Maybe I’m naive, but I want to at least try because I love writing. I don’t want to just cast a real bigot and call it a day. Not when I can write characters based on bigots and hopefully prompt actual conversation. I want my people discussing my dialogue and metaphors, instead of animal cruelty that makes people sick. In a perfect world the system would allow more room for that. We deserve scripts that can stand on their own without shock value leading TikTok to talk.

Continue Reading

Horror Press Mailing List

Fangoria
Advertisement
Advertisement