Reviews
‘Scream’ (2022): A SPOILER-FREE Review
A continuation of the series that reminds people why they love ‘Scream’, bringing a lot of laughs and a whole lot of blood.
In my previous Scream article, I mentioned that I was grateful the series never got swamped down in trying to relive its glory days. I’m going to be honest and say that I feared 5 might kill that track record when the series was picked up by a duo other than Craven and Williamson. It would have been the easier option to ape what made the original great and try to just play the hits; it’s a theme this film touches on quite a bit in fact. But rest assured, directors Bettinelli-Olpin and Gillett have not succumbed to this pitfall.
This movie, rather, is a defiant rejection of the trend that regurgitates our old favorites for the sake of nostalgia, and it’s very telling how often Vanderbilt and Busick’s dialogue serves to drive that home. The movie feels at home with the rest of the franchise, even with some of its more significant changes. Those changes are the reason it’s my current second favorite in the franchise, and it’s not just because of its perfect use of “Red Right Hand”. (If you thought this was going to dethrone Scream (1996), I commend your optimism but question your predictive skills.)
This film has two things going for it that pull it up in my rankings. For one, it’s arguably the funniest in the franchise, and it doesn’t act like some of its dialogue isn’t silly. It has lines that stand out as ridiculously corny, but it’s all very tongue in cheek and doesn’t suffer from rapid tonal shifts trying to take itself too seriously. Those with a distaste for goofy dialogue may walk away unsatisfied, as it’s a good chunk of what makes the film funny, but I think it’s a great change, mood-wise, and it doesn’t detract from the dark humor written into the film or its more brutal moments.
The other prize it takes, alongside most funny, is most gruesome. I would need to marathon them all again to be sure of this assertion, but this is, in my mind, the bloodiest of the films. Keep in mind, this is a franchise that opens on Drew Barrymore and her boyfriend being gutted, so that’s saying something. There were a few kills that made me sink back into my seat from their detail alone. This film definitively has my favorite death in the franchise, usurping Anthony Anderson’s forehead becoming a knife cradle in 4. When you see it, you’ll know what death it is; it felt like all the air got sucked out of the room when it happened at my screening. The opposite could be said of our Ghostface reveals this time around, as we heard some actual screams in the theatre when those bombs dropped.
Each kill and scene flow into the next smoothly, and the pacing never errs on the side of dragging. The technical issues with this film are mainly in the editing. Bettinelli-Olpin and Gillett didn’t take their cues from how Craven depicted the speed of a Ghostface attack, opting for more cuts. There is one moment in a fight during the film’s final act that becomes muddled by a smear of quick cuts where I couldn’t tell what was going on, but that is the most egregious instance and not a common occurrence.
In the traditional Scream fashion, we get a whole lot of humor based on commentary on horror films. The funniest scene in the film, however, has less to do with clever dialogue and more with cinematography. It toys with our traditional sense of telegraphed scares in one sequence that is very clearly a lampooning of the worst of modern horror. It’s a breath of fresh air to see pure comedy without a single word said; the camera work and blocking of the shot make for a very memorable gag that leads into a gnarly death.
Of the old blood in the cast, Campbell, Cox, and Arquette have the same stage presence they’ve had throughout all the films. Sidney displays confidence and expertise as always, and her on-screen interactions with Gale are a treat. Jenna Ortega’s performance as Tara is great, as she seems to be having a whole lot of fun with the role. Jack Quaid also brings his special comedic delivery that he had in The Boys as the awkward love interest, Richie. However, things kind of fall flat in his chemistry with our main character Sam, played by Melissa Barrera.
Overall, I’m not the biggest fan of Barrera’s acting. Some of her lines feel downright wooden, but I suspect this is primarily due to the dialogue she’s given. Her very interesting origin story is also conflicting, to say the least. I can’t discuss it without spoilers, but I feel very torn on how they incorporate her past into the story. Still, when she’s cut loose in the final act, she hits her stride in a major way. She grew on me slowly, but it’s just a shame it takes as long as it does for that to kick in.
RATING: 8.5, leaning towards 9 (REDACTED SPOILER RATING JOKE)/10. In the end, this is a great Scream film, through and through. It’s bloody, laden with mystery and comedy, and has that classic charm in spades. Is it a perfect film? No, but not many are. Is it one of the best in the franchise? You bet your Buck 120 and voice changer it is.
A24 never stopped pumping out banger horror movies. Let’s get that out of the way, straight away. Even its commercial and critical flops, like Opus or Y2K, still took a lot of really original swings, even if it hasn’t been a string of masterpieces like in their horror heyday of the late 2010s and early 2020s. Still, they may have made their scariest yet with Undertone, in a return to A24’s original MO of pure indie filmmaking.
A Single Location Horror Film Powered by Sound
Undertone is not a perfect movie, with an occasional off story beat, and the ending just missing the mark of perfection, but it is a tried-and-true testament to the power of storytelling. With essentially one active, on-screen actress and a single location, the film manages to create a sensory hellscape with immersive nightmare-inducing audio that has both story and scares derived entirely from a podcast. It is a sensory overload of pure terror, one that feels deeply sinister in its pitch-black story, one that demands to be seen in the darkest possible movie theater.
A24’s Undertone: A True Crime Podcast Turns Supernatural
The story is pretty straightforward…at least at first. It follows a true crime/horror podcast host (Nina Kiry), who lives by herself as she takes care of her dying, elderly, and borderline vegetative mother. Her co-host (Adam DiMarco, who is never fully seen) is sent a series of ten mysterious audio files from an unknown address, presumably sent for her to listen to on the show. As they begin to record their latest episode with live reactions to the files, reality slips further as she and her co-host fall into supernatural delirium. Strange noises, slipping time, and other haunted house trimmings all come out to play, each elevated by (as mentioned) horrific sound design and an even more horrific backstory.
Nursery Rhyme Origins and Deeply Disturbing Mythology
The story is about 95% airtight. Without getting too deep into spoilers, the origins of these files and their meaning are deeply fascinating, with some elements and angles involving the origins of nursery rhymes that are very, genuinely disturbing. There is one twist in particular that explores what one of the sounds truly means, which is highly upsetting once pieced together.
That being said, Undertone has some familiar tropes, and while the movie mostly touches upon certain unexplored mythology, certain scenes can feel a little too familiar to other recent demon movies like Shelby Oaks. The true meanings are a lot more creative, but it could have played around with its mythos to create a truly original villain.
Undertone’s Ambiguous Ending Demands a Rewatch
Similarly, the ending is almost perfect. There is a final twist about something the protagonist might have done that is a little confusing, and reframes the context of the film. It is highly interesting, however, and opens up several cans of worms of what this movie has to say about children, motherhood, and parenthood as a whole, as well as posing questions about the movie’s setting and timeline. It is always better to remain vague in horror, which this movie definitely does, but just a slight retweak of its final act could give the audience just the tiniest more understanding, without it going into full, mainstream territory. The film definitely requires a second watch, and in the best way possible.
A Groundbreaking Podcast Horror Experience
In a nutshell, the film’s methods of storytelling are groundbreaking. This movie is not a podcast, but all of its scares and stories are delivered to us like it is one. It feels like the birth of a new medium or style of movie, a perfect blend of audio and visual, with emphasis on the audio.
Additionally, with the story being literally told to us as if we’re listening to the characters’ podcast itself, it is a nightmare rabbit hole.
Like many people born in the mid-90s, the Sci-Fi Channel was one of my first introductions to horror. Whether it was random films playing or Sci-Fi’s 31 Days of Halloween, this channel was one of the main channels in my household. For the month of March, we’re going to take a look at Sci-Fi Originals (and maybe I cheated a bit and picked films that had their premiere on Sci-Fi). Picking films for this month was no easy task. Did I want to cover one of the plethora of amalgamated mega-animals fighting each other? Or what about shark tornadoes? One of the films I picked, after finding it too difficult to find Children of the Corn (2009) on streaming services, was an odd alien film I had never even heard of. That film is Silent Warnings.
What is Silent Warnings About?
Layne Vossimer (A.J. Buckley), his girlfriend Macy (Callie De Fabry), and a group of their friends head to Layne’s cousin’s house, Joe (Stephen Baldwin), after his mysterious death. Once there, they find the house in disgusting disarray. The friends decide to help Layne clean it up in order to put it on the market. But things quickly go south when they find a series of VHS tapes Joe left behind in the attic. What’s revealed in those tapes shows something that’s out of this world. Can Layne, his friends, and Sheriff Bill Willingham (Billy Zane) fend off these otherworldly invaders before it’s too late?
Conspiracy Theories, Mental Health, and Paranoia in Silent Warnings
As stated, this film was a late pick as I could not find 2009’s Children of the Corn streaming anywhere. Boy, am I glad I picked this. Silent Warnings has its fair share of issues. But it makes up for them in so many ways. This film is a very sober look into conspiracy theories, mental health, and the lengths that people go to when it comes to perceived threats. We get very little Stephen Baldwin, but what we do get is more than enough. He’s a recluse who lives on his 40-ish-acre property that’s been alien-proofed. His best friend (cousin?) is a scarecrow that has an AK-47. And he constantly records incoherent ramblings with his camcorder. Baldwin absolutely kills in his limited screentime. It’s like Stanislavski said, there are no small parts, only small actors.
Small-Town Horror and UFO Lore in Porterville
The quaint town of Porterville acts as the perfect backdrop for a story like this: a sleepy, nowhere town, where most people know each other. A town where the big call of the day for the Sheriff is about a missing dog. It’s the perfect setup for a story like this. It even mirrors many of the towns mentioned in Silent Invasion: The Pennsylvania UFO-Bigfoot Casebook. Much of this film’s atmosphere, the crop circles, acres of corn, and the disintegrating house, create a condensed world that adds so much claustrophobia to the film’s soul.
Acting, Dialogue, and the Problem with Early 2000s CGI Aliens
That being said, there are quite a few issues. Mainly, the acting. Besides Kim Onasch, Michelle Borth, Billy Zane, and A.J. Buckley (mostly), much of this film’s acting feels very Sci-Fi Original. It doesn’t help that the film’s dialogue, from writers Bill Lundy, Christian McIntire, and Kevin Gendreau, is just plain boring. And that’s not even mentioning how awful the CGI aliens look. A 2003 film about aliens, when only two or three are shown on screen, should be fully practical. And the fact that they use digital aliens takes away much of the film’s punch.
Why Silent Warnings Is an Underrated Sci-Fi Original
Silent Warnings doesn’t break much ground when it comes to the topic of aliens/Ufology, but it’s damn entertaining. But that’s the thing. Films don’t necessarily need to break new ground. I appreciate the swings this film takes, whether they hit or miss. There’s a wonderful setup with Stephen Baldwin, and the slow build to an exciting finale makes it all worth the wait. For a Sci-Fi Original, Silent Warnings has worked its way into my heart.
The Horror Press Podcast Episode 57: Backrooms & Jigglyspot
‘Undertone’ Review: A24’s Scariest Since ‘Hereditary’
‘Silent Warnings’ (2003) Review: An Unknown UFO Gem
Mami Wata and the Untapped Stories of Water Spirits in Horror
Southern Black Gothic Films and Where To Find Them
Four Seasons of Fear: Queer Holiday Horror Anthology from Stacked Deck Press Coming Soon
Yes, ‘Book of Shadows: Blair Witch 2’ Does in Fact Rule
The Black Punk Framework of ‘Wendell & Wild’
The Price of Admission is Death in ‘The Last Matinee’ (2020)
What Does Modern Black Horror Say About The 2020s?
‘The People Under the Stairs’ Review: A Brilliantly Bizarre Horror Classic
‘Five Nights at Freddy’s’ and The Story of William Afton Explained
Slappy Was the Blueprint: How the Dummy from Goosebumps Became A Horror Icon
Glen and Glenda: Don Mancini’s Reverence for Queerness in ‘Seed of Chucky’ (2004)
‘Truth or Dare’: Who Did it Best?
V/H/S Franchise Ranked, Best to Worst
Everything You Need to Know About Jason Voorhees
The 11 Most Disturbing Horror Movies Ever, According to an Actual Horror Fan
[REVIEW] ‘Cherry Falls’ (1999) Brittany Murphy Shines in This Cult Classic Slasher
