Connect with us

Reviews

‘Scream’ (2022): A SPOILER-FREE Review

Published

on

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.

Advertisement

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.

Advertisement

 

Luis Pomales-Diaz is a freelance writer and lover of fantasy, sci-fi, and of course, horror. When he isn't working on a new article or short story, he can usually be found watching schlocky movies and forgotten television shows.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Reviews

[REVIEW] The People Vs. ‘The Exorcism of Emily Rose’

The Exorcism of Emily Rose is a unique take on exorcism films. The film follows Erin Brunner (Laura Linney), a high-profile defense lawyer. Brunner is fresh off a murder case where her client was cleared of all charges–only for that client to turn around and commit another set of murders. In the hopes of becoming a partner at her law firm, Brunner is talked into taking the defense for Father Richard Moore (Tom Wilkinson). Father Moore finds himself in the hot seat after a series of exorcisms resulted in the death of Emma Rose (Jennifer Carpenter). The twist? Erin Brunner is agnostic! OooOOoooOh.

Published

on

The second film I wanted to cover, that’s “based on a true story”, is one that utterly fascinates me…and not for the right reasons. After Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer, I felt let down. I am by no means a Henry Lee Lucas expert, but even with someone having the bare knowledge of the case, I couldn’t believe they dared to refer to it as having anything to do with the Confession Killer. Could The Exorcism of Emily Rose pull me out of this pit of despair? Can it get some basic information right? Ugh.

The Exorcism of Emily Rose is a unique take on exorcism films. The film follows Erin Brunner (Laura Linney), a high-profile defense lawyer. Brunner is fresh off a murder case where her client was cleared of all charges–only for that client to turn around and commit another set of murders. In the hopes of becoming a partner at her law firm, Brunner is talked into taking the defense for Father Richard Moore (Tom Wilkinson). Father Moore finds himself in the hot seat after a series of exorcisms resulted in the death of Emma Rose (Jennifer Carpenter). The twist? Erin Brunner is agnostic! OooOOoooOh.

This film brings us the dramatized events of Emily’s tragic final days through the setting of a courtroom drama. There’s something fun about this idea. It’s surprising this idea hasn’t been reused. Laura Linney and Tom Wilkinson are an excellent duo, they play off each other very well. If only the real-life lawyers were as likable as Erin Brunner (we’ll get there later). The real star of the show is Jennifer Carpenter. Tasked with doing justice to the real Emily Rose (Anneliese Michel), Carpenter handles her performance with class.

The story jumps back and forth between the courtroom and Emily’s experiences. There is great information for the film to base its script on, and it doesn’t do it interestingly. One of the most notorious pieces of evidence in this case is the leaked audio of the 67 exorcisms performed on Michel. The Catholic church did not release this audio until around 2011, but Carpenter does a great job of channeling the pain you can hear in the audio.

An interesting angle of the real Anneliese Michel story is how the lawyers were really trying to put the devil on trial. Unlike the film, Michel’s parents were also put on trial, as well as the two priests who initiated the exorcisms. Rather than the film’s dramatic guilty plea with time served as a sentence, the German justice department thought the parents had suffered enough and that the priests should just get fined. In reality, both the parents and the priests deserved to go to jail. The complete neglect of Anneliese’s ailments was thought nothing more than the dirty hands of the devil. Anneliese’s parents and the priests were the cause of her death. Their extreme beliefs in a bearded man in the sky trumped the reality of what was actually happening with their extremely sick daughter.

Advertisement

The film plays off Brunner as someone who needs to see the light. Brunner is put on this case to help rectify her previous case (the one where she got the murderer off without charges). God put her in Father Moore’s hands. So, by this logic, co-writer/director Scott Derrickson thinks that for one person to receive redemption, another must die. The Exorcism of Emily Rose is nothing more than religious propaganda. “What if god is real,” Erin Brunner asks the jury. Even if god is real, a young woman is dead! God isn’t on the chopping block, Father Moore is. This latter half of this film plays strictly to the Bible Belt.

Also, Erin Brunner is written as someone who can be redeemed and will be redeemed, a tragic character who has accepted greed over truth. Do you want to know who defended the Michels in real life? Lawyers who defended Nazis in the Nurenberg trials. Scott Derrickson can fuck right off.

Everything about this film feels like nothing more than Catholic-funded propaganda. Rather than owning up to their mistakes and accepting the punishment they deserved, the Michels and priests never had to answer for their true crimes. They left a young woman to die a truly horrible death and all got off with a slap on the wrist.

All of this went down around the same time as Vatican 2. The Catholics who were against Vatican 2 were hoping that they could find a way to prove that Anneliese was possessed because god wasn’t happy with the Vatican II overhaul. If they could prove god’s anger, they could use that as fuel to ensure Vatican II didn’t happen. Anneliese’s mother gaslit her into refusing the idea that her neurological issues could be the cause of all this. See, Anneliese wanted to be a teacher, but her mother forced her to believe that no one would hire her as a teacher if she had all of these issues. People won’t hire a crazy teacher.

Failed by those around her, Anneliese was posthumously deprived of any justice. If there is a god, I can only hope the Michels and the two priests do not meet him. Instead of breaking down all of these fascinating aspects of the case of Anneliese Michel, Scott Derrickson crafted a shell of a film. His lack of care for the source material is beyond disrespectful to Anneliese’s pain in her short time on earth. Scott Derrickson’s classless and [seemingly] Catholic-funded sophomore feature film is nothing more than a film that has a few solid scares that rely on you taking him at his word. For a film that starts with the title card “based on a true story,” there is not a lick of truth in this nearly two-hour film.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Reviews

[REVIEW] ‘Dreadstone: The Beginning’ Is a Gold Rush of Terror

Published

on

We continue to start our year by looking at short films that either ran their festival circuit in 2024 or will soon be running the festival circuit. Western horror is a subgenre that’s often overlooked, usually because it offensively centers around Native Americans attacking groups of white people who have taken over their land. Bone Tomahawk and The Burrowers are unfortunate examples of painting Natives in a negative light for the plight of the whites. Who knew all it would take for a well-done Western horror is an Italian director at the helm?

Dreadstone: The Beginning follows Jeb (Grid Margraf), a tired and weathered man who is left in charge of his non-verbal autistic daughter Adeline (Alexandra Boulas). Jeb finds himself in possession of a purple-glowing gem that may be more nefarious than meets the eye. The two traverse across harsh lands in search of the source of the gem. But things turn south when they find out what they were looking for may have answers to questions they never intended on asking.

Written by Avery Peck and Riccardo Suriano, and directed by Riccardo Suriano, Dreadstone: The Beginning is a fascinating start to a tale as old as time. Peck’s cinematography beautifully brings their words to life and effortlessly blends cosmic horror with the overwhelming fruitless nature of greed and the human condition. Cosmic and Western horror aren’t typically put together, but they work incredibly well with the ideas behind Dreadstone and its themes. Jeb’s gem is a practical MacGuffin and is a great stand-in for the concept of greed; this opulent-looking rock in a no-tech world. It’s a simple object that’s incredibly effective.

The frontier setting of Dreadstone works to create an isolating setting. This large setting singularly frames these two characters and makes them feel like the only people in the world. It isn’t until the film’s final shot that we realize they are definitely not the only people around. Dreadstone: The Beginning is a drastic change from Suriano’s previous film, Along Came Ruby. Besides the obvious time difference between these two films, Ruby sets itself as a Last of Us-like post-apocalyptic film, whereas Dreadstone: The Beginning sets itself to possibly be a pre-apocalyptic film. These two films also differ in tone, but both films prove that Suriano is confident with his overall voice and vision.

Alexandra Boulas stars in both Along Came Ruby and Dreadstone: The Beginning. Boulas excels in both films but gives a more reserved and confident performance in Dreadstone. With the exception of a few moments, Boulas’ performance is silent…but commanding. Watching Ruby shows that Boulas can easily deliver lines, while Dreadstone proves there’s more to her acting than line delivery. Fingers crossed we see her in more films in the near future, I think she has a promising career ahead of her.

Advertisement

Dreadstone: The Beginning is a unique take on Western horror that forgoes the [racist] Native Americans against white people trope that the subgenre is fraught with. A touch of cosmic horror, a hint of coming-of-age, and a heaping spoonful of good ole greed make Dreadstone: The Beginning a short film that will stick with you long after the credits roll. I’ll tell you what…this made me look forward to Dreadstone: The Aftermath!

Continue Reading

Horror Press Mailing List

Fangoria
Advertisement
Advertisement