

Scream 4: A stab in the dark



So it’s not that surprising that SCREAM 4 (R, 1 1/2 stars) hit theatres with a resounding thud, bested at the box office by the latest horror trick pony, the haunted house flick “Insidious.” In many ways, the latest “Scream” flick feels like a pro athlete who hung around for one final season only to find that the game has passed them by.

By the truly awful “Scream 3,” the franchise had run out of gas, and the anticlimactic finish effectively killed my interest in the series (in fact, I’ve only seen “Scream 3″ once, which was more than enough). The previews for the new film did nothing to pique my interest, but since I tend to be a completest, I felt compelled to check it out, with very low expectations.

And honestly, the film is more of the same, which is both a good and bad thing. Like comfort food, it’s fun to see Ghostface tormenting a bunch of smart-assed and wordy teens, but it proves not to be filling, as the repetitive nature of the plot, the insulting logic (how hard is it to keep track of your phone?) and lackluster kills leave a lot to be desired.

What started out as a novel take on the rules and mores of the genre in the original film had faded away by part 3, so the insistence of “Scream 4″ to continually reference remakes, reboots and sequels seems quaint, but doesn’t really go anywhere. There are a couple of throwaway lines as to where horror has gone since the original series – “Saw” gets a shoutout – but Wes Craven, Kevin Williamson and Co. seem content to follow the path of least resistance.

The style, feel and tone of the film are a direct lift from the first three movies, even as we know the world has evolved in the time since then. But Woodsboro seems to be stuck in some strange warp where the Sidney Prescott murders and “Stab” movies have permeated the culture so deeply that copycat killers wouldn’t even bother updating Ghostface for the new decade.

And maybe this says something about me as a horror fan, but shouldn’t Craven, a master of the genre, be bringing more to the table than this? Ghostface stabs someone once and that’s it? That’s supposed to pass for horror? The depraved minds behind the killings haven’t been influenced by what they’ve seen over the past decade? After the seventh stab wound to the body, I was praying that something unique might happen down the stretch, but it does not.

As far as the plot, it hews closely to what we’ve seen before. Sidney (Neve Campbell) is back in town on the anniversary of the murders to promote her new book, and before long, bodies start piling up. Dewey (David Arquette) is now the town sheriff and Gale (Courteney Cox) is trying to revitalize her career. Playing Dewey and Gale broadly worked in the earlier movies to help take some of the sting off the killings, but here, it just seems goofy, right down to the dumb musical cues.

The latest batch of teens includes Sidney’s cousin Jill (Emma Roberts), her friends Kirby (Hayden Panettiere) and Olivia (Marielle Jaffe), Jill’s ex Trevor and a couple of movie geeks (Erik Knudsen and Rory Culkin). No one really makes much of an impression except for Panettiere, who exudes a feisty sexiness as a horror-loving chick.

Without spoiling things, let’s say the reveal is interesting. In fact, I was actually hoping the film might go in the suggested direction the conclusion teases, but alas, things went along standard lines. I guess I shouldn’t really be surprised considering that amid all the talk about doing something different, this is the same old sh*t wrapped in shiny new paper.

Elliott Smith