Scream (Matt Bettinelli-Olpin, Tyler Gyllett, 2022)

There will be a spoiler free review, followed by a section which discusses the film more in depth. There will be a clear demarcation between the two sections. The spoiler section will be written more specifically with fans of the Scream franchise and/or general horror fans more specifically in mind, and much more subjectively.  

Spoiler Free Review

How likely is it that fifth film in a horror franchise can deliver something of quality? If the past is prologue, not very likely. It's an unfortunate truth that the loyalty of horror fans has often been rewarded with franchise entries hurried into production and then theaters/homes, whether or not there were any good or interesting ideas worth putting on screen, much less whether they were executed with any competency. 

Due to Wes Craven being behind the camera for the first four entries, the Scream series has been remarkably consistent for a genre franchise. None of the sequels have matched the brilliance of the original, in part because the original was so genuinely original when it was released. The combination of a great script built around a dense understanding of the slasher sub genre, a great score, Craven's experience and expertise in building tension, his well known penchant for forging genuine relationships with his casts and a young, enthusiastic cast diving into the material, made Scream a blast of fresh perspective and top shelf filmmaking. It was funny, with a great mystery at the center, and some set pieces which are still recognized as high points for horror and thrillers. The first seventeen minutes are widely acknowledged as one of the most effective opening scenes in movie history. In the sequels, even if the scripts weren't quite up to par, Craven's directing working in tandem with the cast's experience with and love for the characters kept those films a head above the majority of horror sequels (and no shortage of original films hoping to spawn sequels). They have at least been entertaining and fun, even if they've lacked in some ways. 

Scream 4 was released in 2011, eleven years after Scream 3, and underperformed at the box office compared to the first three films. With the storyline centered on Sidney Prescott's mother concluded in Scream 3, Scream 4 had room to start approaching the Sidney Prescott saga in a new way. It was released to mostly mixed reviews and an initially mixed reception from fans. Over the ten years since, it's seen a reassessment among critics and fans, with a new appreciation for it being prescient in a number of ways. A number of things which were initially seen as being to its detriment have been reappraised as beneficial. 

To the detriment of the film industry and heartbreak of horror fans all over the world, Wes Craven died in 2015, at the age of 76. The man who'd revitalized the horror genre three times in three consecutive decades, with Scream being one of those revitalizing films, was gone. 

A new Scream, again titled simply Scream (to the consternation of critics and many fans), is back in theaters. The first without Wes Craven behind the camera, there's been a mix of substantial excitement and trepidation about the return of Neve Campbell as the series protagonist, Sidney Prescott, along with Courtney Cox as Gale Weathers and David Arquette as Dewey Riley. With Matt Bettinelli-Olpin and Taylor Gillett taking over behind the camera, having directed the fan favorite and critically well received Ready or Not, some of the trepidation inherent in a Scream film without Wes Craven was lifted. The series was at least going to be in the capable hands of directors who had demonstrated their ability to handle the combination of great tension and humor which has been so important to the success of the original Scream and the films following it. 

Amazingly, the filmmaking team behind this new Scream have managed to keep up and possibly surpass the quality of the other sequels. This Scream is as aware, maybe more aware, of what it is and the place it has among its contemporaries as any of the other sequels have been. There's nothing lazy in it. It doesn't just rest on the laurels of the previous films. It pulls off the laudable task of expanding on what Scream 4 did well, while finding a new, interesting way to stay connected to the story of the original film. 

Like many of the other major franchises attempting to stay alive today, this goes back to the beginning in a significant way. Fortunately for all of us, it does so more successfully than the other franchises have. Scream sticks to dealing with events the original film, instead of trying to pay homage to too many things in the sequels, and literally losing the plot. The writers and directors have together succeeded in threading a difficult needle. They utilize Woodsboro, in the fact that it's a small town, to expand the world of the Scream. The writers also manage to pull off the trick of giving the new characters enough screen time for us to care about them, while also respectfully demonstrating the maturation and growth of the trio who've been the heart of the series. They don't needlessly wedge references to the previous films or other horror films in where they distract from either the characters or the story progression. In other words, it's pretty clear they are first and foremost concerned with making the film work, instead of crafting a series of excuses to wink and nod and fans and Scream obsessives and selling it to them as "respect for the franchise." Bettinelli-Olpin and Gillett pretty clearly understand that the best way to respect the franchise and fans is to make a good film, and they've succeeded.  

They also make the mystery aspect work, and play with audience expectations in an interesting way. One of the few things working in Scream's favor as a fifth film in a series, in combination with the meta nature of the series,  is the feeling it could genuinely go anywhere. With the Scream films, it's not as much about where it goes as it is about how it gets there. Where it does go is clever, and one of the more interesting thematic choices in the series. If there's one thing this film succeeds in as well as the first, it's giving the audience something to chew on. The ending is satisfying from a story perspective, gives us something to think about, and manages to leave a very interesting set of possibilities should this film revive the series for a new set of entries, with or without the characters who've been the focus up to this entry. 

Scream hasn't ever necessarily shied away from the more bloody aspects of the genre, it hasn't ever particularly reveled in them in the way the more exploitation leaning slashers have either. There are some moments/scenes in the previous films which are bloody, but something about this one felt slightly different. Something about this one felt more visceral, more impactful where the violence is concerned. It feels a little meaner where the violence is concerned.   

There's nothing about this latest entry which shouldn't satisfy fans. Some of the more emotional moments may not land as solidly with newcomers to the franchise, but it's still an effectively made, fun time at the movies for more casual audience. It's not going to turn horror on its head, in the way the original Scream did in 1996 either. There's a fair chance it's going to encounter a wave of pissed off internet denizens (of a fairly specific variety), but it's also a film which should wear their derision as a badge of honor. 

What flaws it does have are inherent in being the fifth installment of a franchise. There's some smart writing dealing with what's come to be the necessary parts of the "whodunit" aspects of a Scream film. Still, it's hard to be truly surprising when we, as an audience know part of the point is to weave surprises into to the story, especially at particular points in the plot. It does keep us guessing, and doesn't resolve in a way that feels cheap, which is always a threat in films as necessarily tied to surprises. However, we do run into an age old issue with franchises though, would it be a Scream film without attempting to surprise us at those points in the plot or is this the kind of deviation which takes away from what is essential to the experience? When does innovation make it something entirely different and when does loyalty to the established framework confine it too much to make it something fresh? It threads the line as well as any of the previous Scream sequels, and as well as any of the sequels from other franchises ever have, but the limits of the framework are still felt. 

Either way, it's a good time at the movies. Scream is a film made by people who have an obviously love for the material and are able to wield the various aspects of making an effective Scream entry with confidence, competence and style. 

SPOILERS ABOUND FROM THIS POINT ON. 

From here forward, this will be written as if the reader has seen the film and is familiar with the Scream franchise.

Well wow... Congratulations to the team behind this new Scream entry. As a fan of the franchise, and particularly as a fan who would put Scream 4 as the sequel I most respect, I enjoyed the hell out of this 2022 Scream. I do feel like I need to see it at least one more time to be sure of my feelings about it, but on this first viewing, I found it an extremely satisfying Scream film, and I thought there were some great filmmaking and story choices. I'm also very interested in where things can go from here. In this particular way, I think it's among the more successful of the sequels. It manages to set up what could be a hand off to a new generation, without feeling like it's giving short shrift to Sidney, Gale and Dewey. 

There's so much worth digging into, so let's just start there, with our legacy characters. 

Sidney's continued evolution is great. The Sidney we see in this new film, makes perfect sense given where Scream 4 finished. When all four of the previous films, and Sidney's evolution through them are taken into account, the fact that her response to more Ghostface murders is, "We're going to find this fucker and we're going to kill him," feels right. In Scream 4, Sidney is cast as more of a traditional protector, in that she's still slightly more passive in sitting back and trying to protect Jill from the killer. She does run into Olivia's house in 4, but again, it's because Ghostface has come to where someone believes they're safe, not because someone is being all that proactive. The Sidney in this 2022 Scream isn't being at all passive in her attempt to protect our new cast of kids, and herself, in the same way. She's not trying to hide. Given what she's been through, she knows the killer is going to come to them, and the way to protect them isn't just by surviving or preventing each other from being killed, but by eliminating the threat at the first opportunity. 

It is great to see Sidney becoming the driving force in the hunt for whoever our new Ghostface is. In the previous films, there's a passive, defensive aspect to Sidney's character, for the most part. She's always been tough and smart, but the other films have all been about a cast of characters trying to figure out who is behind the mask in order to protect Sidney, and Sidney essentially defending herself when the killer comes for her. Sidney is no longer waiting for Ghostface to be unmasked and arrested. Neve Campbell, the directors and the writers also don't fall into the trap of making Sidney feel like some kind of Sara Connor rip off either. She doesn't come across as some kind of action movie bad ass heroine. She's still Sidney Prescott. She's not preternaturally gifted at kicking ass. The experience of the previous four films, combined with audience knowledge of those four films, is enough. We know she's tough, but not a superhero. She also has kids and a significant other now. She has moved on with her life. It's great to see her as a character reacting to what she has, instead of what she's lost. The difference between a character just trying to survive and a character who has a life they've intentionally built and want to protect is felt in how she's portrayed here. After spending all these years being our protagonist, it's an evolution of the character which is really welcome. It also leads to the question of whether or not we will get any more Sidney Prescott, should there be more Scream films. It leaves her in a place where it really might make for sense for fans to let her go, live that life she's built and let the new members of the franchise pick up the baton. Personally, at least, if there were new Scream films after this, I'd be happy to not have Sidney involved, for that reason. This could be a perfect ending for her character in the franchise. Even if she has less screen time than she's had in the previous films, I can't help but feel like it's the film which has given her the best treatment. Let Sidney go out on top. As a fantasy heroine, in a story which she's now carried for four and half installments (I say four and a half, because this film is as much hers as it is Sam's), she's earned her way into happily ever after, even by the standards of the often nihilistic world of horror. 

Side note - as a horror nerd, devotee to the final girl in general, and Sidney especially... I STILL DO WANT TO KNOW SO MUCH MORE ABOUT SIDNEY'S LIFE! I don't need to see her life threatened just to get to see someone it, so if that's the deal, I'm good, let her go. What is this life she's hopefully going to go have her happily ever after in though? WHO IS HER HUSBAND? DID SHE MARRY DETECTIVE KINCAID FROM SCREAM 3? Her husband's name is Mark. The detective in Scream 3 was named Mark Kincaid. IS IT HIM? None of this essential to the story of this latest film, I know. I get why it's not there. I just want a peek. Just some little nuggets. Maybe that's some of the toxicity of modern fandom though. Maybe we should be willing to even let go of fictional characters more. Maybe even as a fictional character, Sidney has done more than enough to entertain us, to take us on this roller coaster ride that is the Scream saga, and we should all just be happy she survived and has some kind of life she felt was worth protecting, and that should be all we need to know. Deeply connected to this, maybe it's time to let Neve Campbell move on from Sidney, since she's the one who's imbued Sidney with the things that have made the character so deeply loved. With some substantial breaks in between, she's been at it for twenty-five years now. 

Dewey... poor fucking Dewey. If one of our legacy characters was going to bite the dust, it had to be Dewey. Killing Sidney would have caused riots. It would have killed any good will for the franchise among the large and die hard fan community. Dewey is the next character the audience has a connection to based in their emotional response to him. We all love Gale, but we love Gale because she's a hard ass. We love Gale because she's tough and smart and going to do what needs to be done. We love Dewey because he's the guy who cares about everyone. Maybe he seems a little inept, but he never stops trying to help, which is why we find him where we do at the beginning of the movie. We love Dewey because he has been stabbed nine times, and he keeps showing up for Sidney and Gale anyway. He shows up for these new kids. He's evolved, and the events of the prior films have changed him and taken their toll on him and his life, and this film works this in well, but he's still Dewey. He still shows up. He's still trying to do the best he can, as a realistically flawed character in the middle of these extraordinary circumstances. The revelation of why he's been watching Gale on television every morning hit me in the feels. It's not shocking to see Dewey get killed, but it did create an impact by raising the stakes. We haven't routinely lost legacy cast members since Scream 2, when Randy was killed, though I guess Cotton is technically a legacy character. He certainly wasn't a fan favorite. Three cheers for Dewey and for the fact that he got a death befitting his character, that felt like it had real weight. We'll miss you Dewdrop. 

There's an interesting thing about Gale's character in this film. She's in a position we are much more accustomed to seeing male characters in. She's in it to avenge the death of her great love. In the short scene we do get between Gale and Dewey, we get the impression that maybe their estrangement isn't or doesn't have to be permanent. Maybe we're going to get yet another Gale and Dewey reunion by the end of the movie. They obviously still love each other very much, and the source of the problem is what's been unsaid, and we get to see them saying it. It's kind of a beautiful scene between them, and gives a certain reality to their relationship. It's their flaws bouncing off of each other in a way which is realistic. It does set Dewey up as the character to be "fridged." Gale's decision to be all in on the plan to find this new Ghostface, instead of doing the sensible thing and getting the hell out of Woodsboro, has an understandable and relatable basis, beyond ambition, as a result. It also sets up something interesting, should Gale be back in future entries. Dewey and Gale were characters we got to know in large part through their relationship to each other and their respective relationships to Sidney. We get to see them both as multidimensional characters because we're getting to see the differences in those relationships. Sidney and Gale, understandably, had a pretty chilly relationship until Scream 4. 

Here, we have Sidney and Gale bound together by Dewey's death, but Dewey's death also means we don't have him around to act as a kind of moral check on Gale's ambition. We usually have a reversal of this kind of dynamic, where the female character is acting as the moral check on the male character's otherwise destructive ambition. Should there be more Scream films, what does that mean for Gale, and as it's bound to be related, what does that mean for the relationship between Sidney and Gale? We get two nods toward the idea that maybe Gale has gained some perspective on the destructive nature of her ambition. She has a short conversation with Sidney where she confesses to a feeling of guilt due to her having written the series of books she has, starting with the murder of Maureen Prescott, then the events of the other films. Of course we end with Gale saying she's not writing about the events of this film, and maybe she'll write a book about Dewey instead. Given what we know about Gale though, it's not hard to see her changing her mind if fame and recognition come calling. If this is where Gale's part in the Scream series ends, it does set it up well though. Without Dewey to rush in to try and protect everyone, and without Gale feeling like her ambition is served by continuing to tell these stories or Sidney being at the center of them, there's no reason for Gale to show up again, even if someone else starts committed horrific murders in a Ghostface mask in the future.  

Now, onto the new, in relation to the old... 

Scream 2 and Scream 3 have always worked for me on technical levels. Of course, we have the cast of characters we love. We have Wes Craven behind the camera, working his magic. His understanding of the comedy, the way to create tension and the great set pieces in both those films, as well as his handling of the various red herrings. The scores have always been excellent, etc. Along with the performances, these are what make those films entertaining and fun, despite some writing issues. I've never really liked the way those films rely on Maureen Prescott's biography and sex life as the leverage of their stories though. There's something about it which seems vaguely sexist, even if Scream 3 has elements of being prescient in relation to #MeToo. 

This is where other folks point to the first film hinging on Maureen Prescott's life as well, but the handling of Billy and Stu ends up putting the impetus on them. Billy, at least, is a sociopathic misogynist. Stu seems to be either a sociopath in his own right or is so repressed in his desire for Billy, he's been manipulated into being the accomplice. Maureen Prescott may not have been an angel, but whatever our individual feelings might be about infidelity, Billy and Stu are psychos and the ending of the film gives Skeet Ulrich and Matthew Lillard plenty of time to make a significant impression in this sense. Billy's sense of entitlement drenches every word he says from the moment he reveals himself. It's not really about Maureen Prescott. The ending of Scream 2 doesn't have enough punch to refocus on Debby Salt and Mickey, even as Laurie Metcalf is great with what she's given. In the final edit, sure they're both murderers, but they just don't work as well as Billy and Stu. We've spent a fair amount of time with Sidney's worries about fate, her feelings about her mother, and Mickey and Debbie Salt just feel half thought out as the counter weight to this. In Scream 3, Roman is... well... Roman. Everything about Roman's storyline feels a little too afternoon soap opera, and misogynist to some degree. It's not just that the character of Roman himself is misogynist either, this isn't about whether the existence of characters who are terrible people automatically means the writers/filmmakers are endorsing the characters behavior or point of view. It feels like he's written in a way that the writers don't see the misogyny in continuing to make this horrific saga the result of one woman's sex life. It's another issue of balance in that Maureen was the victim of sexual assault doesn't seem to get the weight it deserves. It just feels poorly handled. Not necessarily malicious, but not given the room it deserves when considering how much of this overall story has been so focused on Maureen's sex life and the revelation that she was sexually assaulted. 

I know Kevin Williamson can't be saddled with much of the responsibility for the writing in Scream 3, but Ehren Kruger can, and Kruger isn't introducing any thematic elements or tones which weren't already established by Williamson, including the afternoon soap opera which Williamson piled on in Scream 2, and was endemic to Williamson's other writing. A little too much Dawson's Creek and The Vampire Diaries making their way into the Scream films.  

Part of what I enjoyed so much about Scream 4 was Craven, Williamson and company getting away from the subtextual slut shaming of Maureen Prescott, and getting back to looking at/talking about the audience, which is a significant part of what makes the ending of the first film so iconic. "Movies don't make psychos. Movies make psychos more creative," is a great line, and the meta aspect in the whole series is more of a dialogue with the audience in the first film than it was in the two subsequent films. Coming back in Scream 4, with Jill and Charlie, returns to the conversation about the audience the first film engaged in. Also, the sequence with Jill throwing herself around the room delivers an impact that's different from, but rivals power of the impact of the Billy and Stu. Debbie Salt, Mickey and Roman feel like footnotes in comparison to Billy, Stu and Jill.

Scream 2022 continuing to have that conversation with the audience, a decade on from the last film and 25 years after the first film, gives it both more weight thematically and helps keep it connected to the better parts of the series. Jack Quaid is great as Richie throughout the film. He brings the comedic skills he's shown off so well in The Boys and has some of the films funniest lines. He and Mikey Madison (playing Amber) also take to their reveal and the resulting scene with such gusto, they're going to be as memorable as Billy, Stu and Jill. The toxic fan aspect is as timely now as Jill's insane desire for attention and fame was a decade ago. We can hope it's not as prescient, because it would be really nice to see this aspect of fan culture cease existing, but it's probably a little too optimistic to expect. The way both Amber and Richie are set up throughout the film is really well done. They're both so obvious, it's too obvious, and therefore, anyone who's seen any of the previous films or is at all familiar with the whodunit framework is going to write them off as red herrings. Amber's over protective attitude toward Tara ends up being turned around as well. It's a pretty smart piece of writing to turn it from appearing as possibly unrequited romantic feelings and into having been a desire to insure Tara was going to be around to play the part they had planned for her. The realization that Amber isn't an overprotective friend, but is instead a manipulative murderer lands with a wallop. Dewey immediately saying the "love interest" should always be under the greatest suspicion ends up being swept aside, as does his question about how long Sam has known Richie. 

The ending works, on both a story and a thematic level, and because endings are so much part of what makes a Scream film, it was a relief to see it so well thought through. 

Melissa Barrera pulls her weight throughout the film. The revelation that she's Billy Loomis's daughter also touches on the soap opera-esque history of the series, but the way it's treated works. Barrera and Jenny Ortega do a great job of selling the moment when Sam reveals this backstory to Tara. It's a great moment between Sam and Tara, and they save it from dissolving into self parody. I'm not 100% sure whether there's a de-aging technique being used or her imaginary Billy is a completely digital creation, but it doesn't look that great. Skeet Ulrich isn't on the IMDB page for the movie, but it's not unusual for actors to be kept off of those to help prevent spoilers from being revealed, and this definitely would have been a spoiler. The underwhelming CGI doesn't take away from the impact as much as it could though, specifically because it is something only Sam is seeing Billy. It doesn't detract from anything in the film for me because hallucinations should exist in the uncanny valley. Our imaginations aren't going to reproduce human beings with the authenticity of the corporeal. That Sam never starts to believe the Billy speaking to her is real gives this a bit more weight too. Basically, what we might see would be convincing to us, because our minds are producing it, but if someone else saw exactly the same thing, they'd recognize the unreal, uncanny  ego  nature of it. 

On a story level, it's interesting to see things being shifted from Sidney to Sam with Billy Loomis's as her father. Part of what never worked about the way Scream 2 and Scream 3 use Maureen Prescott has been that Sidney experiences all of this horror for what was first simple infidelity, and then because she gave a child up for adoption. Scream 3 heavily suggests Maureen became pregnant with Roman through sexual assault. At some point, the hyper focus on Sidney as the debtor for her mother's "sins" became too much. Both in the fact that this does feel sexist on some level, and in part because it's tired storytelling by the third film. Scream 2 also serves to provide a way to let Billy off the hook to some degree. If Debbie Salt was his mother, how was he not going to end up supremely screwed up? Part of the problem with Debbie Salt, as a character, is that someone this psychotic has made it into middle age without any apparent red flags being recognized. Also, the fact that she does provide some bit of ability to push some of the responsibility off of Billy ends up retroactively diminishing the impact of the first films ending. Where melodrama like this is concerned, it works best when it doesn't detract from the power of what we've known or seen from characters, and instead adds to the impact of what we've known about characters previously. 

Like Billy and Stu's motivation in the original, Jill's motivation in Scream 4 isn't really about Sidney or Maureen, it's about Jill. Part of what drives Jill is having lived in Sidney's shadow, but like Billy, it's more convenient excuse than it is anything. Like Billy, Sidney's proximity to Jill and events beyond her control are what happen to cause Jill to focus on her. Part of what works about the endings of the original and Scream 4 is that they suggest something between being completely the purely random and being superficially personal about the connection to Sidney. What the ending tells us about Jill is there's as good a chance she would have ended up doing something unhinged and outrageous in her pursuit for fame and attention, whether she's related to Sidney or not. Her relation to Sidney is just the easiest path to it. 

For Sam, her patrimonial legacy is a source of shame, and it feels more real or more sensible than Sidney's sense of shame about her mother behavior. Billy Loomis was a sadistic serial killer. Maureen Prescott was a sexual assault victim who maybe didn't handle that trauma in a way that's socially acceptable. When we learn this in the third film though, it throws a slightly different light on the shame about her mother's behavior we've seen Sidney wrestle with previously. The magnitude of difference between these two things creates some really interesting possibilities for where future Scream films can go. Scream 2022 gives us a quad of final girls, and the one who will presumably be the series lead moving forward sees her dead, serial killer father as if he were standing next to her. 

Again though, part of why this works is that it really has nothing to do with Sam. It's really about Richie and Amber. They're not even connected to the events of the original film, other than Amber living in the house that was the scene of the original films finale. They don't even care about the original events or people involved with them. They care about the Stab film franchise. There is some parallel between Sam and Sidney in both of them essentially being saddled with the sins of their parents, but there's a combination of the magnitude of the sins, as well as Richie and Amber not even really caring about Billy or Sam. Richie and Amber are just using Sam, Sidney and everyone else, in their insane plan to re-center the Stab franchise. None of the events of the first Scream film or subsequent series matter to them, except in the way they relate to the Stab films. This is a really sly piece of writing. Even as it seems like simply a clever way to add a new twist to the franchise, commenting on horror as a genre and horror fans, it's also saying something pretty significant about what boils down to being "true crime" entertainment. Sam and this cast aren't being saddled with the sins of her father, so much as she's being saddled with consequences of pretty sick dehumanization created when we use real people and the tragedies they endure or create for entertainment, as well as the consequences of the more toxic aspects of fan culture in the age of social media. The two are intertwined because of the nature of the Scream narrative. This feels like a natural evolution of the discussion the franchise has had with fans in the other entries, and this addition is smarter than it seems on the surface. 

How about those Meeks-Martin twins? A welcome addition to the new film, they bring a really fun vibe. Chad makes some decisions his uncle would not have been proud of, and gets the expected results. What gets him into his predicament is a great exchange though. He's not wrong for saying Liv might be the killer, as harsh as it is in the moment. It's directly in keeping with the rules Randy outlined that what gets him into trouble is wandering around in the dark, by himself. And how can we not love Mindy? Mindy is taking Randy's knowledge of the rules to a whole new level, and most importantly, she's applying them. She makes for a great character and a great red herring. That she survives this round of Scream-sanity gives me hope she will show up if there are future installments. She is a weirdo, in a way that's more interesting than we usually see cinematic weirdos portrayed. I enjoy how hard it is to get a read on her through the film, and not just in the red herring way. She might actually be an asshole, and she might not be a horrible asshole, but is just trying to survive since her uncle was killed because of his connection to the carnival of carnage that comes to town every time someone shows up in a Ghostface costume. She survives due to the ineptitude of our killers, but she's definitely a few steps ahead of the other characters in her efforts to escape the knife. The exchange she has with Amber in the basement, initially recalling Tatum's death in the original, highlights Jasmine Savoy Brown and Mikey Madison's abilities as well. 

Dylan Minnette's Wes Hicks was set up to be a healthy, sensitive male character, and unfortunately he and mom Sheriff Judy Hicks, got the knife within a few minutes of each other, though they at least get one of the more suspenseful sequences in the movie. Marley Shelton's Sheriff Hicks gets to go out with one of the films best surprises too. We didn't get much time to see how going from Deputy Hicks to Sheriff Hicks has changed Judy from the dedicated oddball she was in Scream 4, unfortunately, but we're dealing with a slew of characters, and she does get one good exchange with Sam. It was sad to see both of these characters go, but that's part of the draw of the Scream franchise. It gives us characters we can root for, and the stakes are still high enough that we know they might not make it. 

I'm sure there are things I'm missing here, but this is already LONG. If you're also a Scream fan and are looking to nerd out over the minutiae of the franchise and this latest installment, don't hesitate to reach out.