Review of Scream 3

Scream 3 (2000)
10/10
Finally closure...
1 July 2000
To start, I love the original two films in the series and so obviously I was overly-hyped to see this supposed conclusion piece in the modern day classic slasher trilogy. Knowing that Kevin Williamson dropped out, and word that Neve Campbell may be next seemed to give the film a preemptive ill-fate feel. The outcome is fantastic. Personally, the first is and always will be the best in the series, and I'm not sure which comes next between two and three. There is the return of horror director Wes Craven, accompanied by Neve Campbell's nice portrayel of an innocent victim, Sidney Prescott, Courtney Cox Arquette's savvy reporter, Gale Weathers, and David Arquette's oafish deputy, Dewey Riley. This time the script is written by Ehren Kruger who gave us the excellent Arlington Road, though Williamson is obviously absent. The dialogue is a bit different, and the chills are lost a bit in too much self-referential dialogue. The cameo by Randy is great, as is this film. My few complaints come from the complete lack of gore, the somewhat less than impactful conclusion where the killer is revealed, and a mistake with police photos of Sidney I am surely one of the few who noticed.The film is excellent and it brings wonderful closure. I have to say that right now, this is the strongest horror series, for all of its films are mesmerizing. Halloween (the best horror film by far) was accomanied by two good sequals, two and seven, yet three through six were wretched. A Nightmare on Elm Street was great, as was Wes Craven's New Nightmare, but two through six sucked royally from bad one-liners and cheesy effects. Friday the 13th never had an astounding film, and from the rumors of Jason X, set in outer space, there never will be a great one. Don't miss Scream 3 for its one of the few teen slashers of the nineties that still holds its intelligence.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed