Not bad

Rating: Null/10 (31 July 2002)

Over the years my opinion of Scream 2 has gone back and forth. Initially I loved the movie, minus the last ten minutes. Then I'd watch the original and realize just how inferior the second film was. No days, I can appreciate the good along with the bad when it comes to the second film in the trilogy.
Let's start with the good: the cinematography. The film looks great. The scale has been upped from its predecessor. In fact, this is probably the sharpest looking one in the set. There's also a great deal of effort involved in moving the returning characters forward so that they're not just rehashing the first film. There are a few good surprises (the murder in the van), a really suspenseful scene that outdoes anything from the previous film (the cop car), and most importantly a respect for the previous film. Scream 2 is aware of what it is and what it is not. It relishes in the fact that its a sequel.
Now for the bad. Remember what I said about moving the returning characters forward? The only problem with that is that the new characters have absolutely nothing to do. Other than Derek, Sid's new boyfriend, none of them get much screen time at all. I can't decide if this was intentional or accidentally brilliant. Y'see, if Scream is all about cliches than that's one of the biggest: characters who are introduced simply to die. Was Mr. Williamson aware that's what he was doing? Doubtful, but in that respect it works. There are a few plot lines that are never really explored. They start out with the copycat killer scenario with the murderer leaving clues through names. Yet after the meeting in the police station about this, we never hear about it again. What was the purpose? Then there's the atrocious excuse for a climax. Did anybody buy the killers in this film? You've got someone who was barely in ten minutes of the movie and another character who until her entrance didn't even exist to the audience! Very, very disapointing. The best part of the killers' identities in the original was that you were expecting only one. So when he was revealed you'd spent the whole film going back and forth on whether or not he did it. Then enter killer #2 and it's a whole other surprise. Infinitely satisfying. If they'd wanted to shock us this time, they shouldn't have stuck to such a formula. We were expecting two killers. Silly me, I was expecting a character who had been relevant in the movie as well...
Scream 2 really shines compared to the film that follows it. Scream 3 is nothing more than the kinds of movies this series set out to parody. There's also another interesting aspect of Scream 2. It has a built in defense mechanism. To say it's not as good as the original almost feels like that's exactly what they wanted. They can just say, "Exactly. That's the point. Sequels suck." I'm not sure they thought their film sucked, but it's an interesting excuse. Bottom line: WAY better than the modern teen slashers that followed it, but not quite as effective as the original. You could do worse.