Inferior sequel, but good

Rating: 8/10 (9 October 2002)

I'm a big fan of the Scream Trilogy, and while this film is not as good as "Scream", it is still a good film. For anyone who has not seen the film I must warn you not to read on as a go over the events of the film for there will be spoilers.
WARNING: SPOILERS!!! DO NOT READ ON IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN THE FILM!!!!!! SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS

"SCREAM 2" picks-up two years after the conclusion of the first film. The series heroine, Sydney Prescott is in college trying to live a normal life when two people are murdered at a sneak preview of "Stab", which is a horror movie based on what happened in the last movie according to surviving character, Gale Weathers. Suddenly survivors of "Scream" are brought together when a copycat killer attacks them and murderers classmates. Like in the first film you are left guessing who the killer or killers are until the end. The film is darker than its predesessor and lacks a bit of the magic which made "Scream" such a fun, thrilling and original film. The infamous phone voice was dull this time around, not scary or interesting as it was in the first one. The ending is also a little off. While I find it reasonable or exceptable that Mrs. Loomis,(mother of killer Billy Loomis from part 1), was the brains behind her plan for revenge, it wasn't shocking as the revealing of the killers was in the first movie. The first film tricked you until the end and made two likeable characters turn out to be deranged sickos which made it more effective. In this film it was just like, 'oh okay your the killers'. But dispite a few things it's still a funny, thrilling sequel and it does fit as a trilogy