If you exclude the last 15 minutes...

Rating: 9/10 (24 August 2000)

then this is the most exciting thriller there's been in years. Containing some of the most engaging scenes of terror seen in a Slasher film (well, a who done it/Slasher film). This is the most eerie, dark, creepy instalment of the trilogy. Loved the pulse pounding soundtrack! Even the look of the film was stronger than the other two.
Frankly, bashing this film and praising the third is enough to make me recommend watching them again. The third was a watered down, boring, insainly silly, would-be character piece that was a forced and pathetic attempt to link the trilogy together. Suddendly characters had no backstory. They said lines to push the story forward. There was even a lack of Close Ups. It showed that Craven's interest in the series was wanning. If the weakness in Scream two is the ending... the weakness in two is everything after it's intense opening.
Re: Scream 2, if removing a certain character was too much for you to handle, then that's too bad. It's called good drama. I couldn't believe that they did it. I felt angry, I felt upset... then I realized, exactly how powerful and effective the scene was.
On the downside, the last 15 minutes are rather... inept. Equally as stupid as the ending of the "Murder she wrote-eqse" Scream 3. Recommendation, forget the end... the rest will scare, thrill you and make you laugh.