Scream 2 (1997)

 "How do you know that my dim-witted inexperience isn't merely a subtle form of manipulation, used to lower people's expectations, thereby enhancing my ability to effectively manoeuvre within any given situation?"

SPOILERS, in case it needs saying when discussing a slasher that is also a sort of whodunit.

I suppose this film isn't quite as good as its predecessor. But when a sequel is this good, who cares? And, naturally, the film is sufficiently self-aware as to tackle this very subject in the film class discussion scene. Sequels to slashers abound: indeed, one might say that they infest. So it's a joy to see all the knowing references to the specific tropes of slasher sequels.

The plot may be less original than the, er, original, but the narrative is dripping with witty commentary on how the plot is going to unfold. We have a much-maligned red herring in Derek, and a reveal that is a nod to Mrs Vorhees in Friday the 13th.

Yet we also have a cast that shines, and genuine chemistry between Gail and Dewey. The set pieces- the one with Sarah Michelle Gellar as Cici especially- are magnificently done, as one might expect from Wes Craven.

Most of all, though, we have a witty and highly literate script that, at one point, riffs heavily on Aeschylus' Agamemnon. We also get a reminder of how deeply unsettling and weird those American sorority and fraternity things are. Can't they just, like, lower their drinking age to something less insanely puritanical and have their students just drink in bars on campus as happens in every other country?

As sequels go, this may not be an Aliens, or a Godfather: Part II. But it's bloody good, and makes Scream a proper franchise.

Scream (1996)

 "There's a formula to it. A very simple formula.

Best horror film of all time? That's a hard question. But this is a work of genius. It does a lot of violence, but as much of it is directed at the fourth wall as to the killings of Ghostface.

The metatextuality is as exquisite now as it was then. I mean, watching this in 2023 one winces at the passing of time, that we no longer living in a world of landlines, video shop and the great state of California being guilty of judicial killing. Yet we have Randy outlining the rules of how not to get killed in a horror movie. We have a character declare that A Nightmare on Elm Street was great but the sequels were not, in a film directed by Wes Craven. Hmm. We have so many references. After this point, is a straight, non-metatextual slasher truly even possible?

This is a wonderful thing, a B movie genre turned into very clever, if very fun, riffing on all sorts of postmodern stuff. It's very clever indeed. Yet it's accessible.This is a Hollywood horror hit. And it's not lowbrow. There is hope for humanity, and this is the highlight of Craven's career.

The cast is superb, although the ensemble outshines Neve Campbell. The opening set piece is the perfect set up, with Drew Barrymore selling it to perfection. Yet, despite the very meta humour, the whole thing is structured as a perfect slasher, with the big reveal handled very well indeed. This is, simultaneously, a superb horror film and a superb deconstruction. One of the best of its decade.