Scream 2

With “Scream” (1996) becoming a sensational hit, Hollywood quickly responded with a sequel, “Scream 2” (1997), releasing it exactly a year after the first film.  The movie, produced on a budget of $23 million, ended up grossing $173 million at the box-office. The success of “Scream 2” ensured that the slasher genre was well and alive again and that the first film’s success was not a fluke. While a lot of fans think “Scream 2” surpassed the original in all areas, I am somewhat reluctant to admit that this is the case. Nonetheless, “Scream 2” is still as good as the original, if not better.

“Scream 2” adheres strictly to the first film’s formula: a hacking killer, a couple of dead bodies, and an ultimate redemption for the protagonists. Writer Kevin Williamson and director Wes Craven have crafted another taut thriller by developing the characters further, building the right amount of suspense, and maintaining the film’s tight pace by using slick editing techniques. Just like the original, “Scream 2” opens with a thrilling sequence in which the slasher killer is introduced yet again. But this time, the filmmaker’s approach is a bit different. Instead of trapping a victim in a helpless situation, the writer has deliberately created an opening sequence against the backdrop of a social commentary. After you watch the opening shot, you come to realize two things: first, the killer is not important and, second, the violence transpiring on the screen is a satire of Hollywood itself. It is also an interesting insight on the postmodern culture that is deeply influenced by Hollywood.

In this opening sequence, teenagers are watching the theatrical screening of a fictional Hollywood movie, “Stab.” Of course, it should not come as a surprise that this movie is motivated by the real-life events of “Scream.” As we have seen on numerous occasions, Hollywood has a habit of creating movies out of the villains and heroes in real-life. In addition, while the scene is playing out, we see many people in the audience dressed as the ghost-face killer, with all the costumes. They are totally ignorant that a new killer has made his entry into the theater, and they continue to cheer for the movie’s killer to hack another victim. The sight of blood, a naked butt, and a deadly knife are more pleasing than a dying victim in real-life. Indeed, the killer (in “Stab”) has glorified the violence prevalent in the society by impacting the teenagers. Nonetheless, in both “Stab” and “Scream 2” the entertainment moguls have immortalized the killer, and the pseudo-killer happens to be a white male in both the films. All of this is funny, but at the same time socially scary, as we see society’s obsession with the morbid parts of life. An interesting discussion develops later in school, where the teenagers discuss the influence of movies, and importantly the violence, on the current generation. It’s a brilliant piece of mockery on Hollywood and the changing face of the society that is given some weight by Williamson in the script.

This brings us to another discussion: Are sequels always successful? Well, the filmmakers let us decide through the eyes of teenagers in the film. Similar to “Scream,” “Scream 2” ensures that the film geek factor is fully intact. This time around, a seemingly obvious trivia option is dropped, and, rather, we go to a classroom discussion. The teenagers discuss the sequels that have outshone the original movies: films like “Godfather 2,” “Terminator 2,” “Aliens 2” get tossed around in this film discussion. It’s a clever technique to employ in the script, and it engages its audience in thinking hard about the worthiness of “Scream 2.” One thing that immediately comes to mind: What creates a need for a sequel apart from the ensuing financial success? And the answer is: a missing link that comes back to life again. If you look at “Terminator 2” and “Aliens 2,” the story doesn’t end with the death of an evil force. Instead, we try to speculate on the origins and the aftermath of the destruction of the evil. Once we get a full grasp of this, then there has to be another story, a sequel, possibly. The plot of “Scream 2” functions in a similar manner in that it extends the killer’s mayhem to the next level. If you closely look at what happens at the end of “Scream,” then you can somewhat guess the killer’s identity halfway through the movie. And that is why, for me, the killer is not at all important in this film. That said, “Scream 2” in no way emulates the original, “Scream,” but has enough positive qualities to stand on its own.

The characters in the film have advanced emotionally since the events of “Scream,” but the teenagers are still dumb. Sidney (Neve Campbell) is shaken once again when the killer strikers his first victim. It’s a moment of self-reflection, which tries to build on what happened to her two years ago in California. The scene shows the “this can’t be happening to me again” moment for Sidney. Weakened as she might appear on hearing of the killer’s arrival, she is still very courageous and resolute to put all of this behind.  Gale’s (Courtney Cox) monotonous image from the original gets a makeover in this sequel as well. We understand the nature of her stressful job and why she functions in the badass mode she does. In addition, Gale’s human side is also brought to the forefront. Nonetheless, the filmmakers, instead of providing only one female lead as they did in “Halloween,” “Alien,” and “Scream,” give us two female leads blasting their way out from the killer; it’s like a double-barreled shotgun waiting for the right moment to nail the killer. In fact, the manner in which Sidney and Gale achieve their ultimate redemption feels like two femme fatales striking in a Western spaghetti setup.

In the end, “Scream 2” was a lot of fun for me, not in terms of giving me thrills, but with its bizarre commentary on society in general and Hollywood in particular, its plucky tongue-and-cheek humor, and its passionate energy to entertain. It definitely avoids all the pitfalls of a bad sequel and ends up achieving consistent results.

Video:

Earlier this year, Lionsgate obtained rights to release Miramax films on Blu-ray, and the “Scream” trilogy is first release for Miramax under the Lionsgate banner. “Scream 2” comes to Blu-ray for the first time and with a good-looking 1080p transfer. After watching “Scream 2” right after “Scream,” I can say both the transfers looked identical to me, except for a few minor issues popping up in the “Scream 2” transfer.

First, the 1080p transfer is clean, with no dirt on the print; however, a few white specks do pop up here and there, although they are never intrusive to the overall viewing experience. A nice layer of grain is retained throughout, and I could not see any sign of DNR. The close-ups are solid, with realistic skin tones. The detail is generally consistent but lacks depth in several scenes, especially in long shots. Occasionally, the transfer comes across as a bit flat, too. Shot in 35mm, the film’s original condition might have played a big role on how things look in the 1080p transfer. The night shots are solid, with good blacks. Likewise, the outdoor scenes around the town and the neighboring woods are beautifully rendered and generally warm-looking. Then, too, the colors are vibrant and deep, with plenty of reds.

Video:

We get a lossless 5.1 DTS-HD Master Audio track that sounded better to my ears than the one provided in “Scream.” The front channels drive the audio for the most part. The dialogue is crisp and consistently audible. Subtle surround noises are active through the rear channels. We also hear ambient noises from the surrounding woods through the rear channels.  The track shines in the action sequences with its punchy gunshots. You can hear bullets and explosions clearly, and the bass is used to good effect. Overall, it’s a definite improvement on the lossless track in “Scream.”

Extras:

All the extras from the previous DVD release are carried over for this Blu-ray release.

First, we get an audio commentary track with director Wes Craven, producer Marianne Maddalena, and editor Patrick Lussier. The trio talk about the screenplay, the extended killer’s imagery, the influence of Hollywood on the society, and the edgy editing techniques used in the film.

Next, we get several deleted scenes with optional audio commentary by the filmmakers. Following this, there are several outtakes.

Up next, another short featurette, “Behind the Scenes,” takes us to the actual locations. The disc ends with a theatrical trailer and a few TV spots.

Parting Thoughts:

“Scream 2” is a terrific follow-up to “Scream.” It retains all its edginess by packing in plenty of visceral violence, gore, and smart humor. There is no shortage of thrills, and on a few occasions you are left gasping for breath. The only negative thing I see in the film is that it feels too much like an extension of “Scream.” However, perhaps that is not a bad thing, considering how well this extension is articulated by the filmmakers. Highly recommended.