Rating: 
Summary: SCREAM 2...NOW THIS WAS A SEQUAL
Review: I LOVED THIS MOVIE. IT WAS FUNNY, SCARY, HAD A GREAT CAST(AGAIN), A POWER-HOUSE ENDING THAT SHOCKED THE HELL OUT OF ME. AND IT'S ACTUALLY AS GOOD OF A FILM AS THE FIRST. JADA PINKETT DELIVERS AN AMAZING PERFORMANCE THAT RIVALS JANET LEIGH'S IN 'PSYCHO.' BASICALLY THIS WAS JUST A REALLY GOOD MOVIE AND IF YOU ENJOYED THE ORIGINAL YOU ARE GOING TO LOVE THIS ONE. I KNOW I DID. OH AND 'THE CAR SCENE', NOW THAT WAS WHAT I CALL EDGE OF YOUR SEAT SUSPENSE.
Rating:
Summary: An Awesome Sequel!
Review: Scream 2 does not quite pass the high standards of the first film, but it sure is an awesome sequel! The cast all do great jobs, Neve Campbell is incredible, Courteney Cox is hilariouslly scared, David Arquette is quiet and cool, and without Sarah Michelle Gellar as a supporting female, the movie would not of been complete. The mix of genre's in this movie make it even better, it is a hilarious comedy, a horrific horror, a mysterious mystery and a great sequel. Don't miss it.I rated Scream 2 10 out of 10. And I know many people would not agree with this rating, and I do not believe it is an absolute masterpeice, just one of my personal favourite films.
Rating: 
Summary: MIND NUMBINGLY AWFUL SEQUEL
Review: Craven used to be known to make REAL horror movies. Sometimes they were experimentation horror films. But now he has fallen for Hollywood's love of cheap scares and loud, loud, loud soundtracks. This film only has one musical cue that isn't criminally loud noise. But it's music stolen from Hans Zimmer's Broken Arrow soundtrack. A soundtrack I love. This kind of made me annoyed the first, and only, time I saw this (well over 2 years ago). The photography in this film is the worst I have ever seen. Almost everything that isn't in the immediate foreground is blurred and out-of-focus. Horror films offer so many opportunities for creativity in all areas of film production. But as this film is made to appeal to mass audiences the style has to be simple. Even terrible. There is nothing worthwhile about this film and nothing to recommend. The part that I hate most seems to be what most people (for some reason) like the best. A class full of film students discusses if sequels are better than originals. That's it. You see...this IS a sequel, and they talk about sequels. Wow! So what! That's the irony! And it's not worth a penny. I have never seen a more simpleminded and superficial so-called "horror" film as bad as this. The fact that it thinks it's so cool just makes it worse. The true horror of this film is the horrifying ignorance to the audience. Watch Urban Legend instead if you want to watch a Campus "who's the killer?" flick. It's junk but it's better than this. The DVD is in Dolby 5.1 and is letterboxed at 2.35:1.
Rating:
Summary: !!Better than SCREAM!!
Review: I didn't believe a horror movie worthy of Scream status could ever come out, but I was wrong! Scream 2 blows Scream out of the water, bringing back a knife-happy killer to terrorize Neve Campbell and the rest of the Scream cast, as well as some new faces. Once again, the acting is great, the movie is scary and funny at the same time, and you don't know whether to cringe or laugh at some parts. A GREAT MOVIE, HIGHLY RECOMMENDED! Kudos to Wes, Kevin, and Neve!
Rating: 
Summary: ..........
Review: Wes Craven's ``Scream'' (1996) was a revolutionary film, thefirst horror movie in which the characters had seen other horror movies, knew all the cliches, and tried not to make the obvious mistakes. Now comes ``Scream 2,'' in which the characters have seen a movie based on the first killings, and are trapped once again in a slasher nightmare. Like all sequels, this one is a transparent attempt to cash in on the original--but, of course, it knows it is, and contains its own learned discussion of sequels. The verdict is that only a few sequels have been as good as the originals; the characters especially like ``Aliens'' and ``The Godfather, Part II.'' As for ``Scream 2,'' it's ... well, it's about as good as the original. Both movies use a Boo Machine, a plot device for making the audience jump and scream and clutch each other's forearms. The scares this time come from a mad slasher in a curiously unsettling Halloween ghost mask, who stalks a bunch of college freshmen who survived the original slashings. The killer is also interested in such groupies as a TV newsman and a crippled former deputy sheriff. I have witnessed a lot of slashers jump out of a lot of shadows. When Alan Arkin pounced on Audrey Hepburn in ``Wait Until Dark,'' that pretty much defined, for me, how scary such an event could be. I was not frightened by the Boo Moments in ``Scream 2,'' and I found the violence kind of inappropriate; this movie is gorier than the original, and that distracts from the witty screenplay by Kevin Williamson. His premise this time is that violence is quickly translated into marketable form by the media; since he is doing that very thing in ``Scream 2,'' there are ironies within ironies here. The movie is so articulate about what it's doing, indeed, that you can't criticize it on those grounds--it gets there first. The film opens with a showing of ``Stab,'' a movie based on the killing in the first film, and at the screening two audience members (Jada Pinkett and Omar Epps) are ... well, see for yourself. Soon the slasher has moved to a nearby campus, where survivors including Sidney Prescott (Neve Campbell) are students, and the wounded Deputy Riley (David Arquette) has found a job as a security guard. Also hanging around is TV newswoman Gale Weathers (Courteney Cox), who covered the first murders and wrote a best-seller about them that became ``Stab'' and has now inspired the new murders. Also moping about is Cotton (Liev Schreiber), accused by Gale in the first film but found innocent, and now demanding a second helping of his 15 minutes of fame. Who gets killed, and why, and how, I will not reveal ... Idea: In ``Scream 3,'' the man behind the mask is a movie critic, trying to discredit horror movies so he won't have to sit through the movie. The Williamson screenplay uses the horror platform as a launching pad for a lot of zingers; I'd like to see his work in a more mainstream film. When the TV newswoman is asked about her nude photos on the Internet, she replies, ``It was just my head. It was Jennifer Aniston's body.'' And a killer says he wants to be caught, because he's already mapped out his strategy: ``The movies made me do it,'' he'll argue, and he plans to have Bob Dole testify for the defense. (``I'll get Dershowitz! Cochran! The Christian Coalition will pay for my defense!'') Wes Craven was born to direct this material. One of the most successful of horror filmmakers, he made ``The Hills Have Eyes'' and the ``Nightmare on Elm Street'' movies, and was already headed in the same direction as the Williamson screenplay when he wrote and directed ``Wes Craven's New Nightmare'' in 1994. That was a movie (better than either ``Scream'' picture, I think) in which the cast and crew of a horror film found deadly parallels between the plot and their lives. Do movies cause people to act violently? ``Scream 2'' seems to think so--or is that an ironic stance, to make the movie scarier? Will a movie like this, by educating its audience to the conventions and silly cliches of horror films, defuse the violence and make them less likely to be influenced? Now there's an intriguing notion.
Rating:
Summary: Scream 2 is taut and original.
Review: This is my favorite of the series. As the first one, it has excessive amounts of blood and gore, yet it blends it with suspense and black comedy. The cast is well-made and the performances are outstanding. It one year later since the bloodbath that shocked Woodsboro took place and Sidney is putting it behind her. Soon enough, another rash of grisly murders threaten the lives of the students on the college campus. Sidney knows that these murders are connected to her past. As the body count rises, she realizes that she must confront the cunning killer before he gets her first. The struggles between killer and victim are both taut and suspenseful, which most would look in a movie like this. If you like a horror movie with gory violence mixed with suspense and black comedy, I can guarantee you that you will like this.
Rating:
Summary: Funny and "scary" for teenagers
Review: I don't know how I've watched it twice! Well, my friends forced me doing so. At least the film is better than I Know What You Did Last Summer (yes, I saw it. I feel guilty, ok?)- which will probably follow with the sequences I Still Keep Knowing Ever and Allways What You Did Last Summer - but which film isn't, right? I've enjoyed Scream, The First, it was a good film, but this one, please! It has, as the tipical teenage movies of the 90's, cinical jokes while they are getting thriled by a psycho. I know the film isn't supposed to be taken seriously, neither did I have this kind of thought, but it's too foolish, predictable and boring - but that's my opinion! If you like Armaggedon and The Bone Collector - brainless and trashy movies in general - GO WATCH IT! YOU'LL LOVE IT! For the few others who don't match with them, stay REALLLY away from it, as I think you have already known.
Rating: 
Summary: Inferior to Scream? Yes. Still Good? Yes.
Review: Although Scream was a better film, Scream 2 is nearly as fun. Scream 2 has all the main survivors from the first one returning and Liev Schrieber, who only had a tiny part in Scream as Cotton Weary. He is a welcome to the cast. He is a terrific actor and deserves the much bigger role he has in Scream 2 and as people have seen a more significant role. Added to the cast include Jada Pinkett, Jerry O'Connell, and the noxema girl. There is one true difference in this one from the original, this one has more humor than scare. But still is a treat. GRADE: B+
Rating:
Summary: Almost as good as the original
Review: After Scream, you know that there is gonna be a sequel. It was actually quite good for a sequel. The good parts about the movie are that anyone can die, and it has a reference to past horror films. I only wish Sarah Michelle Gellar was around for longer.
Rating:
Summary: Great sequel!
Review: Which horror-fan didn't like the original Scream? Well this is a sequel as good as it gets... The surviving characters of Scream are very believable and sidneys trauma is perfectly written and Neve campbell brings very much depth into sidney's character. Gale weathers, the fame-seking reporter from part1 has written a book, based on the murders in woodsboro. Now this book is made into a movie called "Stab" At a sneak preview of this movie, two teenagers are being brutally murdered and sidney, who's on campus is again confronted with the ghostface killer.... But who's behind the mask this time? Cotton Weary, the innocent convicted, now released, Gale's new, odd acting cameraman Joel... or..? I won't spoil anything...! The rules for scream 2: More blood, more gore! More irony! More suspense! these are the three positiv things about Wes craven's blockbuster-sequel. Several scenes are filled with suspense and I was holding my breath, hoping the character would make it. There is a lot more emotion in the second installment and you really become sort of friends with the characters. Now: The ending is real fun but it's actually not very convincing.... the idea was kinda weird and it didn't really work for me... but if you see part three it'll make kinda sense. It's just not perfect and that's why I couldn't rate it with five stars. But still: Scream 2 is probably the best slasher-sequel ever made. Enjoy!
| 
