Rating: 
Summary: One of the worst sequels ever.
Review: I have to give the original Scream some credit, even though I didn't like it too much, it revived the horror series and even inspired old horror sequels to start resurfacing (Halloween H20 & 8, Jason X, Bride of Chucky). But the things it also did to the wonderful horror genre are inexcusable. It seems like every new horror movie now borrows it's cast from Buffy, Dawson's Creek and Party of Five. Scream 2 does nothing to drop that trend, in fact, it just gets worse. The film takes place 2 years after the original, where (a very tired looking) Neve Campbell and the survivors of the first flick are starting over. However, a movie is made about the Woodsboro events called "Stab" and soon things start to stir up again and a new killer(s) is out to prove that all of today's violence can be blamed on the movies (Just watch, you'll see.) Scream 2 is ultimately a very subpar sequel. Everything just feels like a rehash of the original. The acting in this one is very poor, you don't really believe that these things are happening to the characters. The script is in desperate need of help and Courtney Cox looks really weird. The only upside this movie had (in my opinion) was that there was much more gore and the killings were more creative. ...
Rating: 
Summary: One of the best sequels around
Review: With 'Scream' being such an unexpected hit, managing to reinvent the horror genre, a sequel was almost inevitable. However, 'Scream 2' transcends all horror sequels before it to become every bit as good as its predecessor. Two years on from the original killings at Woodsboro, Sidney (Campbell) is trying to settle down at college with a new boyfriend (O'Connell) and geeky friend Randy. Yet when two gruesome killings of her fellow college classmates coincide with the opening of 'Stab', the movie based on the first 'Scream' movie, it's business as usual with a ghostfaced killer stalking our heroine and her friends. This calls for the return of old favourites Gail Weathers (Cox) and drippy Deputy Riley (Arquette).First off, this sequel is good because it has a new location and shows that it's characters have moved on from the first set of murders. For instance, Sidney is still jumpy around boys whilst there's some well-realised sexual tension between Dewy and Gail. This is helped by a self-knowing script by Kevin Williamson, which even has a discussion of how sequels are generally worse that their predecessors thrown in! Once again he manages to subvert the whole genre by pointing out the clichés through a cast that are well-versed in how to survive a horror movie. The acting is key, with Campbell in particular proving beyond doubt that she can imbue the 'scream queen' persona with a human quality. The supporting cast are all good, and there are some interesting cameos too - Sarah Michelle Gellar, Joshua Jackson and Jada Pinkett to name a few. This is not only clever with its idea of a movie within a movie with a cast that know their role, but exciting and scary. There are some particularly impressive set pieces and original ideas that add up to make this one hell of a ride. The only possible thing that it is possible to discredit is the fact that as a sequel it can't possibly revolutionise the genre in the way that 'Scream' did. However, this is every bit as good as the first movie and a definite improvement on a lot of the horror garbage that is on offer at the moment.
Rating: 
Summary: Don't waste your money.
Review: I was a big fan of the first Scream movie - and consequently, Kevin Williamson. However, with this and other projects like Dawson's Creek, he's proved himself what he really is ... This movie is just a retread of the first film, except what works there doesn't work here. Williamson's writing has the feeling of an intro creative writing workshop. Much has been made about his young characters being too smart - in actuality, they're exceptionally dumb...they just have a thesaurus. In Scream he found a gimmick, in Scream 2 he's beating a dead slasher.
Rating:
Summary: scream 2
Review: The Scream series was directed by Wes Craven.
He must be a brilliant man because I
know so many people that love the series.
Scream series is basically about 6
main carachters who are being stalked by
a masked killer.In every scream movie the begining
has a little catch to it.I won't tell you
what,that's for you to find out.There are
many movies that come from scream that are
comedy, but also horror.Comedy are:Scary movie
and scary movie 2.Horror are:I know what you did
last Summer and I still know what you did last summer.
The I know what you did last summer series is about
a group of friends who are being stalked by a killer
in a cloak with a hook.In scream the carachters are
being stalked by a killer with a knife.
Scream movies have many stars in them like:Drew Barrymore,
Neve Campbell and Courtney Cox just to name a few!
Rating: 
Summary: The only Scream worth watching....
Review: The Scream series is a true enigma. It seems you either love the film's or you hate them. One thing I've found though when speaking to the fans, is that Scream 2 seems to be the least popular of the trilogy. My personal belief is that it's the only installment that is actually a proper horror film. Let me explain... The biggest problem with 'Scream' is it's a hollywood horror film. Experimental maybe, but while it deconstructs the genre left right and centre, it is ultimately as cliched as the slasher films that preceeded it. Only now instead of the sex = death rule, we have a new set of rules for horror films. Rules set by studio executives. Such rules are as follows. 1. You must cast only stars that can be recognised from popular TV shows to make it appeal to the young generation. 2. You must include an ultra commercial soundtrack that bears no thematic or emotional link to the film whatsoever. 3. You must conform to MTV standards to make the film appeal, and be user friendly to a wider audience usually with lots of comedic elements. Basically the new 'mass apeal' horror flicks are very washed down. The first Scream suffered from this a bit, although I did find it enjoyable. Scream 3 on the other hand is completely designed for mass audiences. No 'I Spit On Your Grave' style gut wrenching pain and certainly no 'Evil Dead' style rape scenes. Everything's nice and easy and clean cut. The only original thing about the first Scream was that it managed to use other films idea's so well that people didn't recognise it! Scream 2 is the only entry in the series that is darker. The characters are mostly well defined (even if most of them are annoying), but for once it doesn't conform to the happy 'geek gets the girl' motif. Instead the geek gets slashed and diced beyond recognition. The tone of the film is a lot darker than the other entries in the series. Okay not to the extent of 'Texas Chainsaw Massacre', but it does at least try to be depressing, and that's what horror should be. The reason the teeny bopper types like this film least, is because it's not as 'happy jolly' style as the other two. This one at least tries to hurt the audience a little bit. Yeah okay so there is still the pop soundtrack and TV pop stars. Yeah okay so you may wish Sidney would just die because she's so damn normal it's sickening. But the fact is Scream 2 is the only one of the series that is a proper horror film because it actively says the good ar epunished far more than the bad. At least this one isn't all happy jolly and for that reason it's worth a watch.
Rating:
Summary: a savy great romp
Review: good movie
in order of my fav "scream" movies to the least liked 1.scream
2.scream 2
3.scream3
Rating:
Summary: KICKING A DEAD HORSE?
Review: Some films, sequels particularly, can be overdone. The sequel to Scream is not really bad, but it is not really great either. It does not equal the originality of its predecessor nor does it really provide the same sense of urgency of the first film. In addition, the characters are not quite as interesting this time. When an original premise is overworked, we are left with what could be considered cinematic leftovers, so to speak. Meatloaf, anyone? The only really interesting parts here are the over the top performance of Laurie Metcalf and also the performance of Liev Schreiber.
Rating:
Summary: Definitely better than the original
Review: The original set up the premise, so this one has more room for intensity than all the self-referential humor. Sidney has gone to college, thinking her past is behind her. But when the film about her story comes to town, more murders occur. Scream 2 is so good that it only gives one thing away too early--that 3 is in the works. Just pay attention to the dialogue.
Rating:
Summary: Brilliant!
Review: This movie was definitely a good sequel to the first "Scream". I think that Sidney was a fighter, a lot more bold and brave this time around. This movie really compliments the first one, with a shocking ending on top of that. I would definitely buy this movie if I didn't already own it.
Rating:
Summary: What is a collector
Review: Not a review as such more of an observation. having bought Scream 2 already and the box set what on earth is there to get now. Surely a collector is the person who buys the movie when it first hits the stores ? Maybe not - maybe a collector means they know you will buy the same film again and again and can keep releasing different editions. Maybe that's why I now have two copies of Seven , terminator 2, Scream (trilogy ) and the Exorcist... naughty naughty
| 
