Rating: 
Summary: A killer of a sequel
Review: I haven't seen the first of the trilogy, so I can't compare, but whatever standards Scream set, Scream 2 probably matched them, or at least came very close.
It starts of with a scene that, as the back of one of the DVD's described, may stop your heart. But I"ve seen worse done by Freddy Krueger. (But I did find out why Ray got a willy through the ear in Scary Movie)
Set two years after the Woodsboro murders, Sidney Prescott is now in college and trying to secure a new, happier life.
The opening scene, described above, is at a sneak preview of Stab, a slasher flick based on the book, 'The Woodsboro Murders' by reporter Gail Weathers. The police assume this is a once in a lifetime thing, and not going to happen again.
Until a sorority's 'sober sister' (Sarah Michelle Gellar) is found dead. A connection is made and the body count continues to rise, before everything comes to the surprising killer revelation.
But I got confused by the cover. It has the picture of this black chick who dies in the opening sequence, but normally, the cover people don't die until at least the second murder.
And why is Sarah Michelle Gellar's name on the cover as well? She's in two scenes, (one of which was the best in the whole movie.)
Still very good, and a must for horror fans.
Rating: 
Summary: Another Scream psycho is killing on the loose.
Review: Some of the cast is back in this sequel to "Scream" (1996). A copycat is out there killing more students and people who are getting closer to the truth. The black guys are stupid and talk, talk, talk and rant on. The white people are the intelligent ones in this film. Again, this is a who-is-doing-it. Who the killer is may come as a big surprise. Jerry O'Connell was a heavy-set kid in the film, Stand By Me (1986). Now he is all grown up and buff. He plays "Derek". The last 25 minutes of this film is the best I've seen of all "Scream" films. DVD contains in Bonus Material, outtakes, deleted scenes, theatrical trailer and eleven tv spots, and 2 music videos. Followed by Scream 3.
Rating:
Summary: Just when you thought it was safe to make a crank call...
Review: Funny how the sequel rules say more blood and gore, though we see less of it. The body count is bigger, but the victims go too easily. If you're going to bother doing something, do it right. This film still manages to be well-made with a bunch of great performances by a talented cast, fast-paced editing, and director Craven's horror sensibilities.Less intense than the original, with less insight into the motives of the mind of a killer. But the film makes up for these obvious short-comings with lots of slick action sequences. The opening is the best scene encompassing the remaining horror elements from the original. But, this separates itself with a more universal score which I prefer to the first Scream, that has more contemporary ups and downs than just roundabout classic quirks. The soundtrack dumps the electronic outfits Julee Cruise and Sister Machine Gun from Scream, and attracts more mainstream bands like Foo Fighters, Tonic, Everclear, and Sugar Ray. Though the more impressive tunes come from Master P and Kottonmouth Kings. The DVD includes those two music videos. But I wouldn't go about giving that my highest recommendations. The audio commentary is okay but not as dynamic as the people on it, the TV spots are too alike one another, the trailer isn't in widescreen, the featurette provides no interesting information about the film, and the deleted scenes suck. The music videos and the hilarious outtakes (bloopers) are the only truly worthwhile features on the disc. But if you absolutely have to have any copy of this film, you have to have this widescreen DVD. It's the only exceptable version of the film itself. 3 out of 4 stars for the movie and a 2 out of 3 for the DVD.
Rating:
Summary: SCREAM 2
Review: Okay, so it's not scary compared to RETURN OF THE LIVING DEAD or CREEPSHOW, or even the original SCREAM, but it's still better then most horror movies in many ways. The movie has a strong realistic vibe to it, and although not as atmospheric or gory as part 1, it has a better plot, more suspects, cat fights, SARAH MICHELLE GELLAR (Buffy the vampire slayer, I know) gets killed off! Yes! Plus, there is a truly scary car sequence and the end was quite the shocker! The killer's were obvious, but nobody suspects them because they're too obvious. The scene with Sarah Michelle Gellar was a tacky time filler, but it scared me a little the first time I saw it. I think that SCREAM 2 was worth the 15.99 on VHS, and the 20 bucks I just paid for the DVD, the movie is good, and although part 1 is better on most levels, it sure is a very good, suspenseful and new sequel that uses it's own witt to seperate it from the 1996 blockbuster original.
Rating: 
Summary: ...
Review: In one scene of this movie, Randy has a debate with his film class about whether or not sequels could be good movies. Randy says no way. Well, I'm sorry Randy, but as much love as I have for you, you're wrong. This movie proves it. Not surprisingly, murders dstart centering themselves again around Sydney. Is someone tryign to repeat what happened in Woodsboro? New charactors in this film deliver much comic relief, Gail's photographer man and Mickey, a new friend of Sydney and Randy's opposing debater that sequels CAN rock. Hmm. Don't be afriad to rent this movie. While not scary, it will deliever much needed laughs, and probably make you sad about a certain death....
Rating:
Summary: SAW THE BEGINING
Review: I SAW THE BEGINING AND A LITTLE MORE THAN THE BEGINING OF SCREAM 2 IT BROKE SO I UNFORTUNITLY HAD TO TAKE IT BACK BUT AFTER A CCOOL BEGINING AND NOW THE MOVIE STABS MADE THE REAL LIFE MOVIE OF WHAT HAPPENED IN THE ORIGINAL AND NOW THE LOVERS OF SEQUELS HAVE GONE TO FAR
Rating:
Summary: The ONLY Sequel That Surpases The Original
Review: All I can say is that this could have been an Oscar nomination. In all seriousness! Naturally slasher movies give off a rather cheesy vibe... but noooooo! Not the first two "Scream"s. They have a certain spark. The acting is absolutely fantastic, the plotline is phenomanal, and the slasher costume is higly original. I love this movie as much, if not more than the first. Don't rent... BUY!!!
Rating:
Summary: Scream 2- a real scream, or just a half-hearted gurgle?
Review: Scream 2 contains all the perks of scream one, an amusing cast, a witty and inventive script, a keen sense of parody in relation to other movies of the genre, a sense of humour, whilst not forgetting that it is, essentially, a horror film.
For scream 2, most off the original cast return, with a few new faces thrown in, such as future Mrs. Will Smith, Jada Pinkett, as a student. Scream 2, thanks to these appearances, blends in the right amount of comforting familiarity with fresh faces. Like it's older sibling, scream 2 managed to almost rewrite the horror genre, being as it is, not just a simple horror film, but a satire, parody, whodunnit, and thriller as well.
Scream 2's cassette boasts of being 'gorier, sexier, funnier' than the original. I cannot differ that it may be even a tad gorier than the original scream film, containing some suspenseful, well-constructed and nasty deaths that you remeber a long time after the credits have rolled. The whole film is an-above average horror story,and manages to tie up all it's aspects of film making to a high degree of success. Scream 2 is a classy horror that contains some surprises along the way, especially near the end of the film, as judged by the director's very high security surrounding the real ending. I suppose it's a tribute to him that there was so much interest in his film.
So why then does scream get only three stars? Because it has contracted a serious case of sequelitis. Don't get me wrong, it's a good film, but it does nothing that the previous scream film had not done, put it this way, it's not actually breaking any new ground. The joy of scream was that it was so unexpected, and virtually re-written the entire genre. This seeks to too, and it actually does, unfortunately the original scream was released only one year previous. It contains plot twists, but has none of the shock value that the first scream had. Fans of scream one will be, of course, delighted, but others will wonder whether they are watching an extended version of the original. This film follows squarely in the footsteps of scream one, but because it was released afterwards of course the sequel is a little short on impact. Somehow it's not as enjoyable all- round as scream one was.
Also, being similar to scream one, it has the same flaws as well. It seems to be more interested in blood-splattered gore than suspense, and i personally prefer suspense, as it makes for a much more effective horror atmosphere. All the best horror movies contain suspense. Would you group such films as on a par with others like 'jaws', and 'psycho'? of course not.
In spite of these faults, scream two makes for an effective film in it's own right, and i'm sure it will delight some people, but for me it is only a decent horror movie, and nothing special.
Although it deserves a place alongside scream one in the collection, don't expect a masterclass of horror, or you will be disappointed.
Rating:
Summary: A SCREAM of a sequal.....
Review: If you have seen the first Scream film, than you know the gist. of the movie. The first film U thought was good, but this film was really good. When Sydney is away at college, she starts getting phone calls(big surpirise) She must trust no body except for her friends and family. And two of them are out to get her!! But which two? That is the quetion.... This is one of the best sequals that I havce ever seen. Suspencful, some-what scary and a "killer" of a cast, this movie delivers!!!
Rating:
Summary: Scream And Scream Again!
Review: After the incredible, phenomenal success of the first "Scream" movie, a sequel was inevitable. Actually, it was inevitable from the start since a part 2 and 3 were already planned and part of Kevin Williamson's deal when selling the first movie. While many people thought this was only made since the first one was such a monster hit, it was not. I'm sure the box office didn't hurt tho!. Kevin Williamson is back with another sharp, fresh, and clever screenplay. Wes Craven is back in the director's chair and makes that screenplay into a stylish thriller that exceeds all expectations and puts the "sequels ..." curse to rest...for now anyways. It's been two years since the grisly murders and stalking of Sidney Prescott in Woodsboro, and now Sidney is enrolled in college and trying to put her life back in order. It's much easier said than done since she is now caught up in the frenzy of a new movie called "Stab", which is a film about what happened in Woodsboro based on the book "The Woodsboro Murders", by tabloid journalist Gale Weathers(Courtney Cox). Two young students(Jada Pinkett, Omar Epps)are killed during the premiere of the film in the movie's dazzling and well executed opener, and the hunt is on once again. A copycat killer dressed in ghost figure attire is jumping on the "Stab" hysteria and stalking Sidney and her friends. Returning is Gale, who is still the money loving, attention getter we loved to hate in the original, but we love more now here. Deputy Dewey(David Arquette)is back as well, having survived the stabbed in the back incident from the original. Unfortunatley, it has left him with a bad leg and limp. Film geek Randy(Jamie Kennedy)is back as well, and sets the tone for the film when he explains the rules of a horror sequel. Cotton Weary(Liev Schreiber)also appears in this one. He has a far more interesting and pivotal role than he did in the brief moments he had in the original film. We are introduced to a new pack of characters as well. Sidney's boyfriend Derek, who is played by Jerry 'O' Connell, film lover
Mickey, Sid's roomate Hallie, and Gale's new camerman Joel, among others. "Buffy" star Sarah Michelle Gellar also appears in one of the films's best moments. Former "Roseanne" star Laurie Metcalfe, and David's father Lewis Arquette, round out the great cast. The movie definitley knows that it is a sequel and is fully aware of how sequels usually go. There's even a great scene about students talking about film sequels. But what the first film did horror films, this one does with horror film sequels and gives it a fresh and clever spin. The scares are great and the suspense scenes are carefully executed and fully effecting. The movie still manages to be surprising and scary and catch us off guard, unlike so many sequels. Neve Campbell is a fabulous scream queen heroine. She does another solid turn as Sidney. Cox looks fantastic in this one. Gale is such an entertaining character to watch. Arquette has the Dewey schtick down pat, although it feels as if he wasn't given much to do this time around and was out of the action quite early than he should have been. While many horror films seem to only care about violence and a high body count, these films are about the characters. Not the killer or what he does and how he goes about doing it. It's about why it's happening and how these characters that we have come to love and cheer on will respond to it. Wes and company did something that many people didn't think they would. They made a sequel that is as convincing, smart, scary, and entertaining as the original. "Scream 2" is a follow up that not only does the brilliant original justice, but it also gives sequels a good name.
|
