15 Years? Really!?!

If you look by the year alone, yes, it's been 15 years since the original Scream. But technically, it's not quite 15 years because the original came out in the December of 1996. Yes, I know, I'm splitting hairs; but it makes me not feel quite as old. To avoid putting spoilers in here, to the best of my ability, I thought I'd reflect on what I thought about Scream 4 and what's changed during these 14 1/2 years...

Midnight Showings
Then: I was at both midnight showings for Scream 2 & Scream 3. (I was underage for the original.)
Now: You couldn't pay me to go to a midnight showing (the only exception would be if an Anita Blake movie is ever made). Over the years I found out that there are typically rude, obnoxious teenagers at these that ruin the experience for me.

Woodsboro
Then: The original was filmed entirely in CA, and the houses were spread far apart. I don't know why but there is something far scarier about surrounding woods than 10 feet from your neighbor.
Now: The fourth installment was filmed entirely in MI. Woodsboro is now much more suburban and the high school and the town look completely different. With all the time that's passed this isn't a huge leap, except to people like me who pay way too much attention to details. I do appreciate the production trying to help stimulate the economy in Motor City though.

Sarcasm
Then: It was the perfect amount and not distracting.
Now: I wouldn't call this one perfect, but I understand why it was more over the top. I would expound on this but I want to avoid spoilers...So, let's just say in a post-Columbine, post-Virginia Tech world the tongue has to be farther into the cheek.

Suspense
Then: The first Scream was brilliant in this department. The MPAA was stricter at the time; so the gore was less. This made Craven concentrate on simple shoe shots, deserted hallways, creepy noises, etc.
Now: This is probably my biggest complaint of the new movie. The suspense wasn't any where close to as good. They could now show gorier kill scenes (which they did); that apparently also meant they sparsely used the classic, simple, amazing tricks that build the suspense. (I think I only saw one shoe shot!)

The Killer(s)
Then:  I didn't see the reveal coming in the first one. Craven and Williamson duped me into thinking it was the dad the first time I saw it.
Now: I didn't see the reveal again. This time I think there were too many possibilities to pin it down. In other words Craven and Williamson are still fully capable, although this time they didn't have a clear misdirect to one specific character.

The Soundtrack
Then: I LOVED the first soundtrack. I was addicted to Nick Cave's "Red Right Hand" (which made cameos in the other two films). I also loved "Whisper to a Scream," "Youth of America," "Don't Fear the Reaper," et al. I over played the soundtrack so much, it was my first CD to tear up strictly over how much it was played.
Now: Honestly, there's no nice way to say this: The soundtrack BLOWS, and is distracting at parts. While the rest of the film paid respect to it's legacy, the soundtrack showed no history. I realize it had to appeal to a younger audience, but "Red Right Hand" strategically placed somewhere would have gone a long way with me.

Overall, though, I truly enjoyed the hell out of the film; I jumped 3 times. Craven and Williamson are still two of my favorites and I love them together (despite the fact that the doofus from Scream 3 did rewrites on the new one). I did enjoy the new cast immensely, despite the fact that Skeet Ulrich, Matthew Lillard, Rose McGowan and Jamie Kennedy hold a very special place in this horror geek's heart.