MovieChat Forums > Scream (2022) Discussion > Poking fun at 'requels' whilst making on...

Poking fun at 'requels' whilst making one of the most blatant 'requels' is just...something else.

posted 2 years ago by [deleted]
8 replies | jump to latest

A bit to on the nose. Bordering on parody.

The dire need for legacy characters and throw backs to the original such as the protagonist being Billy's daughter, the house being Stu's from the original, recreating the couch scene where ghostface sneaks behind, recreating the opening scene, referencing the basement scene, having two killers, recreating the kitchen finale... just too many throwbacks and references, it was basically a remake-and-sequel in one whilst the film poked fun at that?

Just feels strange for a film to poke fun at 'requels' whilst being one of the biggest 'requels' I've ever seen. It was firmly in remake territory. "This requel concept is something else haha" - proceeds to do just that. That's parody. The difference between Scream & Scary Movie is diminishing.

The 'for Wes' stuff...I love Wes Craven as much as the next guy but he's been gone for 7 years. I'd be more forgiving if he'd just passed this past year. It just seemed odd and like insincere fan service, 'Hey guys we love Wes, this is a love letter to his work. Wes rocks.' It just rubbed me the wrong way.

All in all I'm disappointed in the film and to think they have plans for another two to follow this one? Eh...

[–] bobbydallas (8132) 2 years ago

i didn't quite understand the requel speech but it sounded lame af

[–] jds182 (50) 2 years ago

Meta is meta.

[–] Ant1238 (847) 2 years ago

Every Scream movie has been a "parody." That's the entire point. The original was almost called "Scary Movie." Everything you described in your post is exactly the point of every movie in the series (slasher, sequel, trilogy, reboot, requel), and it's clearly on purpose. In the original, Sidney goes off on a diatribe to the killer on the phone about horror movies, saying how idiotic it is that the girls run up the stairs instead of going out the front door, and then proceeds to do so herself later on in the film. That's the joke. A parody doesn't have to have dick and fart jokes to be a parody, and is much more effective when it's "on the nose" like this.

So yes, of course the entire joke being about "requels" will result in the movie having those same characteristics, as all the others have had.

And I dunno how on earth you're complaining about "for Wes," this is the first Scream movie since he died, I would have been outraged if there wasn't a message about him.

[–] ChipDouglas (1607) 2 years ago

The previous 4 movies used self-awareness to be funny and creative. Scream 5's use of the meta came across as pandering. It also lacked anything new and was extremely redundant, uneventful, and downright stupid through most of it.

[–] Bobber (6) 2 years ago

You're just nitpicking. There was nothing "creative" about scream 3 in particular, which was just a run of the mil slasher with an awful retcon motive and a killer that was barely in the movie.

[–] TommyJarvis82 (2492) 2 years ago

Scream 3 is far more creative and fun than 4 and 5.

[–] pathlessterrig (41) 2 years ago

No it's not.

[–] TommyJarvis82 (2492) 2 years ago

A lot of 21st century movies fall into that trap of "becoming what you're making fun of." Even when it's the point, I still don't like it.