—–

On a publicity tour to promote her new book “Out of Darkness,” Prescott returns to Woodsboro where she reunites with former tabloid reporter Gale Weathers (Courteney Cox) and Dewey Riley (David Arquette). Weathers and Riley are married and while the former is writing a novel, the latter spends his time as the town sheriff. Even before Prescott starts signing books at a local store, a new killer has already struck. That killer is soon hunting down some of the local teenagers and trying to murder Prescott.  

As I previously noted, I enjoyed the original “Scream” trilogy. Like a lot of horror movies, the series features a lot of violence and gore but the stories are well-told. The trilogy was created to serve a certain audience and they do that well. While “Scream 2” was the best of the original trilogy, “Scream 3” was the weakest. “Scream 4” should be rated beneath the original two “Screams” but above “Scream 3.”

One of the reasons for this distinction is because Kevin Williamson, who wrote the original two “Screams” wrote the screenplay for “Scream 4.” Like the first two films, the newest one features a few solid supporting characters that viewers get to know before some of them are killed. The supporting cast includes the webcast-obsessed Robbie Mercer (Erik Knudsen), the creepy Trevor Sheldon (Nico Tortorella), and the always-perky Deputy Judy Hicks (Marley Shelton). All of these characters are stronger than the supporting cast of “Scream 3,” which featured Jenny McCarthy as a bland actress and the nearly unwatchable Parkey Posey as a Gale Weathers-wannabe.

“Scream 4” pokes fun at the horror genre and some of its newest entries. There are a few nicely-timed jokes about the seemingly-unending “Saw” franchise. (For critics who think the “Scream” franchise has gone on too long, try watching the latest “Saw” movie. It’s nearly unwatchable.)   

“Scream 4,” like its predecessors, also includes some thoughtful ideas. A few of the earlier “Screams” included ideas about media violence and people blaming parents for their children’s misdeeds. “Scream 4″ explores the idea of victimhood and how society often celebrates it. Although Prescott is a real victim, there are side plots in the story about people wanting to be “victims” for publicity. Considering how politically-correct and easily-offended some people can be, it seems like “victimhood” is a timely theme. One prime example of this is Ryan Murphy, the creator of “Glee,” who seemingly claims victimhood when bands reject his show. For a man whose show is a huge hit, one would hope that he would focus more on the people who love his show rather than the few that don’t want their music used on it. 

As with some other horror movies, “Scream 4” has a few weak characters and some terrible dialogue. Nevertheless, it rises above its peers in the genre and proves itself as a film that is worth screaming about.

As a long time fan of the series, I am hoping that “Scream 4” is more like the first two installments rather than the inferior third.

—–

Scream (1996): I was thirteen-years-old when the first “Scream” was released so I didn’t see it in theaters. However, after hearing about it a few years later, I was excited to watch it and loved its mix of suspense and witty humor. “Scream” starts out with a seemingly innocuous phone call that turns deadly for a high school teen (Drew Barrymore), who is murdered in her own front yard. It is eventually revealed that the killer’s main target is Sydney Prescott (Neve Campbell), whose mother had been murdered a year earlier.

If you like slasher films, the first “Scream” is a great one with self-referential humor and characters who understand the horror genre even as they are being hunted by a killer themselves. Henry Winkler has a neat role as a high school principal but the biggest scene-stealer in the movie is Courteney Cox, who appears as the despicable and manipulative television reporter Gale Weathers.

—–

Scream 2 (1997): “Scream 2” is the rare sequel that eclipses the original. In this story, Prescott is again being hunted by a masked murderer but this time she’s at college where the stakes are even higher. The main cast shows up again and Weathers is as conniving as ever.

This sequel features an intelligent discussion about sequels, violence in the media, and raises some questions about parents being blamed for their the misdeeds of their children. It also features some of the most suspenseful scenes in the series, including a scene where Sydney must crawl over the masked murderer to get out of a police car. She doesn’t know if he’s still alive so the scene is nerve-wracking and extremely suspenseful.

—–

Scream 3 (2000): This sequel pales in comparison to its predecessors. Writer Ehren Kruger, who replaced Kevin Williamson, makes a lot of bizarre decisions in the story. This time, the murders take place while a cast of actors is filming “Stab 3,” which is based on the murders committed in the earlier films. However, Gale Weathers supposedly dies in “Stab 3,” even though she is still alive in “Scream 3.” How does that make any sense? ”Scream 3″ doesn’t bother to answer that question.

Additionally, Sydney doesn’t arrive in town for a while so she’s missing from the action early on. She’s off isolated in her own home, where she gets visited by the ghost of her dead mother. Randy (Jaime Kennedy), who died in “Scream 2,” also has a strange appearance in “Scream 3″ when a videotape is found of him discussing the rules of horror trilogies. There’s a lot to dislike about “Scream 3″ but I think it’s still worth watching for the three main characters alone. It’s a decent slasher movie. Nothing more.

With over a decade since “Scream 3” arrived in theaters, I’m hoping that “Scream 4” will bring the life back to this series. Kevin Williamson has returned as the writer so I have high expectations for the film. If his script is as good as the first two films, the fourth entry will be worth screaming about.

“Glee” was one of the new major nominees for the Globes, earning a nomination in the “Best Television Series: Musical or Comedy” category.  As I noted in a review of the program, “Glee”  revolves around a high school glee club.  Even though the show has stumbled a bit throughout this season, it has still emerged as as a entertaining and worthy hit. I was glad it got some attention from the Globes. The most obvious nomination for the program went to Jane Lynch, whose role as cheerleading coach Sue Sylvester is one of the highlights of the program. Other nominations for the show went to Matthew Morrison, who plays the glee coach, Will Schuester, and Lea Michele, who plays the overzealous singer Rachel.

Additionally, I was excited to see Julianna Marguiles nominated for the lead role on “The Good Wife.” For some critics, “The Good Wife” could be written off as another lawyer show with a strong female lead. However, the material for this program is much stronger than that and Marguiles continues to stand out on the show. As I wrote about the show a few weeks ago, the lead character is “a strong woman who, when forced to emerge from the shadow of her husband, fights to prove herself inside the courtroom and outside of it where people often know her because of her husband’s well-publicized misdeeds.” Marguiles has done a good job in capturing that character and if the show continues on its present route, this will not be her only nomination for this program in the years to come.

Also, Courtney Cox was nominated for her role on the show “Cougar Town.” When I watched the show a few weeks ago, I noted its crude and crass content. However, even though I did not like the show, I did appreciate Cox in the lead role. I just wish the rest of the show lived up to Cox’s potential. Cox has had some solid roles in the past including her work as Monica Gellar on the show “Friends” and her turn as Gale Weathers in the “Scream” trilogy but “Cougar Town” often wastes her potential and the potential of the supporting characters on the show.

Because I have not seen all of the television programs or movies that were nominated, I can not say if the nominees listed above are worthy of the prizes they were nominated for (Although, admittedly, it would be hard to top Jane Lynch’s performance on “Glee” in her category.) Regardless, it was exciting to see a lot of the new shows nominated this year. This may not be their year at the award show but I hope that nominations for shows like “Glee” and “The Good Wife” bring more of an audience to these programs and I hope that “Cougar Town” does more to fulfill the potential of its nominated lead actress and the strong secondary characters on the show.

In the program, Cox’s character Jules Cobb is a real estate agent who has recently started dating men in their twenties who are only a few years older than her son. Her dalliances with these men and her coming to grips with her age compose the overall plot of the program. In her daily life, Cobb is surrounded by an offbeat set of characters including her neighbor across the street, her young assistant at work and her ex-husband.

Grayson Ellis, Cobb’s neighbor across the street, is a male cougar, who courts women half his age (and presumably younger). In the second episode, he states matter-of-factly that “When women get older, it’s icky. When men get older, it’s adorable. It’s actually my favorite double standard.” The show seems to be exploring that double standard in presenting this male neighbor who is open about his relationships with younger women and Cobb, who is self-conscious about her behavior and who unsuccessfully tries to shield her son, who is more mature than both of his parents, from knowing about her new dating habits.

Although I like Courteney Cox in the lead, her dating adventures and boyfriends are not as amusing or as interesting as the friends and family members she finds herself surrounded with. For example, her recent boyfriend Josh was not developed as well as some of the other characters on the program and seemed to exist only as an accessory to the program’s lead. You could argue that the character was written that way for a reason but compared to the other characters and their eccentricities, he seemed rather boring.

Also, another major weakness of the show is its focus on crassness and vulgarity. While some critics may like that aspect of the program, the coarse jokes are often unfunny and unnecessary. From the overuse of swear words to the jokes about the process that Jules needs to go through in getting ready for her first night sleeping with Josh, the show pushes the boundaries of taste when it doesn’t need to. The show could be much better as an ensemble comedy about an older woman trying to bring fun back into her life without deviating into tasteless jokes.

As I noted earlier, some of the secondary characters on the program are strong and very funny. Cobb’s ex-husband, for instance, plays a goofy golf instructor who lives in a boat in a parking lot and who often drives around in a golf cart, much to the embarrassment of his son. Additionally, Cobb’s “male cougar” neighbor is an interesting side character. He generally dislikes people, even though he works at a bar, and he likes to torment Cobb about everything from the weight of her purse to the fact that she finds him attractive. On the other hand, Cobb zealously considers him her paper buddy (she likes to talk to him when they are both getting their morning newspapers) even though he often tries to avoid her. In the future, the show would be better if it focused more on the side characters in the program and Cobb’s quirky personality traits and it focused less on the crude aspects of her sex life.

Overall, the weak main storyline and the vulgarity hurt the program. Although some characters on the show have potential, the show has not found its solid footing yet. One day, “Cougar Town” may be a nice place for viewers to check out but for now, “Cougar Town” is not yet a place worth visiting.