Movie Review: SCREAM 4

SCREAM 4

2011
R

Scream 4 is a 2011 horror-comedy directed by Wes Craven that serves as the latest installment of his Scream franchise. It's been eleven years since Ghost Face last graced the silver screen in Scream 3, and Craven and screenwriter Kevin Williamson have given Scream 4 a dose of 21st-century psychology. Once again, we're given a string of murders surrounding the return of Sidney Prescott (Neve Campbell) to her hometown of Woodsboro. As some of the local teenagers are killed, it becomes alarmingly certain that there's a connection to Sidney and her younger cousin Jill Roberts (Emma Roberts). Along with the help of now Sheriff Dewey Riley (David Arquette) and his wife Gale Weathers-Riley (Courteney Cox), Sidney sets out to find the culprit behind the latest deaths and put an end to the terror that's once again plagued Woodsboro.

I know the above synopsis is a little bit sparse, but if you've been following the Scream franchise at all, you'll know the basic plot: someone wants to kill Sidney and kills everyone around her in order to get close to her. I don't want to get into any specifics with the storyline for fear of giving away too many spoilers, so that's all I'm really going to leave you for the moment. That's how they've all gone, and there was no reason for Craven and Williamson to stop that tradition now. This time they tackle the concept of remakes and reboots, and they do so to near-perfection. The strength of these films lies in the execution of the screenplay. What separates them from other horror-comedies is their ability to satirize the target sample (in this case, the consistent onslaught of remakes and reboots we've seen in the last decade in the horror franchise) and poke fun at them while still maintaining a legitimate aura of suspense and horror. Sure, there are a lot more horror flicks that will make you jump out of your seat every two minutes, but none is going to make you do that while you're laughing at an incredibly delectable pun at the expense of Rob Zombie's Halloween flicks.

Another strength is the level of acting which, as is the usual case in the Scream franchise, is head and shoulders above the level of acting seen in your standard horror fare. Campbell, Arquette and Cox bring back their beloved characters who have somehow managed to survive the original trilogy, and there's not much change in their overall portrayal, but they're still solid in their respective roles. However, what you're going to notice very early and very often are the many instantly recognizable faces playing smaller roles. Here's a list of names of actors and actresses in the film that you should recognize pretty easily:

Adam Brody (from 2005's Mr. & Mrs. Smith and 2009's Jennifer's Body)
Anna Paquin (from the X-Men franchise and television's "True Blood")
Anthony Anderson (from 2006's The Departed and television's "Law and Order")
Erik Knudsen (from 2004's Saw II and 2010's Scott Pilgrim vs. The World)
Hayden Panettiere (from 2000's Remember the Titans and television's "Heroes")
Kristen Bell (from 2008's Forgetting Sarah Marshall and 2010's When in Rome)
Rory Culkin (from 2002's Signs)

Fortunately, the exuberant amount of "names" in this flick never weigh it down. I had that fear going in, but everyone's screen-time is spread out pretty evenly. Kudos to Craven on managing such a big cast. (As I re-read that list, I'm sure there's a couple people that I might only know because I'm a huge movie nerd, but I suppose they were still worth mentioning here).

All in all, I'm not sure what else I can say about Scream 4 without giving away too much of the movie, which is something I really don't want to do. I think Craven and Williamson crafted a great return to the franchise, but that could easily just be my fanboyishness showing its true colors. That being said, I think that fans of the franchise will love and accept this one rather readily. It garnered a hearty round of applause from my theater, which was about halfway full despite being an 11:30am showing. I can't rave about it enough, so if you take my opinion seriously, then you should definitely give Scream 4 a watch.

Movie Review Summary:

Grade: A-
Two Thumbs Up
Addition to Rankings
Best Horror/Thriller - #27

Movie Review: BURLESQUE

BURLESQUE

2010
PG-13

You can watch the trailer here

I know that I'm by no means the key demographic for this film, but with Cher's return to the screen after a seven-year absence as well as the first acting role in a feature film for Christina Aguilera, there was a few reasons to see the movie.

In this Steve Antin-directed flick, we're basically given a pretty standard story of a down-home girl who wants to hit stardom in Hollywood. Ali (Aguilera) sets off from Iowa to make a name for herself in Los Angeles, ultimately starting by waitressing at a burlesque club run by Tess (Cher). After forcing her way into an audition, Ali becomes a back-up dancer at the club, but when a fellow dancer (Kristen Bell) tries to sabotage one of Ali's performances, she responds by singing live in front of the audience. This skyrockets her to a mini-superstardom that attracts the affection of Marcus (Eric Dane), a man trying to buy the club from Tess before it goes under. All the while, Ali is living with Jack (Cam Gigandet), one of the club's bartenders, and is slowly falling in love with him.

I'm gonna be totally honest: the screenplay is absolutely horrendous. Well, that may be a tad harsh. It's not the worst screenplay I've ever seen, but there's absolutely no originality to it whatsoever. Aside from the fact that our main setting is a burlesque club, you could ask a toddler to trace this film's path and they'd probably get it right. It's much too simplistic, and it left a lot to be desired.

Thankfully, the acting somewhat makes up for the pitfalls presented by the storyline. It's always nice to see Cher on-screen, and although she's not by any means at the top of her game, she does give a few spirited scenes, especially via musical number. I also think that Aguilera gives a fine performance. She was wise to choose a role like this for her transition to film because it's so similar to her singing career. I don't think she's as good of an actress as she presents in Burlesque, but maybe this will fool some studios into thinking she is for a little while until she can actually grow as an actress. Luckily, we do have a bit of a scene-stealer in Stanley Tucci, whose little quips and remarks throughout the film are so perfectly timed that I'm not sure I would've liked the movie at all had he not been around.

I'd also like to mention the music in the film which proved to be outstanding. As you can imagine, most of the songs are performed by Christina Aguilera or Cher, and they both do very well, but that shouldn't be much of a shock. If anything, the music is what kept me intrigued throughout the film, with "Express" and "You Haven't Seen the Last of Me" being my personal favorites.

As I said before, I'm definitely not the target demographic for Burlesque, but it's not the worst film I've ever seen. Had the screenplay been a little stronger, then maybe I could've said I liked it, but hindsight is 20/20.

Movie Review Summary:
Grade: C
Thumb... SidewaysAwards2010: 1 nomination

Movie Review: WHEN IN ROME

WHEN IN ROME

2010
PG-13


You can watch the trailer here

I guess everybody needs a paycheck every now and again.

It's not to say that I had extremely high hopes going into When in Rome - in all honesty, I watched it on a whim at the expense of my boredom - but I could have hoped for a little more than what I got. With a cast speckled with some well-known names in comedy, it's sad to think that their talent was wasted so easily. Director Mark Steven Johnson should have been able to do a little bit more.

At the beginning of the film, we find ourselves following Beth (Kristen Bell), a workaholic New Yorker with no time for love. On a trip to Rome for her sister's wedding, she thinks she may have found a quality guy in Nick (Josh Duhamel), but when she sees him with another woman, she plunges herself into a literal "fountain of love" (based off the real Trevi Fountain) where she proceeds to remove five coins from the bottom of the fountain. Unbeknownst to her, when a coin is removed from the fountain, the person who threw the coin in will fall in love with the person who removed it. From this point, we see a quartet of men following Beth to New York, stalking her everywhere she goes, and all the while, Beth is trying to fall in love with Nick.

Now tell me: does any of this sound familiar to anyone else? I have often blamed the romantic comedy genre for being much too cliché, and When in Rome only helps to prove my theory. In a sense, we've got our basic rom-com storyline (girl meets boy; girl falls for boy; girl gets boy) with a few minor twists and tweaks to make it seem fresh. However, at its heart, it's the same old tale, stale and unoriginal.

I don't personally have a problem with Kristen Bell, although there has been some talk that film studios are trying to make her America's new sweetheart, and I can see where they're coming from. With films like this one and You Again, it's hard to argue that she's been getting a good number of starring comedic roles in recent past. She plays her usual self here, and it works for what it's worth, but it's nothing really special. Duhamel certainly carries a good amount of charm, and it's always nice to see him on the screen, but he really didn't have much to work with this time around. Maybe stick to those oh-so-wonderfully-written Transformers flicks? (Read: sarcasm).

If anything's working in When in Rome, it's the four potential suitors chasing Beth all over New York. They all bring something a little different to the table: Will Arnett plays an Italian (or is he?) artist; Jon Heder comes in as a street-side magician; Dax Shepard plays a male model (and giant tool - a character he has come to perfect over the years); and Danny DeVito plays a sausage company king. They all bring a certain quirkiness necessary for each of their characters, and they all help to spur the realizations about love that Beth desperately needed to find. However, I just feel as though there were too many guys gracing the screen at once. If Beth would have only had to deal with one or two stalkers, I think the movie would have been a little more manageable; as it stands now, however, it's just a bit of an overload.

Oh, and a couple cameos, from the likes of Efren Ramirez, Shaq and Keir O'Donnell, prove to be pretty funny as well.

All in all, When in Rome is supposed to be a comedy, so it's overall success lies in whether it could actually make me laugh. Aside from a couple of random chuckles here and there, I just could not find the humor in it. It started off a little to silly and slapsticky for me to want to take it seriously later in the film, and that greatly hurt its chances of being a quality film. I do concede that I was not the target audience for this flick, but my review stands as is.

Movie Review Summary:
Grade: F
Thumb... Down