Film Reviews

February 27, 2026

"This time, it's all about nostalgia," so says one of the savvy, self-aware characters in "Scream 7." If that's that case, then hopefully this sixth sequel in the 30-year-old horror series will also be the last, because what could possibly come after nostalgia? After all, we've already gotten the "what makes it a(n)" original, sequel, trilogy, reboot, "requel," and franchise spiels as they pertain to the different categories of "Scream" movies. What is left? If "Scream" was to end now, at least all those who've contributed to it over the past three decades could take solace in the fact it covered all the horror movie flavors and went out on a high (enough) note.

The perseverance of the "Scream" movies, I think, boils down to the idea that no installment has ever been dull. Sure, outside of the original "Scream" (1996), they're predictable, formulaic, and implausible, but to call them boring would be inaccurate. This is one series that has always been able to refresh itself, however slightly, and remain watchable, even if it's not always exciting. "Scream 7" is no exception and indeed watching it does recall fond memories of the times we've spent in this universe and with these characters. Practically speaking, though, after this one, there doesn't seem to be anywhere left for "Scream" to go, except maybe down, and who would want that?

Despite being a horror movie, the best parts of "Scream 7" are, surprisingly, the more grounded and dramatic ones, when the screenplay pauses its signature hip commentary on the role that horror plays in popular culture, and by extension our lives, and allows the actors to talk sincerely, not as self-aware horror movie characters but as real people. In fact, it underscores just how capable the cast would be in other, non-horror projects, especially Neve Campbell, who we'd love to see retire her "scream queen" label and leverage the range we know she possesses and has confidently displayed in other films ("Wild Things," "Panic," "When Will I Be Loved").

Campbell returns after sitting out "Scream 6," a fact that gives the movie one of its several meta moments when her Sydney character says to reporter Gale Weathers (Courteney Cox), another series veteran, "I should have been there." Sydney is no longer Sydney Prescott, but Sydney Evans, and she's been living a low-profile life, which is understandable given her near-victim track record. It's also logical that she's married to a police chief named Mark (Joel McHale), with whom she has three kids.

Sidney has built quite the domestic life for herself in the quaint little town of Pine Grove. After surviving several run-ins with a mysterious Ghost Face, her biggest problem these days is raising her defiant and argumentative 17-year-old daughter, Tatum (Isabel May), who wants to know more about her mother's complicated past now more than ever, probably because, the movie would have us believe, Tatum is the same age as Sidney was during the events of the first "Scream."

The chemistry between Campbell and May is actually pretty good, and it gives the movie its heart and foundation. Director Kevin Williamson, who penned the original "Scream" and shares writing credits here with Guy Busick, lends the story a decent amount of calm, quiet beats so that Sidney and Tatum become more than just potential prey. Their shared moments don't feel rushed and balance out the scenes when the merciless killer(s) shows up.

As for the Ghost Face attack sequences, they range from clever and semi-suspenseful to ridiculous and over-the-top. I suppose we should expect the filmmakers to dial the violence and gore up at this point, but even so, many shots feel gratuitous and in poor taste, which dilutes the movie of some excitement. It's a shame the filmmakers didn't continue to flip the horror genre on its head and suggest that it's a little violence that goes a long way.

Of course, with this being a "Scream" movie, after the "could be anyone" killer arrives and the victim count starts rising, the movie delivers its usual monologue about what type of horror movie we're watching, once again courtesy of twins Mindy (Jasmin Savoy Brown) and Chad (Mason Good). They’re now interns working for Gale, who has gone back to her roots as an on-the-scene reporter. The "horror movie breakdown" trope should have gotten old by now but it's delivered with such oomph by the charming and funny Brown that we can't help but get sucked in by her telling us everyone in the cast is a suspect, including Tatum's shifty boyfriend (Sam Rechner); the seemingly sweet best friend (Chloe Parker); and the creepy neighbor (Lucas Bowden) with a leaf blower.

The movie also cleverly shows us how the "Scream" world has adapted to the modern era. For instance, the signature opening death sequence takes place in an AirBnB-type recreation of the famous Woodsboro farmhouse where the original killers, Billy Loomis (Skeet Ulrich) and Stu Macher (Matthew Lillard), unmasked themselves. The plot also finds a way to incorporate AI and deep fakes into the mix, along with smartphone apps and real-time updates. We appreciate the way the movie both leverages and criticizes contemporary technology in typically sly "Scream" fashion.

But, for all its down-to-earth character moments, amusing satire, and reasonable suspense (editor Jim Page and cinematographer Ramsey Nickell finds fresh ways to reveal Ghost Face emerging in the background), there's a widening gap between the movie's own version of reality/credibility and the degree of violence that transpires. "Scream 7" goes to the extreme as far as what the characters can give and get and then just sort of attributes the implausibility (or doesn't address it at all) to this being a horror movie and therefore reality can bend, but this feels like a cop-out. I couldn't buy, for instance, that one character could be stabbed with a screwdriver half a dozen times only to walk away less than a second later, and that the character who inflicted that pain wouldn't hear or notice the injured character getting up; or that one particular character's demise wouldn't be given a second thought; or that Ghost Face would take the time to do what he or she does with a head. I'm being deliberately vague here because I know there are fans out there who will eat this stuff up, but I've a feeling most will simply tolerate it and roll their eyes.

Ultimately, "Scream 7" puts viewers on the fence. On the one hand, it finds a way to refresh some of the qualities that make this series so enduring, and the nostalgia factor, true to what the movie tells us, works its magic, especially during the climax when there's a quasi-reunion of sorts. And we're grateful it doesn't go the way of the "Terminator," "Halloween," and even some Marvel superhero movies in that it just wiped the history of the franchise clean, discounting all the previous installments, just to keep this one moving forward (it comes close, but it don't go off the deep end).

On the other hand, we can sense the movie sometimes at a loss of what to do, reaching for explanations and rehashing its predecessors, and oftentimes, by virtue of this being the seventh installment, we just sort of watch it passively, unengaged and unexcited. It provides sufficient closure, but we also get the sneaking suspicion the torch has been handed down to the next generation, and we'd hate for the series to dig its own grave by continuing to exist for the sake of continuing to exist, although if it does, I'm sure the next movie would be telling us it's doing so. Hopefully it doesn't come to that, that the filmmakers and cast have decided to go out on this marginally satisfying and likely crowd-pleasing note.