Reviews
[TV Review] “Scream” Episode 1.05: ‘Exposed’
Scream gave us its weakest episode yet with “Exposed.” In a week that was full of boring subplots, not a single person was killed off. Look, I’m not saying that I need to see someone die on every episode of Scream, but let’s not kid ourselves here: it’s Scream. Scream is a slasher series, and we have now gone two episodes without any slashing. To top it all off, Ghostface hasn’t killed off a single annoying/useless character yet. Let’s just dive right in, shall we?
I mentioned back in my review of the season’s third episode that it was refreshing to see the show take a risk and kill off Riley, who was arguably the only likable and relatable character on the show, but here we are two episodes later and Scream hasn’t done us a solid and killed off Mr. Branson, Jake, Will or even Brooke’s Mayor Dad (I don’t even know his name and I refuse to look it up). I get that Scream is trying to give us more time with its characters to get to know them and feel for them, but when you have 3 or 4 characters that no one likes (and never will), you could kill one or two of them off as a show of good faith. Maybe I’m reaching for the stars, here, but I don’t think it’s too much to ask.
Scream also seems to really be trying to convince us that the killer is either Piper the Podcaster (who finally got a bit more screen time this week), Mayor Maddox or Mr. Branson the Pedophile. There is a chance Will & Jake could have a Billy & Stu thing going on, but I doubt it (and how unoriginal would that be?). It would be in Scream’s best interest to not make the killer any of those characters. Also, it would be in everyone’s best interest if this whole blackmailing subplot had a point. I’m sure it does, but it’s just not that compelling.
Speaking of not being compelling, let’s talk about Emma. Many of you in the comments have come to her defense in the past, and I just don’t understand it. This episode sealed the deal for me in that she just is not an interesting protagonist for this series. Even when Brooke confessed to her that Will only started dating her as part of a bet (she was a fucking bet!), it was difficult to feel anything for her because Emma, like some of the other less developed characters on the show, is just there. She had a sex tape leak, and while that was supremely creepy (that is child porn, people!), she didn’t really seem that upset by it. We can’t respond to Emma’s reactions if she doesn’t have any. What made Sydney Prescott such a great Final Girl is that she felt like a real person. Emma does not.
For some of the things that worked this episode (and there were quite a few things), I have to rewind a bit back to Piper. Up until now, she’s had absolutely nothing to do. She stirred up some mischief this week, telling Emma that Rachel’s parents thought that Audrey intimidated her, giving Emma booze and telling Emma that her dad was murdered and it was never solved. None of it really means anything yet (and it would have been nice to have Piper be this involved an episode or two ago), but at least Scream seems to be establishing her as a main character a bit more.
Noah and Audrey proved yet again that they are the most entertaining character pairing on the show. While the entire issue with Mr. Branson having videos of his students having sex is icky, at least our dynamic duo are making some progress (which is more than I can say for Emma).
Scream stumbled quite a bit with this latest episode. While it did move certain plots forward, none of it was all that interesting. This marks the midway point of the season, so hopefully it can improve in the back half (or at least match the quality set by the season’s third episode).
Random Notes
- I don’t think there was a single pop culture reference in this episode. Did I miss one?
- All of the male characters on this show barely have any presence, but Kieran is the greatest offender. Man, he’s dull. On a separate note, he and Emma have sex, so there’s that.
- “We really appreciate all the extra manpower.” -Sheriff Hudson is a sexist. Good to know.
- “We are still reeling from Riley’s death but we still have learning to do.” -Really, Mr. Branson? That’s how you want to motivate your students?
- “Tell that cop about me and you’ll get your mom’s heart in a box!” -I find it doubtful that Ghostface would actually follow through on this promise, since clearly Emma and her mother are part of his endgame plan.
- So there has to be 2 killers since they pretty much show everyone at the candlelight vigil, right? Unless her seeing Ghostface was a hallucination.
- “What part of skinny iced macchiato don’t you understand???” -Brooke, back to being a bitch.
- “I like torturing the ice” -Jake, speaking one of the dumbest lines ever when he orders hot coffee and ice, rather than just an iced coffee.
- “Before I say what I have to say….how hot is your coffee?” -This actually made me laugh. Yay Brooke!
- Was it supposed to be a big secret that Will and Jake were the blackmailers? It seemed pretty obvious to me.
- “Daddy, what happened to your nose?” “I’m having work done.”
- Mr. Branson using the word “threesome” to describe Noah’s scene project is creepy. There have to be better words than that Mr. Teacher!
- “Damn. No wonder this girl’s dead.” -Detective Brock sounds like a terrible cop. She’s no Detective Tanner, though.
Reviews
‘Hungry’ Review – Finally, a Film Brave Enough to Call Out Hippos for the Monsters They Truly Are
When it comes to the animal attack subgenre of horror, there’s a hierarchy of sorts with the wildlife in question. Killer shark movies are easily the most ubiquitous, while alligators/crocodiles, dogs, bears, and snakes probably lead the rest of the pack.
It’s often worth paying attention, though, when a filmmaker targets a more atypical animal threat, including the likes of Jonathan King’s Black Sheep or Juan Piquer Simón’s Slugs. A new contender rumbles its way onto the screen this month, and while we all grew up thinking hippos are rotund cuties, the truth is far more frightening – this hippo is Hungry.
Sistine (Madison Davenport) and her best friend, Hannah (Olivia Bernstone), are enjoying a vacation in New Orleans, hoping to drown out their troubles back home. They sign up for an early morning bayou tour known for its alligator sightings and are joined by four other tourists and the boat’s skipper, Rodrigo (Michel Curiel). An uneventful trip sees Rodrigo take the group off the beaten path, but when an animal in the water capsizes their boat, the group finds themselves trapped in the swamp by something unexpected and deadly.
It’s a hippo. There’s a hippo in the bayou, and it’s not happy about all these pesky people.

From Joy Houck’s Creature from Black Lake to Walter Hill’s Southern Comfort to Adam Green’s Hatchet, the movies have warned us time and again not to go into the swampy bayous of Louisiana. Those cautionary tales are appreciated, though, as bigfoot, inbred hicks, and undead serial killers are a very real threat. But hippos? In the bayou? Well, that just seems silly.
And yet, Hungry plays its blubbery, big-toothed threat with deadly seriousness, and it’s all the better for it. “But Rob,” I can already hear some of you saying, “just yesterday you reviewed the new shark attack film, Chum, and said it suffered from taking itself too seriously. What gives?” For one thing, you’re misquoting me, but more importantly, the reference there was more of an observation on the animal attack subgenre successes as a whole. The “fun” ones tend to succeed more often than their more serious counterparts, but a dramatic and thrilling time can still be found with filmmakers who know what they’re doing.
Chum may be serious, but it’s also poorly written/performed, lacking in any degree of tension, devoid of personality, and so on. By contrast, Hungry lets its suspense build on the backs of engaging characters, good performances, and believable writing. Only one of its ensemble is obnoxious – a major feat for this kind of film – but even then, their motivations are both well-written and understandable.
The rest of the characters are people you’d be happy to see survive the night, and rather than looking forward to the next kill, director James Nunn and his cast leave us uncertain and nervous about who’s going to go belly up. The nervous business traveler wanting to get back to her kids? The family of three celebrating lost loved ones while on their vacation? Joaquim de Almeida’s Walker, an old hunter, is introduced saying, “The only cute hippo is a dead hippo,” so you pretty much know where he’ll end up.

To that end, the film teases out its hippo’s first appearance until well into the ninety-minute running time. We get ripples and splashes, but it’s only around the midway point that we get our first real look at the beast, and it looks fantastic. Nunn goes on to show the hippo in all its glory, and it’s a convincing antagonist brought to life through practical prosthetic effects and digital work. From the ear twitches to the beast’s giant maw opening wide with awe and malice, the hippo’s presence feels part of the action. There’s a tangible nature to it, something practical effects excel at while digital effects sometimes fail to convince of, and both succeed here with quality work from all involved.
While we get brief exteriors early on and some visually appealing drone shots, the bulk of the film unfolds on what looks to be a highly believable, set-dressed water tank (but could very well be an actual location, in which case, kudos to the team). It’s wholly convincing as a section of the bayou, complete with shoulder-high water and arching, twisting trees emerging into the sky. The film was shot in Malta, which is, coincidentally, where Chum was filmed as well.
Nunn, who also wrote Hungry, is now ten films deep into a fairly interesting career as a genre filmmaker. He’s made four movies with Scott Adkins, three of which are certified action bangers (with 2016’s Eliminators in particular being an underrated gem). He dipped a toe into the animal attack subgenre back in 2022 with the aforementioned Shark Bait, and it’s clear he learned some lessons from that endeavor, as its first hour is an engaging, attractively shot feature that sinks fast as soon as its poorly rendered shark becomes a lead character. Hungry improves on every aspect of that film, with its biggest step up being in regard to the effects.

If there’s an area or two where Hungry lacks bite, it’s in both its gore and its ending. There are numerous kills here, but the nature of the attacks and the choices made by Nunn mean none of them result in gory assaults or outcomes. We’re shown the torn apart corpse of an alligator early on, but most of the human kills see them attacked and dragged underwater, leaving nothing but a blood spill behind. Similarly, while the ending encounter satisfies, it still feels like it should have been a bigger confrontation. Neither of these aspects really hurt the film, but a bolstering of the gore and ending antics would have definitely upped the film’s ultimate entertainment value and rewatchability.
When all is said and done, Hungry is a genuinely solid animal attack film that succeeds in making its creature threat thrilling, entertaining, and, dare I say, educational? Title notwithstanding, the film acknowledges that hippos are vegetarians, meaning the five hundred or so people they kill every year – a true fact! – are slaughtered not out of hunger, but out of spite, self-defense, or a desire to play “land orca” while tossing around us fragile humans like we’re little more than seals in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Characters are grounded and engaging, the film moves well between suspense, character beats, and action, and the effects used to bring the hippo to life are highly effective and never feel like distractions. Drop those expectations of a Hungry Hungry Hippo romp, and settle in for a terrific little survival thriller about an angry, angry hippo instead.
Chomp chomp.
Hungry releases in select theaters today, June 3, before arriving on VOD on June 23, 2026.



You must be logged in to post a comment.