Editorials
‘Scream’ Defined the Decade and Changed Horror in Ways Both Good and Bad [We Love ’90s Horror]
The ‘90s often get a bad rap with horror fans. After the numerous successful slashers and creature effects films of the ’80s, the ‘90s offered a different variety of horror fare. Though there were plenty of hits, hidden gems, and misunderstood classics, the ‘90s usually don’t get the kind of love that other decades get when it comes to horror. It’s time to change that.
There was no question I’d cover Scream at some point with this column. It’s often touted as the best horror film of the ‘90s. While that moniker is certainly subjective, it’s more than fair to call Scream a seminal film for both the genre and the decade. Its shadow is cast wherever it stands, and that shadow looms large over the entirety of ‘90s horror.
And that’s something of a problem.
Before I get into that, I don’t want there to be any confusion about my feelings towards Scream as a movie. It’s a very good mystery/slasher flick with clever direction from maestro Wes Craven and a slick script from Kevin Williamson. Above all, the casting for Scream is uniformly excellent. There isn’t a single weak link in the chain, with Neve Campbell delivering a horror heroine for the ages in Sidney Prescott. Not to mention a scene-stealing performance from Courtney Cox as Gale Weathers. Add in delightful turns from David Arquette, Skeet Ulrich, Matthew Lillard, Rose McGowan, Jamie Kennedy, and few choice cameos and you’ve got a Murderers’ row of talent.
Speaking of cameos, let’s talk about the opening of the film. Maybe more than the movie itself, the pre-credits opening of Scream is an all-timer. It sets up the meta premise of the movie, introduces us to a creepy killer with a specific personality, delivers tons of tension and scares, and finally pulls the rug out from under the audience by killing Drew Barrymore and showcasing her gutted corpse. Even today, it’s still a shocking and powerful opening that’s so effective it kind of acts as a standalone short film.
There’s plenty to like about Scream, from its eclectic cast of characters to its slasher sensibilities. Thanks to Craven’s smart understanding of the genre’s hallmarks, he always keeps the movie moving at a brisk pace and the mood of the entire piece is nothing but unbridled fun. I like Scream and I completely understand why most people love it.
But, Scream suffers from a problem that all great successes fall victim to: their influence is often the worst element of their legacy. And Scream’s influence created some serious issues in horror and horror fandom.
The most immediate was that mainstream horror tried to copy Scream’s unique tone and voice, and while there were a few worthy successors like Urban Legend, the majority of the post-Scream slashers were disappointing imitations. That actually shows just how special Scream was at executing its goals.
Another unfortunate side effect of Scream’s impact was how it turned everybody into a supposed horror expert. With the character of Randy Meeks pointing out the presumed “rules” of horror movies, audiences turned into armchair authorities on everything about the genre. This led to a lot of horror movies (both contemporary and classic) being viewed through an ironic lens. Whether this had a lasting impact on an entire generation of horror fans is another debate entirely, but it’s no question that Scream caused this viewpoint to be the default for quite some time.
The most pertinent repercussion of Scream for this column is what it did to the perception of ‘90s horror. The reason I started this column was in the hopes that the decade could undergo some reappraisal. My feelings are that it’s a decade littered with legit classics and underappreciated gems. However, Scream continues to hover over the conversation in a way that I didn’t expect. What surprises me is that Scream is a deliberate parody of the genre, and yet that parody is regularly hailed as the benchmark for the decade.
This outlook has made the entire decade fall under the scrutiny of Scream’s satirical intentions and that’s a real shame. While Scream is a genuinely entertaining time, that’s also all it’s really interested in being. Any supposed commentary is really just well-crafted jokes, as opposed to Wes Craven’s other meta ‘90s horror film which has a ton to actually say about the genre. It’s not that Scream is vapid – again, Williamson’s script is intelligent – but it’s aspirations are more crowd-pleasing than actually analytical.
To reiterate, don’t let this read as a negative screed against Scream itself. It deserves all the love it gets, but the fallout of its popularity hasn’t all been positive. With another entry on the way from some talented filmmakers, I’m hoping a new Scream can put itself under the microscope a little bit. No matter what, all the Scream films have managed to deliver popcorn thrills and plenty of laughs. Still, I hope now that we’re thirty years removed from the ‘90s, the decade can start to stand outside of Scream’s reputation.
Judging from the unprecedented box office success of Kane Parsons’ Backrooms adaptation, you’ve likely already seen the liminal horror hit that managed to make audiences afraid of empty hallways and bad wallpaper. And now that so many of us have already entered the yellow labyrinth (some of us more than once), the time has come to discuss the spoiler-filled details that make the movie so fascinating in the first place.
And if there’s one element here that makes the Backrooms movie stand out from any previous lore/mythology, it has to be the genius addition of the Still Life entities. Warped recreations of real people that somehow wandered into the Complex, these misremembered creatures are responsible for some of the most disturbing imagery of 2026 – as well as laugh-out-loud memes created by one of the film’s very own concept artists.
However, true to Parsons’ word that the movie would rely heavily on practical effects, each of these distorted monsters was brought to life by real actors under heavy layers of makeup and prosthetics (with the occasional splash of CGI enhancements). While Anora and If I Had Legs I’d Kick You actress Ivy Wolk wasn’t among these performers, despite what Letterboxd might have you believe, the creature cast did benefit from veteran players with plenty of genre experience.
For starters, Alien: Romulus alumni Robert Bobroczkyi (who previously brought that film’s horrific Offspring to life during its most memorable sequence) plays the flick’s main antagonist, the Still Life version of Captain Clark. And though there was some obvious CGI involved in making the character’s peg-leg and nightmarish face more believable, Bobroczkyi’s monstrous performance and his natural 7’7″ frame helped to make that final chase sequence a clear highlight among this year’s genre offerings.
The film’s Texas-Chain-Saw-inspired “dinner” scene also features a freaky collection of less-aggressive Still Life creatures in the form of the Bearded Man, the Red-Headed Woman and, strangest of them all, the cheekily named “Archibald Leland Sutter Still Life” (who earned this title among fans and crewmembers as a reference to his apparent affinity for lamps).
While this was the first major horror outing for both Patrick Baynham (The Bearded Man) and Dana Mahmood (Archibald), Rhiannon Roberts has worked as a stunt performer in everything from Yellowjackets to HBO’s The Last of Us adaptation – which is probably why The Red-Headed Woman is the most active out of Clark’s impromptu “family.” That being said, the Archibald Leland Sutter Still Life is my personal favorite of the bunch simply because his anachronistic outfit suggests that the Backrooms phenomenon might be a lot older than the Async Foundation. I also love how hard he tries to be helpful with that little light of his!
That might be it for the Still Life entities, but I think horror fans will also be pleased to hear that the film’s Found Footage prologue stars none other than Resident Evil: Welcome to Raccoon City star Avan Jogia as Naren Warne – and American Mary herself Katharine Isabelle also shows up in a blink-and-you’ll-miss-it cameo at Mary’s house party towards the middle of the story (though I have a feeling that she originally had a bigger part that was likely cut for time).
At the end of the day, Parsons’ Backrooms may have been an auteur-driven project motivated by the young director’s unique take on the classic creepypasta, but film has always been a collective artform, so it’s fun to see just how many talented performers it takes to bring this kind of supernatural nightmare to life in a way that connects with so many people.
You must be logged in to post a comment.