Connect with us

Editorials

In Defense Of ‘Scream 4’…Just Listen a Minute!

Published

on

Welcome to the first in hopefully many entries of “In Defense Of”. A series where I take a movie that generally gets a lot of shit that actually isn’t THAT bad. Of course this is all opinion and you may not agree with what I say but hopefully you will get some enjoyment.

So as the title suggests I am here to discuss the merits of Wes Craven’s Scream 4. I can already feel the eye rolls coming my way and I want it to be clear that I am not one of those die hard Craven fans that think everything he has done is gold. Because it’s not. Fuck Cursed. BUT! Scream 4 is not NEARLY as bad as it has been made out to be. Its major fault is being the 4th in a series that didn’t ask for sequels and we can hardly blame it for coming out after Scream 3.

So the plot: Sidney comes back to her home town to discuss her new book, “Out of the Darkness” and finally rid her of the “victim” status she has grown up with. But Sidney isn’t escaping that easily, now Ghost Face wants to kill her for good and anyone else who gets in his way, including her cousin!

Scream 4 Gayle

Basic plot for these movies sure, but we are here for a slasher movie and there are always allowances for simple plots. I really like the idea of Sidney coming back to her hometown to finally close her horrible past. She has to have a ton of survivor’s guilt and it makes sense for her to come back and face it. I will say that the cousin angle is sort of shoe-horned in and at first seems completely ridiculous. Why have we never met her before? Or Sidney’s aunt for that matter. But I am willing to excuse that for the following reasons.

  • Scream 4 is probably the most meta/self-referential of the series and for me this is a plus. I like meta things and I like being the one in the group that “gets” the jokes and references when other people don’t. But I also enjoy that it sort of takes a jab at it’s own references. Courtney Cox even has a line stating how she doesn’t get “meta” and she just heard someone say it. Craven and Williamson understand that their self-referential-ness had become a joke and rather than try to play it serious they goofed on themselves and I can respect that.
  • I was listening to a podcast and they discuss how Friday the 13th should never leave the 80s and how that is part of why the later movies suck so bad. I feel the same idea applies here, it’s still got that weird 90s feel. Obviously Scream 4 is set in present day and we have a considerable amount of cellphone usage to prove it but for some reason it still feels like a 90s horror movie. The Scream franchise was born in the 90s and it should hold on to that feeling.
  • For me, the cast of characters are just as likable (if not more so) than some of their predecessors. Obviously Sidney, Gayle and Dewy remain the same but as far as the new kids go they are pretty entertaining. These are kids I would have wanted to be friends with in school, yes even the Caulkin…until his major flaws in the latter half of the movie. The core group of Jill, Kirby and Marnie sort of remind me of Laurie, Annie and Lynda of Halloween fame.
  • Sidney is the ultimate Final Girl. She does not die and she gets the shit kicked out of her for 4 movies but just keeps coming back. Even Laurie Strode bit the dust eventually but so far so good for Sidney and that’s awesome. She has firmly built her place in Final Girl history and though not a Scream Queen, she still kicks ass.
  • Finally, even if Craven’s entire intent with the Scream franchise was to make fun of the formulaic-ness of slasher movies thus fueling his ego as the “more creative” of the big horror movie monster creators…he still made a decent slasher movie. Ghostface has a great body count, bloody kills, and plenty of teens to destroy. What isn’t to enjoy?

Is Scream 4 a great movie? No, but it’s hardly the worst sequel ever. I would watch Scream 4 over Jason Goes To Hell or even Wes Craven’s New Nightmare any day of the week! So what say you? Did you hate? Like it? Tolerate it? Why? Discuss!

Scream 4 girls

Jess is a Northeast Ohio native who has loved all things horror and fringe since birth. She has a tendency to run at the mouth about it and decided writing was the only way not to scare everyone away. If you make a hobby into a career it becomes less creepy. Unless that hobby is collecting baby dolls. Nothing makes that less creepy.

Editorials

‘Arachnid’ – Revisiting the 2001 Spider Horror Movie Featuring Massive Practical Effects

Published

on

arachnid

A new breed of creature-features was unleashed in the 1990s and continued well into the next decade. Shaking off the ecological messaging of the past, these monsters existed for the sake of pure mayhem. Just to name a few: Tremors, The Relic, Anaconda, Godzilla, Deep Rising and Lake Placid all showcased this trend of irreverent creature chaos. Reptiles and other scaly beasts proved to be a popular source of inspiration for these films, but for that extra crawly experience, bugs were the best and quickest route. Spiders, in particular, led some of the worst infestations on screen in the early 2000s. And on the underbelly of this creeping new wave — specifically the direct-to-video sector — hangs an overlooked offering of spider horror: Arachnid.

In 2000, Brian Yuzna and Julio Fernández launched the Spanish production company Fantastic Factory. The Filmax banner’s objective was to create modestly budgeted genre films for international distribution. And while they achieved their goal — a total of nine English-language films were produced and shipped all across the globe — Fantastic Factory ultimately closed up shop after only five years. Arachnid, directed by Jack Sholder (Alone in the Dark, A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy’s Revenge, The Hidden) and based on a script by Mark Sevi, was the second project from the short-lived genre house. Yuzna was drawn to the concept largely because of its universal appeal; a monster was marketable in any region, regardless of cultural preferences or restrictions. There was also the fact that spiders give everyone a case of the heebie-jeebies.

By having extraterrestrial forces be the cause of the spiders’ mutism and immensity as well as other urgent problems within the story, Arachnid incidentally pays respect to Hollywood’s golden age of schlock filmmaking. The opening sequence indeed shows a stealth plane’s pilot (Jesús Cabrero) trailing a UFO and its translucent passenger to an island in the South Pacific, but the alien business is kept to a minimum going forward. There is no time to process this seismic revelation of life beyond Earth before moving on to the film’s central plot. 

arachnid

Pictured: Alex Reid, Chris Potter and Neus Asensi’s characters get trapped in the spider’s web in Arachnid.

Several months since the E.T. was last sighted — and after being snuffed out by one of its own accidental creations — a medical team from Guam heads to Celebes (better known as Sulawesi nowadays), in search of whatever is behind a new illness. The doctors (played by José Sancho and Neus Asensi) already suspected a spider bite, although they failed to consider the biter could be the size of a tank. With The Descent’s Alex Reid as the snarky pilot of this doomed expedition, one who has ulterior motives for accepting the job, the film’s core characters go off in search of a spider and, hopefully, a cure.

The title makes it seem as if there is only the one arachnid in the story, but once Chris Potter and Reid’s characters plus their team step foot on the island, they encounter other altered arthropods. Yuzna felt Sevi’s script needed more creatures along the way, especially before the spider showed up in full view. The bug horror commences as one gunsman succumbs to a burrowing breed of crab-sized ticks, and random characters fend off a horrific centipede with reptilian qualities. These are just the appetizers before the greatest arachnid of them all arrives. The late Ravil Isyanov, here playing a zealous but sympathetic arachnologist, becomes a human Lunchable for the spider’s eggs. And one of the doctors gets a face full of corrosive spider spew. So, there is no shortage of grisly predation in the film, with a few bits of the monsters’ handiwork possessing a haunting quality to them.

Shot quickly and cheaply, Arachnid is fast-food horror. It’s convenient and designed for immediate consumption, and will likely not linger on the palate. Usually there is not a lot worth remembering with these slapdash genre productions, however, this is one case of spider horror where the extra effort made a difference. Apart from the egregious use of digital imagery in the outset, Jack Sholder’s film primarily employs practical effects. And these are not rubber spiders dangling from strings or being flung at the actors, either. Fantastic Factory aimed much higher by securing DDTSFX (Pan’s Labyrinth, Hellboy II: The Golden Army) and creature designer and makeup artist Steve Johnson (Species, Blade II).

arachnid

Pictured: One of the spider’s web-covered victims in Arachnid.

Arachnid, while far from flawless, somewhat redeems itself by having chosen practical effects and animatronics over CGI, which had become the new normal in these kinds of films. And this class of creature-feature was definitely not getting the sort of advanced VFX found in the likes of Eight Legged Freaks. Steve Johnson’s spider was not the easiest prop to work with, and it lacks the movement and versatility of a digital depiction. However, there is no beating that sense of weight and occupation of space that makes a tangible monster more intimidating. Viewers will have trouble recalling the human characters long after watching Arachnid, yet the humongous headliner remains the stuff of nightmares.

Over the years, the director has spoken critically of the film. He originally held off on agreeing to the offer to direct in hopes that another project, a Steven Seagal picture, would finally manifest. No such luck, and Sholder accepted Arachnid only on account of his needing the work. He said of the film: “I thought I could […] make it halfway decent, but I discovered there wasn’t a whole lot I could do.” Nevertheless, Sholder’s experience as a director of not exactly high-brow yet still rather entertaining horror is evident in what he has since called a “dud.” While there is no denying the reality and outcome of Arachnid, even the most mediocre films have their strokes of brilliance, small as they may be.

Arachnid

Pictured: The poster for Arachnid.

Continue Reading