Thursday, June 10, 2010

BD impressions: Scream

8:28 PM / BD Impressions / Comments7 Comments

BD Impressions
Blu-ray

Ah, the 90s! Haven't they aged well? No, not really, at least in the case of SCREAM. Wes Craven's 1996 slasher was more or less the first modern horror movie I ever saw - prior to that, I had only ever been acquainted with the likes of THE OMEN and THE MEPHISTO WALTZ, and SCREAM opened up a whole new world of possibilities for me, ultimately leading me, in a very roundabout way, to the gialli of Argento, Fulci et al. SCREAM owes something of an indirect debt to these films, and can essentially be viewed as a Californian, teen-oriented giallo, with the Ghostface costume and raspy Roger Jackson voice a clear descendent of the black-coated, black-gloved killer who so often disguised his (or her) voice when making menacing phone calls to his intended victims. I'm inclined to think, however, that the better gialli were somewhat cleverer and more self-aware than SCREAM.

SCREAM, you see, has been called many things. A parody, a satire, an homage... the last of these is probably nearest the mark, although the film's creators have muddied the waters by using all three (I forget precisely who called it what and when, but I don't think it really matters much). The film purports to be self-aware, and this self-awareness manifests itself in the form of its entire cast having an intimate knowledge of the horror genre and repeatedly observing that the situation unfolding around them is very much like... would you believe it... a horror movie. The trouble is that I'm not quite sure what the filmmakers are trying to say. Are they mocking the genre? I don't have a problem with that - slasher movies are ripe for mockery. SCREAM, however, attempts to both have its cake and eat it, essentially pointing out the clichés but doing nothing beyond that. There's little real subversion of slasher movie conventions, and the few that ARE subverted - for example, Sidney commits the cardinal "sin" of having sex but lives to tell the tale - stick out like sore thumbs amid the slough that aren't. I don't know it Craven and writer Kevin Williamson were aware of how conventional they were being in killing off the ditzy, big-titted blonde, but frankly I don't think it really matters whether they knew what they were doing or not - either way, no real point ends up being made.

What we're left with, once you ignore the muddled and now decidedly uncool self-referentiality, is an admittedly well-made slasher movie that looks an awful lot like a whole bunch of other well-made horror movies from the previous decade. Craven is what I would call a very uneven director - for every NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET there's a SCREAM 3 - but when he's on the ball, he's REALLY on the ball. His most recent film but one, RED EYE, was a gripping exercise in eking every last drop of tension out of a minimalist situation, and on several occasions he manages the same thing with SCREAM. The opening sequence, featuring an extended cameo by Drew Barrymore, is one such example; another is Sidney's first phone conversation with Ghostface and her subsequent flight from him through her otherwise empty house. These sequences owe a certain debt to the segment "The Telephone" in Mario Bava's BLACK SABBATH, and both Barrymore and Neve Campbell make for likeable "scream queens". It also has a genuinely effective whodunit that caught me off-guard the first time I watched it. When the tension lets up and the characters start waxing lyrical about "Wes Carpenter" (haw haw) flicks, however, you remember all too quickly how annoying the rash of self-referential slasher movies that came out in SCREAM's wake were. SCREAM was the first, and probably also the best, but it just doesn't have the impact it did 15 years ago.

Image quality: Ugh. I think perhaps even Universal might have had second thoughts about releasing this disc... but then again, having seen the screen captures of their recent BD of SPARTACUS, I'm not so sure. SCREAM is barely on the right side of watchable - muddy, grubby-looking and lacking in detail, it has the look of a master created some time ago with the assumption that it would be downscaled to a more forgiving resolution. It looks a lot like the various DVD releases that have surfaced over the years (many of them non-anamorphic) and offers a fairly marginal upgrade over them. If you find it cheap in a bargain bin somewhere, it might be worth a look. Otherwise, you're better off waiting for Disney to release it... which will probably happen before too long, given that SCREAM 4 is currently in production over at the Weinstein Company. Hopefully, they'll have the sense to retransfer it. 4/10

Scream
studio: Icon; country: Australia; region code: ABC; codec: AVC;
file size: 18.1 GB; average bit rate (including audio): 23.38 Mbit/sec

Scream Scream Scream Scream Scream Scream Scream Scream Scream Scream Scream Scream

 
7 Comments

1. FoxyMulder said:

Funnily enough the cinematographer of this one also did The Fly and that one is also accused of looking grubby and lacking detail.

So i ask is it lacking detail because of the print used or because the original photography just looks that way. ?

Incidentally a film called Black Sabbath is coming out in 2011, i wonder if it's a remake of the Bava version.

(Posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 at 9:32 PM)

2. Ronny said:

Damn it...what a terrible transfer. It looks underwhelming to say the least. I was curious if this is the uncut version of "Scream"?

(Posted on Friday, June 11, 2010 at 3:02 AM)

3. Author Profile Page Michael said:

FoxyMulder:

It's hard to say, but I'd be surprised if the original material looked THIS Bad. In my opinion, the BD of THE FLY was much better-looking.

I haven't heard anything about a remake of Bava's BLACK SABBATH, but I could be wrong. There have been about a zillion movies made using that title over the years.


Ronny:

It's not uncut, I'm afraid. I'm led to believe that the only existing uncut master is SD, created for the US LaserDisc release.

(Posted on Friday, June 11, 2010 at 10:12 AM)

4. Kentai said:

The Japanese DVD was both uncut and anamorphic, though it's now out of print: CDJapan Listing

The first JP release was in a jewel-case and was basically a port of the laserdisc. I don't know what the 16:9 R2 DVD was sourced from, but I'd assume it's the best print of the uncut version available.

A Nightmare on Elm Street, The Serpent and the Rainbow, and The Hills Have Eyes are among the very best in American horror films, and by and large Craven deserves a lot of the praise he's been given over the years. Scream, however, feels like a forced joke from a man who didn't earn the right to make it in the first place. Craven's career really has nothing to do with slasher films, and the genre had long succumbed to self-awareness, so he added nothing to the table but giving far hackier directors a chance to make their own "hur, ain't slasher films dumb?" knock-offs... I'm sure someday I'll forgive Wes for that, but God, it isn't easy.

(For reference, Jason "Took Manhattan" seven long years before Scream came out. And that was the third self-depreciating entry in the F13 franchise!)

(Posted on Friday, June 11, 2010 at 10:03 PM)

5. Kentai said:

Both Germany and Japan released the Director's Cut on DVD. Looks like a component, anamorphic source in both countries: http://www.caps-a-holic.com/vergleich.php?vergleichID=249

I'm not a big fan of SCREAM anyway, but all things considered I'd rather have the uncut German DVD than this abysmal looking Blu-ray.

(Posted on Saturday, June 12, 2010 at 9:14 PM)

6. Author Profile Page Michael said:

Kentai:

I own the Japanese DVD (it was the first film I ever double-dipped on, and I paid through the nose for it). The image quality is disappointing, offering no real improvement over the non-anamorphic UK release. (The cut Australian release is noticeably bit better.)

As for your assessment of SCREAM the film, I think you're pretty much spot on.

(Posted on Saturday, June 12, 2010 at 10:36 PM)

7. Kram Sacul said:

I think with some DNR and the EE cranked up this could be the next Gangs of New York. I've seen dvd upconverts that looked better than this wreck.

(Posted on Monday, June 14, 2010 at 11:20 AM)

 
To combat spam, commenting is automatically disabled on entries older than 30 days.

Did a comment you tried to post accidentally get eaten by the spam filter? It happens from time to time. I get upwards of 200 spam comments every day and unfortunately don't have the time to weed through all of them in case something genuine ended up there by mistake. If one of your posts gets incorrectly flagged as spam, email me at whiggles[at]ntlworld[dot]com and I'll do my best to retrieve it.