Review and Analysis of Scream 5
The Scream franchise is one of the most iconic slasher series in horror cinema, blending fear, suspense, and meta-commentary to carve out a distinct place in film history.
In this installment, the focus remains on a masked killer who threatens victims through phone calls. The film attempts to maintain suspense and narrative twists so that the killer’s identity stays hidden until the final moments. Alongside classic slasher elements, it tries to challenge horror tropes by having characters openly discuss scary movies and critique the genre within the story itself.
The franchise began in 1996 and has since produced several sequels and even a television series inspired by its themes.
This review centers on Scream 5, released in 2022. Personally, I’m not a regular viewer of horror films and hadn’t seen the previous entries. My reason for watching this one was to complete my viewing archive of Jack Quaid’s work. He plays a character named Richie, who initially appears as a kind and loving boyfriend. However, from the second scene, it’s easy to suspect that Richie might be the killer. His quirky and overly supportive behavior, even if genuine, aligns with the psychological profile of a serial murderer. Later, when he attacks his girlfriend in the hospital, he becomes an even more obvious suspect.
Richie is the boyfriend of Sam Carpenter, the film’s main character. At first, he seems caring and protective, but his true identity is gradually revealed. He is one of the main killers, though not responsible for all the murders. The killers’ goal appears to be a reboot of the Scream franchise.
They are obsessed with American horror films and, like other characters in the story, view horror purely as entertainment. The critiques voiced throughout the film lack any meaningful engagement with the ethical impact of horror media. Even when psychological aspects are questioned, the film avoids deeper moral reflection.
The emotional responses of characters to traumatic events are shallow, reflecting a low level of empathy. This isn’t unique to Scream—it’s a recurring issue in many American films. It’s a serious mistake to be indifferent or overly optimistic about movies that portray abnormal behavior. Depicting disturbing themes isn’t inherently wrong, but the message behind the portrayal matters. If the film’s message is poorly designed, it can inspire audiences to mimic unhealthy behaviors.
Some horror films manage to present disturbing content in a way that encourages understanding and reflection. They offer neutral yet insightful portrayals of human pathology. However, the entertainment-driven nature of cinema has led many horror films to become mere vehicles for violence and shock, rather than meaningful storytelling.
Richie’s behavior in the early scenes is overly innocent, which is a common trick in slasher films to mislead the audience. But the lack of attention to behavioral nuance makes his suspiciousness too obvious. The film feels more like a market product than a carefully crafted thriller.
His “freaky” behavior—being overly eager to help—often feels artificial. In moments of fear, Richie’s reactions seem unnatural. Hidden killers usually try to act normal, but sometimes their normalcy itself becomes suspicious.
Richie could have been portrayed as a long-distance boyfriend, communicating only through phone calls. This would have delayed the reveal and created more suspense. If more characters had indirect contact with key figures, the audience would have had a harder time identifying the killer, increasing the mystery.
Conclusion Scream 5 attempts to satisfy longtime fans while attracting a new generation of viewers. However, it falls into common traps seen in slasher films and entertainment-driven cinema. Like previous entries, it uses suspense and twists to conceal the killer’s identity until the end. Richie’s behavior is suspicious from the start, and his overly supportive demeanor makes him the prime suspect. Despite Jack Quaid’s strong performance, the film’s atmosphere feels overly commercial and predictable, reducing its appeal for serious horror fans. The psychological and cinematic critiques presented in the film lack ethical depth and ultimately serve a purely entertaining purpose.
