Scream 7 Review: An Overly-Nostalgic Sequel Puts The Slasher Series On Life Support

There's a pretty good reason why the "Scream" franchise has endured to this day — several of them, actually. The original is a stone-cold classic, the underrated fourth film perfected legacy sequels before they were even a thing. Then came the passing of beloved director Wes Craven, a sloppy "requel" or two, and all the behind-the-scenes controversy surrounding this latest installment ... but even all that hasn't been enough to derail this enterprise. In that way, "Scream" might as well be one of its own Ghostface killers, constantly coming back from the dead in defiance of all logic. Well, even the most legendary horror villains can't overcome a well-placed kill shot; if "Scream 7" makes a convincing case for anything, it's that it deserves one of its own.

In one sense, it's a shocking realization. Original writer Kevin Williamson takes the directorial reins this time, adding a reassuring touch to a property that seemed on the verge of becoming just a little too clever for its own good. Scream queen Neve Campbell makes her vaunted return (again) as Sidney Prescott Evans, now living with her husband Mark (Joel McHale) and daughter Tatum (Isabel May) far, far away from Woodsboro. It's as safe and back-to-basics a setup as it gets, which should've at least resulted in a solid enough sequel to keep the spooky times rolling. But, on the other hand, that's precisely the problem here. What could a seventh movie possibly hope to accomplish that hasn't been done to death already? The IP's usual bag of tricks has long since run dry, leaving us with a thinly-sketched bore that mostly resembles one of those in-universe "Stab" knockoffs — an impression of an impression.

That's the thing about leaning so heavily on nostalgia, though: It can either lift you up on its shoulders for a free ride, or cut you off at the knees. For a franchise that has traditionally embraced irreverence and rejected the idea of being precious about itself (until the post-Craven installments, at least), that's nothing short of a death knell. There have been lackluster "Scream" sequels before. What "Scream 7" turns out to be is something far worse than that. For the first time, we now have an utterly perfunctory "Scream" movie. If that's not a sign to call for an official time of death, I don't know what is.

"Do you like scary movies?" was never supposed to feel like this much of a threat. When "Scream 7" begins with one of the franchise's usual cold opens — in this case, involving a pair of victims visiting a meticulously curated recreation of Sidney Prescott's house from the 1996 film — it doesn't take very long for a sinking feeling to, uh, sink in. Nostalgia is the name of the game, early and often, and Kevin Williamson and Guy Busick's script (with James Vanderbilt getting "Story by" credit) never once shies away from it.

This proves to be both a blessing and a curse for "Scream 7." Caught awkwardly between the aborted plans involving Melissa Barrera's Sam Carpenter and Jenna Ortega's Tara Carpenter and the Hail-Mary attempt to essentially redo large swaths of 2022's "Scream," it'd be the understatement of the century to say that this latest effort already feels stretched to the breaking point. Ironically, that also applies to Sidney herself. Despite relocating all the way to Pine Grove, Indiana, our hero once again ends up a target of the ghosts from her past. An early scare puts Tatum in harm's way of a new Ghostface (or two) on the prowl, threatening to drag Sidney all the way back to the trauma she thought she'd left behind. If this premise feels somewhat tortured and overbaked, it's at least somewhat saved by Neve Campbell committing 110% to her performance as a final girl who really just needs a break at this point. We get a compelling enough thread regarding her overprotectiveness with Tatum, a shy and "timid" girl who's nonetheless well on her way to reliving her mom's history, but having the exact opposite effect. The more Sidney buries her childhood fears and memories, the more they manifest anyway.

Whenever Campbell isn't on-screen, however, one can almost feel "Scream 7" sagging under its own weight. Isabel May certainly holds her own as Tatum, slowly revealing a steely resolve beneath her brittle shell, but that's pretty much the extent of any emotional undercurrent whatsoever. Very few of the new additions make any sort of impact at all, from "The Boys" breakout Asa Germann to "Ghostbusters" star Celeste O'Connor to Sam Rechner as Tatum's boyfriend to a tragically wasted McKenna Grace. The grand reappearance of Courteney Cox's Gail Weathers overplays its hand so badly that it's likely to provoke unintended laughter, while the returns of both Jasmin Savoy Brown as Mindy and Mason Gooding as her twin Chad mostly fall flat. At best, they provide a flicker of energy into an otherwise sedate and humorless film. At worse, they're vestigial organs of a narrative dead end, echoes of movies that used to have a talented and young cast ready to take up the torch for fresh, new stories. In its place, we're now left with a story stuck hopelessly in neutral.

Despite all this, "Scream 7" is all but guaranteed to become a box office hit and it's not particularly difficult to see why. As much as passionate fans of "Scream" (that's the annoyingly-titled fifth movie, not the 1996 original with the exact same name, of course) and "Scream 6" may be turned off by a production that so shamelessly retreats to safer, risk-free ground, general audiences only ever revolt when a feature fails to deliver on what it promises. And if ever there were a franchise film that manages to live up to the absolute bare minimum of expectations, no more and no less, this is it.

That means a basic "Scream" movie that goes through all the usual motions you'd anticipate. If you've seen one Ghostface pratfall their way down stairs and through windows while absorbing all manner of punishment, you've seen them all. But, for more veteran horror hounds, "Scream 7" at least has the decency to mix in some seriously nasty kills — some of which even border on cruel. It's no spoiler to say that this sequel takes a more theatrical approach than most others in the franchise, clearly deriving a sick sort of glee (complimentary) out of one-upping the fate of its many victims. A spectacularly gory set piece at a school and another in a restaurant kitchen are memorable standouts, as is a much more claustrophobic attack at Sydney's own home.

But these aren't quite enough to make up for deficiencies elsewhere. As much as "Scream 7" tries to set up red herrings galore and hint at potentially lore-shaking twists, this is one sequel that's best described as "predictable." The clunky script gestures at some typical metatextual commentary, but hanging a lampshade on its own nostalgia and retconning has never felt more irritating than it does here. Even the blaring score, composed by returning "Scream" veteran Marco Beltrami, is as obtrusive and obvious as it gets. And though DP Ramsey Nickell does his best to add some off-kilter personality behind the camera, there's no getting around Kevin Williamson's lethargic direction.

All of this is emblematic of a film that suffers from self-inflicted wounds at practically every turn. Lacking the cleverness of the original, the undeniable flair of the best of Wes Craven's sequels, and the crowd-pleasing thrills of the recent revivals, "Scream 7" is more or less dead on arrival. Maybe it should stay that way.

/Film Rating: 4.5 out of 10

"Scream 7" opens in theaters on February 27, 2026.