Every Scream Movie Ranked

The best thing about the "Scream" franchise is that, as far as most fans are concerned, there are no downright awful entries. Some movies are weaker than others, sure, but no movie was so bad that the series' creators had no choice but to reboot the entire thing. This is a series that builds on itself, embracing continuity and refusing to allow viewers to discard any of its entries. The "Star Wars" sequels pleased nobody when they tried to make "Rise of Skywalker" serve as a reversal of every controversial decision made in the previous film, but the "Scream" series has never made any such cowardly mistake. Every sequel matters in this franchise, no matter what. No movie is going to apologize for anything the last movie did.

Still, not all "Scream" movies are created equal. Some of them have tone problems, or lackluster killer reveals. Some of them are a little too focused on the health of the franchise, while others might not be concerned enough. Ranking these movies is a complicated process — not to mention extremely subjective, of course — but I'm going to try it anyway. If Melissa Barrera's Sam Carpenter could deal with the controversy of everyone thinking she's a killer, then I should be able to withstand the controversy that may come from my questionable rankings below.

Spoilers below for the entire "Scream" series.

It's hard to get on this movie's case too much because, when it comes to its main purpose of reviving the franchise, it succeeds. It gives us a new cast of characters to follow around, and a fresh new final girl who is (in a wise choice) barely like Sidney at all. Replacing Sidney would've been impossible, so the fifth film doesn't even try. 

It also has some good scares, is well-paced, and has one of the stronger killer reveals in the series. Richie and Amber not only have a fresh, interesting motive, but they're featured prominently enough throughout the movie that their reveals feel like genuine betrayals. Some fans complained that their reveals were a little too obvious, but it's better to have killers the audience can guess than killers that feel like they were pulled out of a hat, or whose reveal means little to the main character. (More on that later.)

Where the movie fails, however, is by playing it way too safe. As much as the story mocks requels (half reboots, half sequels), it still follows the standard requel format to a tee. So much of this movie feels like a repeat of the first film, except we don't get to spend as much time with the new friend group because so much time is spent on fan service around Sidney and Gale. The result feels like we're watching someone competently (but boringly) pull off a complex juggling act: The movie sets the groundwork for more ambitious and surprising "Scream" films to come, but it doesn't do a whole lot more than that. 

As much as I've come to appreciate this movie's many charms over the years, nothing quite makes up for the fact that this is easily the least scary entry in the series. Cotton's death in the cold open feels like more of an action sequence than a horror one, and when Ghostface is slashing up the Stab cast left and right in the second act, it's hard not to notice how empty it all feels. Outside of Parker Posey's Jennifer and her bodyguard played by Patrick Warburton, none of these new characters are interesting or memorable in the slightest.

What doesn't help is that Gale and Dewey's storyline feels too much like a repeat of "Scream 2." We've already seen them start off a movie pissed at each other and then slowly rekindle their love, and the second movie weaved this all much more seamlessly into the main plot. It's made worse by how Sidney is sidelined for most of the first half; it makes the reveal of Roman as the killer extra underwhelming because, well, Sidney's never even met him before. It's not even clear if she should recognize him at all.

Where "Scream 3" succeeds, however, is with its masterful portrayal of Sidney's PTSD. Neve Campbell gives a career-highlight performance as a broken, self-isolated Sidney who decides to face her fears head-on and finally get some closure. As shaky as this third entry is, it nevertheless gives a shining example of what makes the series so great: It takes Sidney's pain seriously, and it allows her to meaningfully grow with each passing film. 

I feel bad ranking this entry so low, because the final act is easily one of the strongest sequences in the whole series. Emma Roberts nails it as Jill, a killer uninterested in revenge but who simply wants to be famous as a victim. Back in 2011, her monologue might've felt a little too "kids these days" with its presentation of young people who are way too obsessed with the internet at the expense of their in-person relationships. But with 12 years now to reflect on it? I'm loathe to admit that screenwriter Kevin Williamson was spot on. In an age where teens are doing all sorts of questionable stuff in their attempts to go viral, Jill's motives seem painfully believable, and Emma Roberts sells all of it.

Where the film fails is that, much like "Scream 3," it's just not that scary. The only proper chase sequence in the movie is with a callous publicist we're not expected to care about; outside of that, the kills are way too quick and easy, often going for laughs when they should be going for scares. It also hurts that outside of the delightful Kirby (whose scenes were cut down from the original script), no one in this new cast of characters is particularly likable. Even Jill felt pretty generic before the big reveal; sure, that was probably on purpose, but it doesn't make for a particularly compelling opening two acts. 

In a lot of ways, this movie is the opposite of "Scream 4." It's a compelling, suspenseful film for the first two-thirds of its runtime, and then it gives us the weakest final act in the entire series. The killers feel like cartoon characters, our heroes are walking off stab wounds way too easily, and so much of the killers' plans just don't make a lot of sense. Every "Scream" final act is a little ridiculous if you think about it, but the messiness here is just too prominent to forgive this time around. 

But "Scream 6" still makes it to the #3 spot just by how fresh and suspenseful those opening ninety minutes are. After three movies in a row where the series seemed to neglect high-quality chase sequences, this movie is full of them, putting them in exciting new locations we've never seen Ghostface in before. From the bodega scene to the ladder scene to Gale's apartment showdown to the subway chaos, this movie is a pure adrenaline rush, made better by how genuinely unclear it often is as to how the characters can escape the situation, if they can at all.

This is the first entry since the '90s that feels fully fresh, almost completely unhindered by expectations of previous films. Both Screams 4 and 5, and even 3 to an extent, were all focused on returning to the first movie and replaying those same beats, whereas "Scream 6" was almost entirely its own thing. Even if it doesn't quite stick the landing, "Scream 6" deserves props for its sheer ambition. It's a movie where we truly don't know what's going to happen from moment to moment, and that's exactly what the series needed.

I've argued in the past that this actually is the best Scream movie, and I still largely stand by that point. "Scream 2" is the scariest entry, as well as the most emotionally affecting. Now that Gale, Dewey, and Randy have all officially beaten the Ghostface allegations tinting their scenes in the first movie, we can finally root for each of them just as much as we did for Sidney the first time around. The result is a movie where the chase scenes are just as suspenseful as the ones in "Scream 6," except this movie actually follows through. It has the guts to kill off fan-favorite Randy halfway in, not to mention the likable newcomers Hallie and Derek. Yes, Dewey's survival was a bit of a cheat, but after eight brutal kills, it was a lot more forgivable.

The only reason "Scream 2" doesn't win it all is because I still can't quite get over how disappointed I was when Mickey was revealed to be the killer, because my reaction on first watch was, "...who?" Timothy Olyphant's Mickey was introduced alongside a ton of other minor characters in the first act and then forgotten about almost entirely in the second act, which meant his reveal feels the most unearned out of possibly anyone in the franchise. Of course, Olyphant still nails the performance as Mickey, and so does Laurie Metcalf as the maniacal Mrs. Loomis, but that initial deflated feeling invoked by Mickey's reveal is still disappointing. Even on multiple rewatches it feels clear that they didn't do enough to make him memorable pre-reveal; "Scream 2" might not win this ranking, but just one or two more scenes of Mickey probably could've taken it there. 

There's a lot to love about this first film, but looking back at it 25 years later, maybe the best part is just how free it feels. This movie has very few expectations going into it, no plot points or fan service it feels obligated to include. This is the first and last movie where a two-killer reveal can be a genuine surprise and the only movie that can get away with killing off the supposed main character in the opening scene. 

It's a movie that makes a lot of choices that feel inevitable now, but were fresh and surprising at the time: Letting Gale be a hero at the end instead of punishing her for her ruthless reporter habits isn't just unexpected; it turns out to be the start of the one of the most fascinating character arcs in the whole series. Establishing that Sidney sent the wrong man to prison for her mother's death is also a strange stroke of brilliance, both adding a complicated shade of grey to her character and perfectly setting up a masterful Cotton Weary storyline in the sequel. 

But the main thing that sets it apart is its killers. Because its big twist is not the reveal of the killers but the fact that there are two of them, this movie can afford to show us a ton of Billy and Stu without giving things away. The result is that these two are far and away the best Ghostfaces, whose reveals feel the most earned and whose performances — both before and after their big reveals — reign far above the rest. Skeet Ulrich and Matthew Lillard are both absolute menaces in this film, and the series hasn't quite been able to recreate their magic ever since.