The Worst Scream Movie In The Horror Franchise, According To Rotten Tomatoes
Spoilers for "Scream 3" to follow.
Although many "Scream" fans will insist there's no such thing as a bad "Scream" movie, Rotten Tomatoes certainly disagrees. The original "Scream" and "Scream 2" were well received by critics (81% and 82% fresh on RT, respectively), while "Scream" 4, "Scream" (2022), and "Scream VI" all landed in the 60-80% range, but "Scream 3" is certified rotten. With only 41% of critics leaving positive reviews, and 38% of audiences saying they enjoyed the film, "Scream 3" is widely considered the worst entry in the entire slasher franchise. (At least, assuming you don't count the "Scream" TV show.) As the RT critics' consensus reads: "Despite some surprising twists, 'Scream 3' sees the franchise falling back on the same old horror formulas and cliches it once hacked and slashed with postmodern abandon."
I, for one, have always appreciated "Scream 3," even if large sections don't quite land for me. The film works best when it's focusing on Sidney (Neve Campbell) and her attempts to move past her trauma from the first two films, but, unfortunately, the script seems more interested in the constant bickering between Gale (Courteney Cox) and Dewey (David Arquette). It was a little too lighthearted and campy a follow-up to the wonderfully brutal "Scream 2," and even when the film did show some real guts — killing off returning character Cotton Weary in the opening — it still felt oddly hollow. I love Cotton, and think he was one of the most interesting parts of the second movie, so why do I feel nothing when he's killed off here?
In a lot of ways, Scream 3 was doomed from the start
Beyond the obvious difficulties that come with being the final part of a trilogy, "Scream 3" had a few major obstacles ahead of it. First was that longtime "Scream" writer Kevin Williamson left the project. The second was that Neve Campbell had a limited schedule that the production had to work around. Third was that the recent Columbine massacre, one of America's first major school shootings, sparked a wave of speculation over the social influence of movie violence.
The result of all this was a movie where Williamson's sharp dialogue is missing, Sidney feels ignored for large sections of the narrative, and most of the violence feels oddly muted. The first two movies felt like horror comedies, with an emphasis on the horror; "Scream 3" feels like an action comedy, with an emphasis on the comedy. To be fair, it is a good comedy, with Jennifer (Parker Posey) and Gale serving as perhaps the most charming character duo in the series, but it's not the tone most fans want or expect from a "Scream" film.
The good news is that, like most of the "Scream" sequels, its thematic material has aged well over time. The film's commentary on the treatment of women in Hollywood felt even more astute and cutting in light of the #MeToo movement, in much the same way that the "Scream 4" killers' obsession over internet clout feels increasingly relevant in today's social media-poisoned age. Like most of the franchise, "Scream 3" was surprisingly ahead of the curve. It might be a messy, awkward film that gave Gale an oddly terrible haircut, but it's still a fun time that's worth the watch. At the very least, it's better than "Scream" (2022).