Ghostface in Paramount Pictures and Spyglass Media Group’s “Scream 7.” © 2025 Paramount Pictures. Ghost Face is a Registered Trademark of Fun World Div., Easter Unlimited, Inc. ©1999. All Rights Reserved.”.

The “Scream” franchise has been ongoing for 30 years now, and the latest installment, “Scream 7”, sets a new mark in the franchise for being the most forgettable of the bunch. 

By bringing Neve Campbell back into the fold as Sidney Prescott and putting her mostly front and center following her absence from “Scream 6”, the film follows Sydney and her teenage daughter, Tatum, as they face off with a new, or perhaps old, iteration of the Ghostface killer. While it isn’t hard to imagine the seventh film in a franchise being devoid of new and exciting ideas, “Scream 7” largely follows the familiar template of the series and falls surprisingly flat in doing so. 

Multiple scenes in the film are just complete recreations of scenes from the original film, so much so that it took me completely out of the movie. It felt as if this was done to serve as a stand-in for the lack of meta horror commentary in the film, an integral element to the “Scream” zeitgeist, but it just comes off as extremely hokey and on the nose. There are more nods to other classic horror films like “Halloween”, but they are done with much more subtlety and taste, so they play quite well in comparison. 

We are given a new group of teens to (somewhat) follow in the form of Tatum’s high school friends, and none of them are particularly memorable in any way. A couple of them are given personality traits to fit a certain stereotype, like the suspicious boyfriend or the true-crime junkie, but none of them stand out with what they are given to do, which is essentially just to act as cannon-fodder to raise the body count. The film knows this, which is why there isn’t much time spent on them, but rather most of the runtime is focused on legacy characters that don’t end up serving the plot in any real positive way. 

Speaking of legacy characters, if you’ve paid attention to any of the buildup to “Scream 7”, you probably know about the expected attempt to bring back a certain character from the original film that has long been presumed dead. The way in which the character’s return is actually executed is beyond silly and could have been completely removed from the film with virtually no difference to the final product. Considering the immense clamoring from the character’s fanbase online for the franchise to bring them back, it’s not shocking that it finally happened, but it is a shame that the return proved to be completely insubstantial. 

The true calling card of these films is the mystery killer aspect. When a “Scream” film is truly working, you find yourself contemplating who is behind the mask at every turn. This trait is also what gives the films such high re-watch value. Once you’ve seen the film and know who the killers are, it is equally as exciting to go back and look for clues or potential signs and wonder how you might’ve missed them the first go around.

The big reveal of the killer’s identities in “Scream 7” is a complete and utter flop. All “Scream” films except for one have had multiple killers, and in “Scream 7”, each one is entirely uninteresting and nonsensical. One of which only appears in a single scene before the reveal, so it’s entirely anticlimactic. The other gives their big monologue to explain their motivation, and it doesn’t feel natural in the slightest. Of all the Ghostface reveals in the franchise, “Scream 7” delivers the worst by a country mile. 

Though it is a mess of a film, it is not a total trainwreck. Neve Campbell is always fun to watch as Sidney, and her chemistry with her on-screen daughter (Isabel May) works well enough. Many of the kills are quite creative and well-done, so all the gore hounds out there are sure to be at least moderately satisfied. There are a few well-staged and truly suspenseful set pieces that director and series creator Kevin Williamson has a keen eye for. And overall, as even the worst of the “Scream” films are, the film is entertaining. It has a very fast pace that never allows it to drag, and at under 120 minutes, it feels even shorter. There is just something so energetic about the “Scream” formula that raises the floor of its entertainment value. 

Finally, to address the elephant in the room, “Scream 7” is sorely missing Melissa Barrera, the star of the previous two “Scream” films, who was let go from the franchise following her public support for Palestine. Along with Barrera, the directors of the previous two films, Tyler Gillett and Matt Bettinelli-Olpin – known together as members of the Radio Silence collective – did not return either. Their absences, especially Barrera’s, make for a rough transition that leaves a section of the franchise feeling incomplete. 

The Radio Silence team brought a new life to a series that was unsure how to move forward after Wes Craven’s passing following “Scream 4.” By bringing Barrera into the fold as the daughter of Billy Loomis, the franchise had found a new final girl to follow that was interesting and different. Watching her wrestle with being the daughter of a serial killer while trying to suppress that darker, even sinister side of herself was a fascinating turn that the franchise greatly benefited from. To completely scrap the idea after two films, all to center yet another film around Sydney Prescott (whom I love), feels tired. 

There is a way to continue classic horror franchises without handcuffing them to their original final girls. It is the same complaint that I’ve had with the latest trio of “Halloween” films from Blumhouse when Jamie Lee Curtis was brought back for yet another Laurie Strode vs Michael Myers showdown. How many times do we have to watch the same character go through the same back-and-forth with the same villain before things get stale? I feel it is best to introduce new and fresh characters and allow them to carry the series forward for a new generation of viewers, all while staying true to what makes the franchise unique. Radio Silence laid the groundwork for “Scream” to continue to tell worthwhile stories for many years to come, and their vision was ultimately scrapped for a forgettable nostalgia-soaked retread. 

It is clear with “Scream 7” that the franchise is running out of creative steam. That’s not to say, however, that I wouldn’t embrace the idea of more Scream films being made, which is likely on the horizon given the box office success. I hold the best of the franchise in dear regard, and I even find a fair amount of enjoyment in the not-so-good entries. So, it’s hard to envision a future where I don’t find myself excited to head to the local theater to see the latest “Scream” flick. But sometimes things run their course, and under the current direction, it’s equally as difficult to imagine the franchise becoming significantly interesting again anytime soon.