What If...?: Scream 5

I know, I know, it's been a while and I'm a day late and a dollar short with this one but hey, it's my blog, I can be as late or as early with things as I wanna be, so in this installment of "What If...?" I'm gonna ask the question what if "Scream 5" was good? No, like really good? For those of you who don't know, I am a huge fan of the "Scream" series (the films...the MTV show is...decent enough) and despite all the hate it gets, I actually really enjoy "Scream 3" (don't get me wrong, I do still consider it the weaker of the films, but I digress). The point is, I really do love "Scream". To be completely honest, the "Scream" movies are the last vestiges of 80s slasher flicks, punched up with a modern take on a genre that is since dead. Think about it, not many slashers exist in this day and age. I'm not gonna recap the films here but if you haven't seen all 4 "Scream" movies, do yourself a favor and check them out and then check out "Scream 5".

While I liked "Scream 5" and had fun with it, it could have been MUCH better and while the reveal was obvious, the motive was completely nonsensical to me (I still don't understand their motives). Like any good sequel or part of a series, it should ALWAYS call back to previous installments and remind the viewers that certain events happened to help usher in new and old viewers. After all, if you're making a sequel for a new generation, they're gonna wanna understand the previous installments so that they can understand all the character relationships, otherwise why even bother making a sequel if you're not gonna reference previous installments? So let's ask What if "Scream 5" was really good? And warning there will be spoilers.

For me "Scream 5" did a LOT right up until the very end and a few details here and there but for me I will be keeping the movie largely the same, except for the ending and the motive. First let's address the blunder of "Scream 5" before I clean it up. So the motive for the killers in "Scream 5" is that they were hardcore fans of the "Stab" movies (the movies based on the Woodsboro murders) and the subsequent "Stab" films have gone SO FAR off the rails that they're not even recognizable, and as hardcore fans they decided to make their own "Stab" movie by recreating the Woodsboro murders thus possibly inspiring new "Stab" movies...is that it? Because I honestly don't know, by the end it was so...nonsensical I basically just chalked it up to "Oh, they're just crazy.". So please, allow me to explain why this is a bad motive. Aside from a few scenes, the "Stab" movies aren't referenced in the film enough to have a clear presence in the movie. Furthermore there's no indication of either Richie or Amber (the killers) being fans of the film.

If the core group of friends were discussing the "Stab" movies in relation to their current situation and the discussion turned towards how bad and how inaccurate the latter movies got that'd be good foreshadowing as to where the film is going, but it wasn't. But I'm not gonna discuss this anymore because I have something FAR better, so let's dive into that. Now I said I'd keep the film largely the same except for a few details, those details are as followed: as nice as it was to see him, I'm ditching Ghost Billy. The idea of having "killer" be in Sam's blood is just a "spook" story, there is no "serial killer" gene or whatever. Let's remember that Billy was driven to murder by certain events. However, I would keep this idea of Sam being a killer because her father was a killer as a key piece of motivation for the killer. Throughout the movie I'd have Ghostface coxing Sam about her origins, because consistently in the movie we're told that someone knows she's Billy Loomis's bastard child. By the end of the film here's what would happen.

GHOSTFACE

We all know who you are, you're the bastard child of

Billy Loomis. Woodsboro murder mastermind,

but the real question you still haven't figured out. Who am I?!

SAM

I DON'T KNOW!

SYDNEY

Stu...you're Stu Macher.

Ghostface removes his mask to reveal Richie. Sam looks on dumbfounded and terrified.

 

Now here's the reason why I'd have Richie be the bastard child of Stu Macher. Considering the 1st "Scream" Drew Berrymore plays Stu's ex-girlfriend, later on Stu himself kills Tatum, it wouldn't be too far out of the realm of possibility that Stu was possibly getting some on the side. After all, according to Randy, "There's always some bullshit reason to kill your girlfriend." and having back-up booty sounds perfectly logically to me. Plus considering these 2 are serial killers I wouldn't put cheating on their respective girlfriends past them. Now if Billy can get someone pregnant, Stu can too. However, here's where the motives come in, unlike Sam's mom, Richie's mom decided to give him up for adoption. Seeing the media circus surrounding Sydney and seeing all the drama surrounding Stu and Billy she keeps quiet about having had Stu's baby and claims she had it aborted. The ONLY person she revealed this to was Sam's mom (a plot point) as Sam's mom is the ONLY person who understands her plight of having had a serial killer's baby.

Fast-forward and Richie having grown up decently enough becoming a fan of the "Stab" movies and he meets Amber online and they become friends as they're both fans of the "Stab" films. Richie reveals that he was adopted from Woodsboro and Amber reveals that she's in Woodsboro. Amber then reveals to Richie that Sam's mom was once see with Billy Loomis by her mom and that Stu was known to sleep around a lot. Richie having been adopted gets the idea in his mind that he maybe Stu's kid. After doing some digging they confirm that Sam is Billy's kid and Richie is in fact the bastard of Stu Macher. This enrages Richie because throughout the series Billy is ALWAYS considered the mastermind behind the murders while Stu is merely an afterthought, a patsy, a nobody. Billy was so important that even his own mother attempted to avenge him, Stu was never avenged by anyone. Stu was discarded and likewise Richie felt discarded as well by his birthmother. This sets a paralelle between Richie and Roman Bridger the killer in "Scream 3" Sydney's long lost brother (both discarded by their parents).

For all the crap "Scream 3" gets, this reveal and retcon was actually not bad at all. I really think it's underrated in terms of Retconning done right.

Richie and Amber decide to give Stu some justice by recreating the murders but this time, pin it all on Sam (Billy's daughter), thus they're both the masterminds and the victims. The way they see it, Sam would kill Sydney and try to kill everyone else (including her boyfriend, a dark mirror of her father trying to kill girlfriend) as an homage to her father, trying to succeed where he failed. And her motive would be hating Sydney for killing her father. Richie hates his mom for discarding him, he hates Sam for not wanting the attention of being famous for having an infamous father, he hates Sydney simply for being so important that everything ends up being about her, he hates Billy because Billy basically used Stu to the point where Stu was a nobody in the Woodsboro saga of murders. Billy got the credit for everything even though Stu actually successfully killed 2 of his girlfriends while Billy couldn't even kill one, so technically despite being more successful than Billy killwise, Stu is still looked at as 2nd fiddle. So ultimately Richie is trying to succeed where Stu failed. In the end however, he shoots Amber because according to his plan she was Sam's patsy and this ultimately ends up being his downfall. In my version of the film right when Richie gets up for the final RAWR! Amber stabs him with a firepoker and then dies, this is a call back to "Scream 4" when Jill turned on Charlie except Charlie didn't managed to survive, plus it subverts the expectation of the heroes getting the last shot at the villain.

This B*tch was CRAZY!

Ultimately, if you're gonna have a character by Billy's daughter, they should have had a character be Stu's son and I was waiting for that revelation and it never came. And the fact that there were already so many paralelles to be drawn from previous "Scream" films, while maintaining the lore and building new lore as well, and like Randy said "The past isn't done with you.". But this time it isn't Sydney's past, not really, but Billy's past. This changes the dynamic and can open up new possibilities. We can even keep the part where Richie kills his cousin Vince for NOT avenging his Uncle Stu (again drawing a paralelle to "Scream 4" a cousin killing a cousin). So what do you guys think? Is this better? I think so. But what do I know, I'm just a guy who loves the "Scream" movies. Drop a comment and I'll catch you guys later.