California Screamin': The Crimes of Hollywood and the Power of Cinema in SCREAM 3

On the surface, the Scream sequels always play and toy with the premise of the original film in a similar cosmetic sense that gives each film its own automatic pitch to audiences. If Scream is sold as a deconstruction of the modern horror film, then Scream 2 is a deconstruction of horror sequels, and consequently Scream 3 is a deconstruction of horrors trilogies, Scream 4 is about horror remakes (and the Scream television series is, in some sense, a wasted opportunity to deconstruct the horror genre and prestige television). But each of these sequels has little to say about the true nature of sequels or trilogies beyond quick spoken jokes or visual gags. Scream 2 does not deconstruct the nature of the horror sequel as acutely as Scream deconstructs the nature of the horror film, and the same follows for Scream 3. This is not a testament to the quality of the films but rather this is entirely by design. An examination of the Scream Trilogy reveals that only Scream is about the text of horror movies at its core and that the sequels dive not into the text itself but into post-text elements. That is to say that Scream 2 critiques the societal effects, or lack thereof, of horror films in the age of moral panic.

It was only during Scream 3 that the franchise again had an explicit interest in the filmic text or horror as a subject, not in terms of it being a conclusion to a trilogy, but with the added dynamic viewing of the text in the larger context of the Hollywood system. The film deals with the exploitative nature of Hollywood with regards to how it treats women and in some sense the psychological effects of cinematic recreation. In fact Scream 3, the most often decried of the series seems to hold the most to say in terms of how the Hollywood system operates and serves as a conduit to channel Craven’s mixed feelings about the industry. 

In Scream 2, the primary killer was revealed to have been a “fan” of the original Ghostface who terrorized Sidney. Someone who had seen what Loomis had done and had even idolized him. Following this, in Scream 3, the new Ghostface is revealed not as a fan of the original but as his creator, the person who encouraged Billy Loomis to kill Maureen Prescott and eventually terrorize Sidney, setting into motion the events in Scream and eventually Scream 2. Here, the Scream trilogy has advanced a hierarchy placing the text in the middle and the audience and creators on either end of it. In his critique of Hollywood, Craven advances two fronts. The first being the constant and total humiliation of Roman Bridger, the director of "Stab 3" who has his vision, however warped, constantly thwarted by red tape and backdoor deals, and despite never factoring into his official motive, serves to reinforce his indignation. 

Roman’s indignation is dwarfed, however, by the exploitation and abuse of Sidney’s mother Maureen Prescott. A woman who, it is revealed, starred in several B-horror films under producer John Milton and was later presumably sexually abused by one or more Hollywood producers. The exploitation of women in Hollywood is present throughout Scream 3, both in the content of the in-universe "Stab 3" film where Sarah’s character is gratuitously nude during the murder scene, and in the people met like Bianca, who talks about auditioning and losing the role of Princess Leia in Star Wars to the sexually promiscuous Carrie Fisher (who happens to be played by Carrie Fisher herself, awkwardly implicating George Lucas as sexually extorting young actresses). All of this eventually culminating in the reveal of Maureen’s sexual assault, discounted by Milton as an exaggeration: “Nothing happened to her that she didn’t invite”. The circumstances even imply that this traumatic event may have led to Maureen’s implied hypersexuality, the affair with Billy Loomis’ father, and eventually the events the Scream. 

The most intense scene in the film by far is Sidney’s trip into the "Stab 3" set by herself, where she revisits a perfect replica of her family house and street. Once she enters the house, she finds herself being chased by the latest Ghostface, reliving the same trauma that pushed her to isolate herself from home and the world, in a recreated, artificial setting. After having been found by the detectives and Dewey she screams out “He was there! In Woodsboro!” to which Dewey replies “That’s not Woodsboro”. The scene echoes similar moments in Wes Craven’s New Nightmare which also follows a plot of an in-universe movie killer coming to life and terrorizing the cast members, and where Heather Langenkamp eventually finds herself playing, or rather replaying, the role of Nancy Thompson in her real life. Both films, in one way or another, illustrate the same distress of watching art play itself out in reality, but in Scream 3, the art that has been imitated is actually based on true events in universe, thus rendering the recreation as life imitating art imitating life, an added layer to New Nightmare’s dynamic.

The terror that hits Sidney in this scene goes much deeper beyond the surface than it’s original counterpart specifically because of its status as a follow-up. Sidney is not just experiencing the physical terror of being chased by a murderer but the psychological terror of having to relive one of her most traumatic experiences in an environment perfectly detailed to replicate the scene of the original trauma. The scene serves to demonstrate the immersive power of the created cinematic universe. That Sidney could experience trauma again in a minimally set-dressed environment speaks volumes about the power of the recreated setting, about cinema, to create such terror. This is Scream 3’s primary contribution to the franchise’s view of the horror text. Whether intentional or not, it serves as a reflection of cinema’s quiet power.