After some massive setbacks, Scream 7 resumed production and even confirmed two major casting choices. Specifically, Matthew Lillard and Scott Foley will return to the meta horror franchise. The actors will reprise their roles as Stu Macher from Scream and Roman Bridger from Scream 3, respectively. What's more, both (supposedly) died at the end of their films. This means that they either survived, or they'll return in some way, not unlike Billy Loomis being Sam Carpenter's recurring hallucination.

But even as someone who grew up watching and loving the Scream films, the only thing I felt when I heard these casting calls was exhaustion. Stu's and Roman's upcoming returns feel more like a step backward than something I should look forward to. This has nothing to do with the actors or their characters. Both actors played their roles well, and their characters served their purpose. That said, their upcoming returns are not only transparently cynical,

To most people, the Scream films are the ultimate meta-horror commentaries. Broadly speaking, they're right. Not only did these films (especially the original trilogy) revive the then-stagnant slasher subgenre in the '90s, but they basically pioneered self-aware scriptwriting. It's debatable if the Scream films were the first to point out genre clichés and weaponize them, but they undoubtedly popularized this now commonplace practice. Today's crop of painfully self-aware slashers all owe something to the Woodsboro killings. But after revisiting all the Scream films in light of Scream 7's casting news, I've come to the conclusion that

The original Scream was a reaction to the formulaic slashers and the moral crusade against horror fiction that swept the '80s and bled over to the '90s. Scream 2 doubled down on the first film's commentary by introducing the in-universe Stab films, which are exploitation films based on Billy's and Stu's murder spree. But starting with Scream 3, the franchise withdrew into itself and gradually stopped being about horror films. Whatever deconstructive goals the original had were replaced by the franchise's need to praise itself for its cleverness. As Ghostface themselves yelled in Scream VI's prologue before they killed the latest murderous cinephile:

At most, Scream 3 to Scream VI gave lip service to the rules of horror that Randy Meeks laid down, or they made jabs at whatever the new horror trend was. But after that perfunctory franchise tradition was done with, Everything was connected to a handful of families, every Ghostface killer was motivated by revenge, and everything was always tied to the sacred original film and cast. Sam Carpenter can't just be a new hero; she's Billy's estranged daughter who also carries his "legacy." She even looked to Sidney Prescott and Gale Weathers for inspiration in Scream (2022) instead of forging her own path.

More to the point, Granted, this kind of horrifying tragedy will haunt any survivors for as long as they live. But in Scream 3 and beyond, the characters didn't move on from Scream only because of justified trauma, but because Ghostface was their entire life and universe. Whoever donned the Ghostface mask (originally just a cheap and untraceable Halloween costume) was "inspired" by the previous one. The heroes dedicated their lives to stopping the next Ghostface every few years because it's their destiny. The younger characters always found time to praise the original film's events and cast. The films themselves reflect this reverent nostalgia for Scream by having next to no interest in commenting on modern horror.

Instead of confronting horror trends like the contentious found footage fad, the sadistic torture porn wave, the gentrification of the '80s slasher, or the pretentious "elevated horror," these sequels just repeated what the first did. They'd recreate scenes, revisit old locations, bring back old characters, recite quotes verbatim, and so forth. All these homages are achingly sincere, proved most glaringly by Scream VI's literal shrine to the Scream films. In contrast, the Hollywood recreation of Woodsboro in Scream 3 was intentionally tasteless. especially in those made after director Wes Craven's death. And just when it seemed as if the franchise was about to move on from this tiring trend, it brought back two dead Ghostfaces.

To be completely fair, it's too early to tell how exactly Stu and Roman will figure into Scream 7. For all anyone knows, they'll just get quick cameos. But if Sam's visions of Billy are any indication, Stu and Roman will get similarly respectful treatment. Given how Stu's apparent survival was teased in Scream VI and how Foley recently confirmed that Roman will come back posthumously, it's all but guaranteed that Scream will stick to its shift from meta horror to self-involved melodrama. The most frustrating thing about all this is that, cream VI was already on the right track to finally giving Scream a place in the new generation.

Due in part to a pay dispute with Sidney's actor, Neve Campbell, Scream VI had no choice but to focus on the Carpenter sisters, Sam (Melissa Barrera) and Tara (Jenna Ortega). Sidney's absence was a blessing in disguise, as it allowed Scream's new survivors to shine in a way that the reverent Scream (2022) didn't allow them to. Instead of only existing to prop up the original cast,Scream VI wasn't above making some of Scream's most cloying tributes yet — the most egregious being Billy's Ghostface costume becoming an heirloom, and his knife being treated like a holy lightsaber — but it could've been the franchise's true restart.

But then, Spyglass Media fired Barrera when she dared denounce the atrocities that the Palestinians suffered in the Israel-Hamas War. Shortly after, Ortega quit due to "scheduling conflicts" (read: solidarity). In response to the unceremonious exits of its best stars since the original trio of Sidney, Gale and Dewey, Nowhere was this made more evident than in Spyglass patching things up with Campbell to put Sidney back in the lead, getting original and longtime Scream writer Kevin Williamson to direct Scream 7, and now, bringing back Lillard and Foley. Courtney Cox and Skeet Ulrich are also expected to return as Gale and Billy, respectively.

Even momentarily ignoring the messy politics and obvious injustices behind these casting decisions and firings,Just when it was about to finally break free from the past, the seventh film figuratively and quite literally stabbed the new generation in the back after half-heartedly promising to pass them the torch. It then went back to its real priority: putting the original film and the old generation on a perpetual pedestal.

I concede that Scream didn't age perfectly. These meta-films aren't as clever as they were some 30 years ago, nor are they that gory or scary to begin with. Their sense of ironic above-it-all detachment quickly gets tiresome, especially now that this is something almost every "witty" film indulges in. That said, Not too long ago, they were the gold standard for what intelligent, crowd-pleasing horror can and should be. What's more, even the weakest entry still had salient social commentary. But now, they're just insufferable and self-congratulatory fanfilms about themselves. But according to the Scream films, Ghostface's rampage and Sidney's never-ending fight aren't mere scary stories: they're a generational saga that must be retold time and time again.

Even as far back as Scream 3, but especially in the post-Craven era, Scream was so convinced of its apparently undying real-world legacy. While these films are undeniably groundbreaking game-changers whose influence can still be felt today, anecdotally speaking, New styles of horror and metafiction have long surpassed what Scream did, and yet it refuses to acknowledge this or even try to get on with the times. Despite being a horror franchise, Scream now has more in common with the latest and most tiresome iterations of Ghostbusters and Star Wars than it does with new horror series like The Conjuring or Terrifier.

To add insult to injury, Scream's insistence on having an internal mythology that constantly references previous entries was already outdone by the Saw series. In its own twisted ways, Saw honestly questions Jigsaw's legacy and its characters, while recontextualizing itself with each new sequel. Meanwhile, Scream is so certain of its pop culture immortality that its characters, world and story will always repeat what happened in 1996. Ghostface will always "remake" the Woodsboro killings and deliver a fanatical monologue at the climax. Sidney will always fight Ghostface. Gale will always regress to being a smarmy and unethical tabloid reporter. And last but not the least, some cinephile will always enumerate a new set of rules.

The loss of the Carpenters plus the return of Sidney, Stu and Roman all but confirmed my worst fears for Scream 7, and killed what little hope I had for the series as a whole. Not only has Scream completely abandoned its original purpose of satirizing the horror genre and the adjacent social trends it inadvertently inspires, but it now has no intention of ever leaving its nostalgic comfort zones. This, despite Scream VI showing how this could've been done.

All Scream films are now available to watch and own physically and digitally.