The seeming resurrection of characters killed off in Scary Movie for its sequel, Scary Movie 2, is largely attributable to comedic license and disregard for narrative continuity in pursuit of maximizing comedic impact. The film operates within a meta-narrative framework where breaking the fourth wall and ignoring established rules are central to its comedic style.
The Slapstick Resurrection: Abandoning Logic for Laughs
Scary Movie 2, much like its predecessor, satirizes the horror genre, but with an increased emphasis on absurdist humor and slapstick. This shift necessitates a willingness to sacrifice logical plot development for the sake of a joke. The writers and directors, the Wayans brothers, clearly prioritized comedic timing and shock value over maintaining strict adherence to the events of the first film. Characters like Shorty Meeks, Brenda Meeks, and Ray Wilkins, all ostensibly deceased by the end of Scary Movie, reappear without any in-universe explanation or acknowledgement of their previous deaths. This blatant disregard for continuity is not a plot hole; it’s a deliberate comedic choice.
The film actively mocks horror tropes, including the “final girl” and the expected mortality rate of characters. By resurrecting seemingly dead characters, Scary Movie 2 highlights the artificiality of these tropes and underscores the fact that it is, above all else, a comedy. The deaths in the first film were never intended to be taken seriously; they were punchlines in a larger joke. Bringing the characters back simply allows for more jokes, with no need to justify their return. The absurdity is the point. To overthink it is to miss the humour.
The Meta-Narrative Shield: A Comedy First, A Story Second
The Scary Movie franchise, and Scary Movie 2 in particular, operate within a meta-narrative framework. The characters are aware of the horror tropes they inhabit, and the filmmakers are equally aware of the audience’s expectations. This allows the film to get away with narrative inconsistencies and illogical plot points. The resurrection of characters is simply another example of this meta-narrative at play. The film is winking at the audience, acknowledging that it’s not taking itself seriously and that the rules of storytelling are secondary to the pursuit of laughter.
Furthermore, the film’s opening sequence, a direct parody of The Exorcist, immediately establishes the tone of heightened absurdity. This sequence makes it clear that anything is possible within the film’s universe, including the resurrection of dead characters. From a narrative perspective, this provides a license to bend, break, and ultimately ignore the rules of conventional storytelling. The primary goal is to elicit a reaction, be it laughter, shock, or discomfort, and adhering to established narrative logic is deemed unnecessary in achieving that goal.
Character Continuity: Laughing in the Face of Consequences
Essentially, continuity is treated as optional in Scary Movie 2. The characters are more caricatures than fully developed individuals. Their purpose is to serve as comedic vehicles, and their past experiences, including their deaths, are largely irrelevant to their present-day antics. The actors themselves are often playing exaggerated versions of themselves, further blurring the lines between reality and fiction. This blurring makes it easier to accept the resurrection of characters, as they are not necessarily playing the same characters as they were in the first film. Instead, they are playing variations of those characters, altered to fit the comedic needs of the sequel.
This approach allows the filmmakers to recycle popular characters and comedic setups from the first film without having to worry about the logistical challenges of explaining their return. It also reinforces the film’s overall message of comedic nihilism, suggesting that nothing truly matters and that everything is ultimately disposable. The characters are simply tools to be used and discarded as needed, with no regard for their past or future.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
Here are some frequently asked questions to further clarify the situation:
Why didn’t they even try to explain it?
The lack of explanation is deliberate. An attempt to rationalize the resurrections would only draw attention to the absurdity and undermine the comedic effect. The film thrives on its willingness to ignore logic and embrace the ridiculous. To offer an explanation would be to admit that the resurrections are a problem, which they are not intended to be.
Does this mean the deaths in Scary Movie are meaningless?
In the context of the Scary Movie franchise, yes. The deaths are primarily played for comedic effect and are not treated as permanent or consequential. This is part of the film’s satire of horror tropes, which often rely on the shock value of death.
How does this affect the overall canon of the Scary Movie franchise?
The Scary Movie franchise has a loose and often contradictory canon. Each film largely operates independently of the others, with little regard for continuity or consistency. This allows the filmmakers to reinvent the characters and storylines as needed, without being constrained by the events of previous films.
Were there any characters who didn’t return despite dying in the first film?
While most of the prominent deceased characters returned, some minor characters who died in Scary Movie did not reappear in Scary Movie 2. This further reinforces the idea that the resurrections were selective and based on comedic potential rather than narrative necessity. The returning characters were those deemed most valuable to the sequel’s comedic aims.
Is Scary Movie 2 considered a good sequel because of this?
Critical reception of Scary Movie 2 is mixed. While some viewers appreciate its over-the-top humor and willingness to push boundaries, others find it to be less funny and more gratuitous than its predecessor. The disregard for continuity is often cited as a contributing factor to the film’s perceived decline in quality.
Did the Wayans brothers ever address this decision directly?
While specific interviews directly addressing every character’s return may be scarce, the Wayans brothers have consistently emphasized their focus on comedy and satire when discussing the Scary Movie franchise. They have stated that they prioritize making audiences laugh above all else, even if it means sacrificing narrative coherence.
Could they have used some kind of supernatural explanation?
They could have, but doing so would have changed the tone of the film. A supernatural explanation would have implied a degree of seriousness that the filmmakers were actively trying to avoid. The goal was to create a comedy that was unapologetically absurd and irreverent.
Does this mean anything can happen in a Scary Movie sequel?
Essentially, yes. The Scary Movie franchise has established a precedent for narrative flexibility, allowing for a wide range of possibilities in future installments. Anything that can generate a laugh is fair game, regardless of how illogical or improbable it may be.
How does Scary Movie 2 compare to other satirical horror films in its handling of continuity?
Scary Movie 2 is more extreme in its disregard for continuity than many other satirical horror films. While other films may occasionally bend the rules of storytelling for comedic effect, Scary Movie 2 actively breaks them. This is part of what distinguishes it from other films in the genre.
Is there any deeper meaning or symbolism behind the resurrections?
While it is possible to interpret the resurrections as a commentary on the disposability of characters in horror films, the primary intent is comedic. Any deeper meaning is likely unintentional or coincidental. The focus is on generating laughter, not on conveying complex themes.
What would have made Scary Movie 2 better regarding this issue?
Instead of ignoring the deaths, a brief, tongue-in-cheek acknowledgement – even a throwaway line suggesting they were clones or simply “dreaming” – might have satisfied some viewers without sacrificing the comedic tone. However, the Wayans’ chosen route clearly doubled down on the absurdity.
Will this narrative choice affect the legacy of the Scary Movie franchise?
The Scary Movie franchise is primarily remembered for its irreverent humor and its willingness to satirize popular culture. While the disregard for continuity may be a point of contention for some viewers, it is ultimately a defining characteristic of the franchise. The legacy will likely remain focused on its comedic contributions rather than its narrative flaws.