--- title: "Scream 3: the reviews" canonical: "https://film.one/film/scream-3/reviews" title_page: "https://film.one/film/scream-3" critics_score: 56 critics_reviews: 15 licence: "© Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL." --- # Scream 3 (2000): what the critics said Critics' score 56 from 15 reviews: 6 positive, 3 mixed, 6 negative. The reviews split almost down the middle, and a score in the mid-fifties reflects an argument rather than a shrug. Where most critics agree is on the humour: the in-jokes, the Hollywood film-set satire and the cameos are the elements singled out most often, and even the harsher notices grant it a few sharp gags. The cast draws steady approval, with Radio Times picking out Posey and Fisher and Roger Ebert praising Neve Campbell’s screen presence. The reservations cluster on the horror. Several critics find the jolts mechanical, the plot over-stuffed and the sense of danger absent; Time Out calls it a poor copy of New Nightmare, and The AV Club sees Craven going through the motions. Sight and Sound finds the killer’s reveal weak. The spread is wide, from the Los Angeles Times, which finds it scary and amusing, to Paste, which calls it a mess. Film Stories, writing much later, argues the film has been misjudged. ## Los Angeles Times — Kevin Thomas Fi1m's normalised score 90/100 (inferred from the text). 4 February 2000. Scream 3 brings a blood-drenched, bravura conclusion to the trilogy with its smart, sharp edge intact; it is genuinely scary and highly amusing, regaining the edge lost in the previous installment. [Read the review](https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2000-feb-04-ca-60873-story.html) ## Screen Daily Fi1m's normalised score 90/100 (inferred from the text). 7 February 2000. A devilishly clever, supremely entertaining thrill ride, funnier and more intriguingly plotted than previous entries, with smart in-jokes and expertly staged setpieces. [Read the review](https://www.screendaily.com/scream-3/401291.article) ## The Guardian — Andrew Pulver Fi1m's normalised score 70/100 (inferred from the text). 28 April 2000. The critic praises the film's logical self-referential structure set on a Hollywood film set and its smart-alecky dialogue that reproduces the series' style. It appreciates the movie-industry satire and Hollywood references while hoping the trilogy ends there. [Read the review](https://www.theguardian.com/film/News_Story/Critic_Review/Guardian_review/0,,214814,00.html) ## The New York Times — Elvis Mitchell Rating NYT Critic’s Pick. 4 February 2000. The film is funny and brisk with enough good lines to make the comedy more satisfying than the routine jolts; it functions as much as a personality show as a slasher film. [Read the review](https://www.nytimes.com/2000/02/04/movies/film-review-the-ultimate-scream-still-mad-still-slashing.html) ## Variety Fi1m's normalised score 70/100 (inferred from the text). 7 February 2000. Hyped as the final chapter, Scream 3 is a crafty and well-crafted wrap-up that brings a satisfying sense of closure to the franchise through its witty handling of the series' conventions. [Read the review](https://variety.com/2000/film/reviews/scream-3-1200460718/) ## Empire — Clark Collis Fi1m's normalised score 65/100 (inferred from the text). 1 January 2000. The film delivers satisfying comedic schlock horror with energy and strong cameos, but the premise is starting to wear thin as the trilogy concludes. [Read the review](https://www.empireonline.com/movies/reviews/scream-3-review/) ## Radio Times — Josh Winning Rating 3/5. Wraps up the trilogy with just enough style to satisfy fans, though the script lacks bite and grows goofier; charm in campy elements and strong performances from Posey and Fisher. [Read the review](https://www.radiotimes.com/movie-guide/b-vq28kd/scream-3/) ## Total Film Fi1m's normalised score 55/100 (inferred from the text). 28 April 2000. Scream 3 is a workmanlike slasher that lacks the intensity and thrills of the first two entries, though it maintains the series' irony and self-referential humor. [Read the review](https://www.gamesradar.com/scream-3-review/) ## Evening Standard Fi1m's normalised score 40/100 (inferred from the text). 10 April 2012. The film offers post-modern horror with in-jokes and meta elements but feels past its prime, with formulaic murders only intermittently relieved by sharp gags. [Read the review](https://www.standard.co.uk/culture/film/scream-3-7433850.html) ## RogerEbert.com — Roger Ebert Fi1m's normalised score 30/100 (inferred from the text). 4 February 2000. The critic finds the characters thin and the film a lite version of self-aware horror, expressing relief that the series has ended. He notes some fun in cameos and praises Neve Campbell's screen presence. [Read the review](https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/scream-3-2000) ## Sight and Sound — Kim Newman Fi1m's normalised score 30/100 (inferred from the text). The critic finds Scream 3 disappointing and not ruthless enough, with a weak killer reveal and stretched visual imagination, though it has some fun in-references and good bickering between characters. [Read the review](http://old.bfi.org.uk/sightandsound/review/491) ## The AV Club — Keith Phipps Fi1m's normalised score 30/100 (inferred from the text). 4 February 2000. The critic finds Scream 3 arbitrary and clumsily executed without the original's ingenuity or the second film's tense set pieces. Craven appears to be going through the motions for a paycheck, with recycled ideas and little craftsmanship on display. [Read the review](https://www.avclub.com/scream-3-1798192285) ## Time Out — NF Fi1m's normalised score 30/100 (inferred from the text). The film is tiresomely over-plotted with no real jeopardy, mechanical jolts, though some good performances; a poor carbon copy of New Nightmare. [Read the review](https://www.timeout.com/movies/scream-3) ## Film Stories — A J Black Fi1m's normalised score 70/100 (inferred from the text). 3 March 2025. The critic argues that Scream 3 has been misjudged and works well as a knowing subversion of trilogy conventions and Hollywood excess, particularly its commentary on toxic Hollywood figures. [Read the review](https://filmstories.co.uk/features/scream-3-an-underrated-post-modern-deconstruction-of-the-horror-film/) ## Paste — Jim Vorel Fi1m's normalised score 30/100 (inferred from the text). 11 February 2021. The film is an utter mess, hampered by production chaos, a weak script from a new writer, and diminished returns on its meta elements. It sidelines core characters like Sidney and leans on contrived plotting and continuity issues that undermine the franchise's clever origins. [Read the review](https://www.pastemagazine.com/movies/scream/scream-3-2000-problems-review-neve-campbell-kevin-williamson) --- © Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL. Our review: https://film.one/film/scream-3.md