Just intense enough to provide a much-needed diversion, just lightweight enough to make you forget about it soon after it’s over. It’s not exactly “good,” per se, but it does what it sets out to do in terms of putting us on edge, which makes it … successful?

This film is so real. It treats its characters with so much care and sensitivity.

One of the worst ways to make a cult movie is to set out to make a cult movie.

One of the film's great tricks is that, for a time, you think it will go down a rabbit hole of unrealistic glorification.

Scream, also known as 'The Outing', is the only film where I've seen pretty much every review pan it. I decide to check it out of curiosity. Oh the horror! The horror when the cameraman slowly pans over to a lantern for the third time! The shock when a man wakes up to find...A DOOR OPENING SLOWLY!'Scream' is so bad, yet oddly enjoyable in my opinion, it deserves at least a remake. If that happens maybe all the mistakes could be corrected.Anyway the plot sees a bunch of rafters sailing down the Rio Grande river. Only they get lost along the way. They then decide to camp in a nearby deserted town (which looks like a set from Blazing Saddles). However when night falls they start to get killed off one by one by an unseen killer.The premise itself is interesting so what can go wrong? Everything. Nothing is explained. It's never explained whether the rafters are family or friends or work colleagues. This defeats any kind of characterisation, making it difficult to care for the victims. Veteran actor Woody Strode enters the film as a sailor (who looks more like a 1940's noir Detective! lol)called Charlie. His performance is the most interesting and still has bad dialogue. The cast are mainly lead by Pepper Martin (the guy who beats up Clark Kent in the diner in Superman 2). Why give somebody with such little experience in acting the lead? Add to that the lighting is bloody awful. There is no gore and you can tell that there are no stunt doubles. This is because you can blatantly tell when the actors are doing the stunts! A scene that I find unintentionally hilarious is when a woman runs across town at night and obviously JUMPS ACROSS THE WIRE-TRAP THE CHARACTERS SET MOMENTS BEFORE!! Lol. The titles theme is god-awful. It sounds like it came from Starsky & Hutch.The opening and ending sequences have hardly any links to the main plot at all. I only had a rough idea but what they consist of is a mantel piece, clock, three porcelain figures. The opening ends with the Butcher having decapitated the Baker and the Candlestick Maker. Then when Charlie shoots the killer the Butcher is decapitated too!!! Dumb dumb Dumb! There's also a painting of who the killer is at the very end. When the end credits rolled I had become so excited I fell off my seat.My advice...Stick to Wes, Neve, Courtney and David.

I have to agree with the other reviews. And I LIKE bad horror. I especially get a kick out of bad 70's and 80's horror. I will take The Mutilator, Slaughterhouse Rock, or Don't Go In the House any day! Ever seen Inn of the Damned? Yeah, it's a piece of dung, but nowhere near as bad as this. This movie has no plot, little dialogue, awful pacing, just boring as hell. The whole movie is like a power-outage, all dark and lanterns, and NOT scary. I don't need things spoon-fed to me, but the movie does not explain anything! Where did any of the characters come from? Where is this set? Why is everyone a useless wuss... oh wait, I guess that applies to most horror. But seriously, I was eagerly awaiting all these folks to die just so it would be over. One of the most infuriatingly inane movies I have ever seen. Don't do it.

A group of rafters is terrorized by a mysterious killer in a small Western ghost town.As soon as they arrive and night falls the murders begin.Then a horseback-riding ghostly stranger comes into town lead by a black dog.Painfully slow,almost lethargic slasher flick with solid cast and passable photography.The music is quite atmospheric during the night scenes,but there are so many flaws in "Scream" that's it's hard to enjoy it:paper-thin characters that resemble zombies in coma,agonizingly slow pacing,amateurish editing,incompetent direction and bloodless death scenes.Should I go on?No logic.No suspense.No tension.Just boredom and the lack of explanation in the ending.Who was the killer?We will never know.4 out of 10.A bit better than "Savage Water",but not much.

Long before Wes Craven used the title "Scream" to launch his successful horror trilogy, little-known director Byron Quisenberry made this "Scream". An inept, boring, badly acted and totally unconvincing slasher movie that many deem to be the worst of its type. Indeed, this film makes the whole Friday the 13th series look like a work of genius.You know with these movies that the plot is going to be unoriginal, but the film makers usually have enough about them to wring out some shocks. Yes, The Burning is a bad film but it occasionally makes you jump. Just Before Dawn isn't anything special, but it is punctuated by the odd jolt here and there. Amazingly, Scream manages to miss every single opportunity for a shock. It takes an overused but reliable formula, and proceeds to muck-up the potential for terror in every conceivable way. Anyone studying how not to make a film might find this an ideal guide.Heading the cast is Pepper Martin (he was the guy in Superman II who beat up the weakened Clark Kent in a diner, only to be beaten up in return by the rejuvenated Superman at the end of the film). It's a good indication of how unambitious this film is that someone who had such a miniscule role in Superman II can be entrusted with the leading man label here. Woody Strode is also in the film, but his character is undone by bizarre scripting.Martin and his fellow vacationers are rafting down the Rio Grande when they pull in for the night at an isolated ghost town. One by one they are picked off by a lurking psychopath. They try various things, like setting traps, but the killer seems to evade them every time. A strange stagecoach driver turns up and starts mumbling on about an old sea captain that got the town up-and-running many years earlier. By the end, it looks as if the violent ghost of the old sea captain may be the killer (it's not clear if this is so, as the ending is dreadfully muddled).It's hard to imagine how bad Scream is without experiencing it for yourself. The plot could be made serviceable. Some of the cast members are well-known. Even if the film isn't very good, it should have enough mileage to be tolerably bad. But no... this film is something beyond bad. It reaches such depths that you begin to think that everyone involved must be trying deliberately to make the worst film possible. It feels almost as if Quisenberry's intention is to win the worst film of all-time contest. The end result is a truly awful horror movie and, therefore, one of the most irresistible films that a collector of bad films could ever hope to find.