Let’s not waste time. Most people care only if “Scream 4” is worth seeing and nothing else.

Well, it’s way better than the third installment and almost as good as the first two, which were amazing.

It’s also one of the more fun horror films in my recent memory. If you care to know why, you can read on.

It’s been eleven years since “Scream 3” was released, and in the past decade, horror films have been transformed into movies like “Saw” and “Paranormal Activity.”

“Scream 4” reunites the trilogy’s survivors: Sydney Prescott (Neve Campbell), the tough reporter Gail Weathers (Courtney Cox) and deputy-turned-sheriff Dewey Riley (David Arquette).

Sydney returns to her home of Woodsboro on the last stop of her book tour.

When she does, a new Ghostface killer begins stalking and killing off a whole new generation of horror movie buffs that abide by a whole new set of horror movie rules that have taken over the genre since the last “Scream” entry.

It would almost be easier to name who isn’t in “Scream 4,” but the newcomers include Emma Roberts, Hayden Panettiere, Marley Shelton, Rory Culkin, Erik Knudsen, Nico Tortorella, Adam Brody, Anthony Anderson, Kristen Bell and Anna Paquin.

I did see “Scream 4” at the midnight show with a packed house, which is an odd contrast to the film’s low box office numbers opening weekend.

Midnight shows might be detrimental to reviewing a film, because the atmosphere and energy is so intoxicating that even if the film sucks, you still have a good time at the theater. It’s fun to share in so many people’s excitement for the exact same thing in one room.

Seeing “Scream 4” a few weeks after its release on a Wednesday afternoon won’t be as fun as seeing it at the premiere like I did.

But the movie itself is still a good one. This could have been a dull cash-in with nothing interesting to say.

That’s what the third one, although fun, felt like.

I never found the “Scream” movies scary. Suspenseful, but not scary.

There’s nothing intrinsically horrifying about watching a guy jump out of the corner accompanied by a loud music sting.

If you want a truly scary movie, go see “Insidious,” which is having a good run at the box office.

But what makes the “Scream” movies, including this one, so enduring are their memorable characters and satirical treatment of other horror films.

Where “Scream” mocked horror films and “Scream 2” mocked sequels, “Scream 4” mocks remakes and just the last year of cinema in general. That’s where it succeeds the most.

I liked that it set up a new set of rules for the characters. The commentary on the last decade in movies is one of the film’s strongest aspects, and I wish they had focused just a little bit more on that.

“Scream 4” also feels modern for the audience, much like the original did in 1996. There are references to Facebook, the Internet and webcams, the latter of which is integrated cleverly well with one of the kills.

I also like the characters that have survived this far in the franchise. My favorite is Courtney Cox’s Gail Weathers, the cutthroat reporter. Having the lives of characters you care about jeopardized adds another level of suspense.

The new characters are interesting in that they mirror some of the characters from the original, which is a self-referential spoof of the film’s disdain for horror remakes. The best of the newcomers is Hayden Panettiere’s Kirby, the cool best friend of Jill (Roberts).

Panettiere is involved in a scene that almost remakes parts of the famous Drew Barrymore scene from “Scream,” which made me applaud, because it was a great reference. And the opening involving Anna Paquin and Kristen Bell is awesome.

Overall, I liked “Scream 4” a lot. I haven’t gone to the movies much this year, so this is one of the better ones I’ve seen so far. It’s funny, unpredictable and an honor to welcome Ghostface back one more time.

However, I don’t want to see another “Scream” movie for a very long time, or probably ever again.

The long absence of the franchise has given this fourth film the ability to mock what’s happened in the past decade. I care about this franchise too much to watch it go stale…again.

Perhaps director Wes Craven and writer Kevin Williamson should just make a movie every decade to provide smart-ass insight on the deteriorating horror genre.