Is the universal love for Stu overblown?

I think it's more than fair to say that Stu is the fan favorite accomplice killer by a long shot and maybe the favorite killer period according to the fan consensus.

I love Stu. But I do think him being a part of the original gives him an advantage in being so hyped by the community. I also think people love the character because of how much they love the actor. But in reality, Stu is objectively the least developed character in Scream, at least among those part of the core cast. Billy is the handsome bad boy with a broken family looking to get laid, Tatum is the outgoing, cheerleading, girls-girl, loyal best friend who is highly protective, Randy is the nerdy movie buff and voice of the audience who has a major crush on Sidney and works at the video store (lol), and Stu is Tatum's boyfriend who used to date Casey. I guess he's also Billy's best friend? But that's never portrayed in anyway whatsoever until the reveal.

His function in the film is to be comic relief until his reveal. He has no arc, no individual A plot and he doesn't do anything prior to reveal that propels the story forward (accept maybe hosting the party if you want to argue that).

However, I'm also not saying there's anything wrong with that. It makes perfect sense that one killer is a main character with rich backstory and direct access and involvement in the protagonist's life and another shows up occasionally to be present reminding you he's there until he's revealed to be in on the murders. I'm not saying a lack of backstory, individual plot, or arc for the secondary villain is necessarily a bad thing - especially an arc. All villains in Scream are static charaxters and never evolve. But in Stu's case, I do think his role is elevated by the performance of the actor vs the part itself being anything notable.

Compare Stu to Mickey narratively. Prior to reveal, Mickey has a much stronger function in the narrative. In fact, he's as close to Sidney as Billy was in the first. Most of his scenes involve him doing something that drives the story forward or foreshadows his involvement as a killer. He's continually psychologically manipulating Sidney by casting doubt about Derek leading her to isolate herself and distrust people trying to protect her, he usually has the video camera in his hand that is later theorized by Gale. His reveal results in a huge pay off from his actions where Derek dies as Sidney struggles to untie Derek because Mickey got inside her head.

In theory, the plot of Scream 2 is highly reliant on Mickey's ability to manipulate Sidney along the way, but in Scream the movie does not change in any notable way if Billy had simply chosen a different accomplice because he has not plotndriven funtion unmasked. The motive, end goal, and all other main characters would have the same function and the end result would essentially be the exact same.

I think it's fair to say, most of us love the character because of who plays him and how well he plays him, not because the character is particularly rich, interesting, or critical to the story.

I know how strong the love for Stu is and how much I am opening myself to attacks by Stu fans. But I encourage you to be objective and respectful if you disagree and simply share your thoughts in a meaningful way. It's also perfectly valid to say, "yep, he's my favorite and it's 100% because of who plays him."