To start off this post, I think the original Halloween is a classic film but has often been held higher in regard than it has any right to be. Sure the cinematography, the score, and the powerhouse performance by Donald Pleasence are wonderful and add to the movie so well, it's just without those things, it is a generic slasher. That and I prefer the Friday the 13th franchise. Also I wouldn't even put Halloween in the top half of John Carpenter films because most of the others are so much better, such as The Thing, Escape From New York, Assault on Precinct 13, Prince of Darkness, Big Trouble in Little China, They Live, In The Mouth of Madness, and Escape From LA. I probably like The Fog slightly more than Halloween due to the atmosphere of that film being well done but I'm getting way off topic. The Halloween franchise, as we all know, was never really meant to continue with the story of the shape that we call Michael Myers but instead turn into a anthology series, as evidence shows with the existence of Halloween III: Season of the Witch (which I do like a lot) but that plan never came to be. Part of that might have been due to the fact that if that were the case, the studios should have not have made Halloween 2 a direct sequel to the first. But studios love their money and the first one made a lot of it, along with spawning the glutton of slasher films in the early 80's, so that one was made. As for that movie, I think it's fine. Not really noteworthy aside from it being the film debut of Dana Carvey and the stupid plot twist that is the reason I'm covering this: the fact that Michael and Laurie are brother and sister. The stupid plot elements/twists exist in future sequels and when I was thinking about it, a lot of them were really, really dumb and this is coming from the guy who just admitted he liked the Friday the 13th franchise a lot more, which had zombie Jason, telekinetic girl, slug creature and going to space. I thought I'd cover three of the things in the Halloween series that really made me go, "This is just fucking stupid." Those being the previously mentioned brother-sister thing, The Man in Black/Cult of Thorn from Halloween 6, and the beginning of Halloween: Resurrection AKA why that movie even happens after how the previous movie ended. I also thought about the ending of Halloween 4 which (SPOILERS but this whole post will have spoilers so I have warned thee!) ends with Jamie killing her foster mother in a way similar to how Michael killed his sister as a kid. Why that is not here is because for the most part, I think that it would have been a cool setup for sequels although there is that it is ripping off the ending of Friday the 13th part 5 (another movie that I shouldn't like but I do, mainly in the same way I like Troll 2 and Showgirls).
Halloween 2, oh how much of a betrayal you are in terms of continuity. One thing that I don't like about it too is how Doctor Loomis changes his personality almost immediately from the end of the first one, which had him with the look of "I knew this would happen" which does follow with how he saw Michael as being pure evil and thus something that probably could not be killed by normal means. That was changed to "Holy shit! This just happened." and Loomis becomes way too panicky and paranoid to the point where he accidentally kills a kid. But onto that twist. Throughout the film, Laurie has flashbacks which has her remembering how her mom told her that she was adopted but the last one that settles things is that she actually met Michael at Smiths Grove as a kid, which kind of throws the idea that she had no idea who Michael was aside from the story of that first murder out the window along with why was she there in the first place. The worst part was how the twist is revealed in the first place, when Loomis is being taken back to Smiths Grove due to Michael's escape and his investigation. He is with his colleague Marion Chambers, who was with him during Michael's escape, and she is the one who reveals the fact that Michael and Laurie are related. The worst thing about this was that how did Loomis not know this already? Loomis first met Michael fifteen years prior, around the time of Judith Myers' death, as was pointed out in the first film where Loomis explained that he had spent that time trying to communicate with him followed by trying to keep him locked away. Chambers explained that Michael's parents died two years AFTER he was committed to Smiths Grove, which left Laurie orphaned and to be adopted by the Strode family. Laurie was already born during the time of the first murder as well which leaves the question of where she was in the time frame but that will deal with the Cult of Thorn plot line so I'll cover that then. So as to why Loomis had no idea about that connection does make him seem really incompetent as a doctor due to how simple that information was. Sure, Chambers explained that the records of Laurie being Michael's sister were destroyed for reasons but that leaves the question still of who authorized that meeting between Laurie and Michael from the flashback. It could be assumed that it was 7-8 years before the events of the first movie which makes the whole Loomis didn't know thing all the more stupid. Unless it was authorized by Dr . Wynn which again would go into the Cult of Thorn plot. But seriously, this twist was really stupid. Also no matter if you hate the Rob Zombie remake and its sequel, they at least tried to make this twist work better and for the most part, it makes a little more sense but not enough.
Now we get to what most people consider to be one of the worst films in the series, Halloween 6: The Curse of Michael Myers, infamous for the whole Thorn curse being the reason why Michael is such an invincible killing machine. And to be honest, it probably is one of the worst even with the producer's cut but I don't think that the Thorn curse is the main reason why it sucks. That doesn't mean it's not a stupid plot line but looking up some information regarding this film, I think that maybe this movie could have worked since from reading some of the original script, it actually isn't half bad, especially since it could be considered fan fiction due to writer Daniel Farrands having done a lot of work into putting the plot together, expanding on the Thorn symbols' brief appearance in the 5th entry. Yet the script was re written 11 times before the final version so I'll have to read some more of it to see what changes were made and for what reasons. So the whole Thorn curse thing is that its a Druid symbol that represents a demon who spreads destruction, and a child is chosen to bear the curse and is meant to sacrifice the next of kin in his tribe on Samhain. This is how the movie explains it from what I remember and it isn't that bad of an explanation for the supernatural elements of Michael Myers although sometimes it's better not to explain things. There is also the Man in Black, a mysterious figure that also first appears in the 5th film who in the end of that helps Michael escape police custody and as revealed in this film is part of the Cult of Thorn that kidnapped Jamie and impregnated her intending the child to become the next sacrifice. This is where the real problems come in with this plot line. In the movie, they bring back Tommy Doyle, one of the kids that Laurie babysat in the first film and he is staying with an odd lady named Mrs. Blankenship, who is revealed that she was babysitting Michael the night he killed his sister. I don't remember if it was mentioned if she was watching Laurie as well but I am not sure. Maybe some fan theory could explain that but it also mean that either Mrs. Blankenship is a terrible babysitter or that she was aware of the Thorn curse, since she tells the main characters that Danny hears the voice of the Man in Black just like Michael did all those years ago. The cult itself seems rather dumb too to think that they can control Michael which does end up backfiring on them in the end in the theatrical ending mainly (with the cult being killed off really brutally). I thought I had more nitpicks at this but I think there are many people who have done a good job at doing the subject justice and maybe I'll do a follow up on this one at another time.
Halloween Resurrection is the worst film in the franchise. No doubt about it. It is a rather pointless film especially considering how the previous film, Halloween H2O, ended with Laurie decapitating her brother. And they retconned that immediately in the sequel by saying that Michael disarmed a paramedic and had him take his place so Michael could leave the scene of the crime, meaning Laurie killed the wrong person. The reasoning behind his escape is ridiculous since why would Michael need to do that? And sure, the paramedic's windpipe was broken so he couldn't speak but in the end of that film, if that were the case, why didn't the paramedic just take the mask off? I don't think Michael thought that far ahead to think to make the mask stick to the guy's face. There is also the fact that how did no on notice Michael out in the open considering that he should be covered in severe burns from the events of Halloween 2. I don't know if I should forgive the fact that he should be blind as well due to his eyes being shot out which I think people would have taken notice to as well. The previous sequels also didn't take that into consideration (Halloween 5 had that moment with Jamie trying to communicate with him which has Michael taking off his mask to reveal his eyes) but H2O threw out that continuity so whatever. Another point that has to be made is that wouldn't this have given him the perfect opportunity to kill Laurie due to him being is disguise and not having to wait all the time that passes (which was apparently 3 years) and I can forgive Michael for not looking for Laurie for the 20 years prior to H2O but Resurrection just really seems all the more pointless because of it. And with Laurie being killed off right away in that one, the rest of the movie doesn't need to happen either since what is the real point now that he killed his sister?
So what is the verdict? Which Halloween plot twist/element is the worst of them all? That's easy, it's Halloween 2's brother-sister twist. Sure the thorn curse is dumb for a lot more reasons for many people but at least the writer thought that through and took some of the hinted elements to make something out of it, although it did fail (mostly due to Joe Chappelle rewriting the ending on set and changing a lot of the plot around) yet it had some things to cling onto unlike the twist in 2 which seemed like an afterthought. Resurrection is probably a worse betrayal but the movie itself is rather pointless and should be erased from the minds of everyone who has seen it. Hopefully this doesn't turn out to be a controversial post since this was just something I thought of that would be fun to write. So to sign off, wow was the Halloween franchise really stupid.
No comments:
Post a Comment