Skip to main content

Halloween 2!!!!!!!! Sort of.

Yah, another bad one.

When the idea of remaking the first Halloween came about, I wasn't really offended like some of the other fanboys. I wanted to give Rob Zombie the benefit of the doubt. I mean, I really enjoyed The Devil's Rejects and thought he could bring that same brutal element to the Halloween franchise, which was itself dying a painful death (his previous faceoffs in the main series was against Tyra Banks and Busta Rhymes... I rest my case).

Anyhow, that movie came out and frankly, I was appalled. It was just not a Halloween movie nor did it seem like Michael Myers. I understand it's a re-imagining from Zombie's perspective, but still if that's the case, then it was just a bad movie in general, let alone a Halloween movie. Well, that was all 2 years ago.

Like all slasher movies, it's not complete without a/some sequel(s). This year, we were "treated" to Halloween 2 also directed by Zombie. Again, being the fool that I am, I wanted to give him the benefit of the doubt. While, yes, I hated the first one, the trailers for this one made it look like things were on the right track. It seemed like it was becoming its own animal, distinct from the original Halloween franchise.

So having watched it now, it indeed accomplished that. It came into its own. This would be its blessing, however, ultimately it's also its curse.

Although this movie is Halloween 2, it isn't a remake of the original Halloween 2 but rather a new sequel to the series. The movie takes place 2 years after the first, with our main hero Laurie coping with life after the tragedies that took place years prior. She's doing her best to avoid being all emo about what happened and moving on with her life, now that her homicidal brother, Michael, is dead. Key thing to note, they never found his body... so how the fuck do they know he's dead?! Well, it's not long before Michael shows up in town blood thirsty and all. And now he sees visions too. Visions of his mother and a horse (?!?!), who beckon him to kill, kill and kill.

You know, besides the names of the characters and a killer sporting a William Shatner mask, this movie in no way resembles a Halloween movie. Had they left the franchise alone and let this be its own completely original movie/series, I think I would have been fine with it. He tries to add a lot of artistic elements to the movie and it just seems to fall flat. At times, it's more like an abstract, indie horror film rather than a mainstream slasher flick that you'd associate with Halloween.

Instead, its association with Halloween is the main crux of my disdain for the movie. This was a piece of trash! Halloween movie this was not!!! My main problem is how Zombie took three of the most iconic characters in horror movie history (Laurie, Dr. Loomis, and Myers) and completely destroyed who they were. With a remake, you'd think that you'd treat the characters with a degree of respect to the original, but he doesn't. Laurie, who in the original movie, was the quintessential female hero, is an unsympathetic brat in this movie who cries a lot and wants to get drunk. Seriously? Why should we care if she lives or dies, because she doesn't seem to. The original Dr. Loomis was an interesting character, the only real bridge between reality and madness for his infamous patient, Michael. He was always the character that you'd feel safe to have around, only because it seemed like he was the only one capable of calming the beast. Zombie manages to twist his character into some sort of fame-hungry, money-chasing, prima donna celebrity, instead of the good doctor like we knew he was. Shit. It's bad, but I wanted him to die! And I shouldn't have to feel that way, especially not for good ol' Dr. Loomis.

And then there's Michael. Okay, I'm going to try not to swear because it could turn into a torrent of havoc. Instead I'll use initials for swear words and you can guess what I'm trying to say. Basically Zombie B.F.'s Michael's character into oblivion. This is no longer the Michael that we knew from the previous series or even from the previous movie. I don't know what the F happened or what he was trying to do, but Michael got F'd. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that if you humanize a monster, it's no longer a monster. Whenever we see things from his perspective, we see not only monster him, but we also see child him. Ughh... And oh yeah, spoiler alert.......... we get to see his face at the end, and he talks?!?!!?!?!?!?!???!?!!??!?!!? F YOU ROB ZOMBIE!!!! WHAT THE FLYING F WERE YOU THINKING?!?! HOW THE HELL DID YA THINK THIS WAS A GOOD IDEA!?!?!?! YOU ARE ONE CRAZY A.F.M.F.!!

Breathe Jeff. Pillows. Sheep. Fluffy things. I am again in my happy place. Moving on then.

There were a few good things in the movie though. This is the second movie I've seen this month with geek favourite Brad Dourif and he does a pretty good job as the Sheriff of Haddonfield. Also good was Danielle Harris who was wounded but didn't die in the first movie. She reprises her role as Laurie's best friend Annie, and comes across as the only sympathetic character in the whole movie.

Also, the violence is damned brutal in this movie. The kills aren't exactly creative, but it's made up for in it's brutality. As I was watching the movie, I noticed a general pattern. Every time Michael went in for a kill, what ever action he needed to do, you had to add a plus 2 to 3 times on top of that action.

A few examples. Stomping a guy's face in to kill him, maybe 3 times. Plus 3. Make that 6 times. Smashing a girl's face into a mirror to kill her. It'd take maybe 2 times, given his strength and her brittleness. Plus 2. Make that 4 times. Stabbing a nurse through the back, it'd take maybe 4 times. Plus a billion. Make that a billion and 4 times. You get the point.

So really, there's no reason to watch this movie. It's an abomination to the series. I hope John Carpenter never watches this. That's it for now. Later geeks!



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

R.I.P. Evan Tanner

The body of the professional fighter and former UFC champion, Evan Tanner, 37, was found in the Palo Verde mountain area of California on September 8th, 2008. He was found a few miles away from his campsite on foot, with no water, where the temperatures were around 110 degrees fahrenheit. The coroner's report listed the cause of death as from heat exposure.

Tanner left Oceanside, California on September 2nd. On September 4th, he sent a text message to a friend telling him that his motorcycle was out of gas, that he was out of water, and if his friend didn't hear from him the next day, to call the authorities. Unfortunately, Evan never returned home.

I'm not the hugest MMA fan, I consider myself a casual fan, and a n00b at best. I was listening to Dave Meltzer and Bryan Alvarez of the Wrestling Observer Radio, and the story of Tanner's life sounded intriguing.

As fantastic as it sounds, Tanner ventured into the deserts in search of treasure and adventure. I kid you …

DTV Madness: Jack Brooks - M.S. and Gingerdead Man 2

Okay, honestly, I think this will be the last DTV post for a while. One man can only take so much shit. I'm only human, I have feelings too. These two movies pushed my limit. I'm going to be in DTV-detox for the next month or so.

Jack Brooks: Monster Slayer

I thought that with a title like this, it couldn't fail. I thought that with a poster like they had, it couldn't fail. Then I realized something... I failed. I failed in thinking that this movie had any hope.

I was expecting some fun horror, mixed with comedy in sort of a Buffy the Vampire Slayer kind of fashion with a bumbling hero and smart quips. I mean, with a title like Jack Brooks: Monster Slayer, was I wrong in expecting a variety of monsters get slayed as the title suggests?

It didn't help much that the monsters looked uber cheesy. They looked like something right out of a Power Rangers episode. But to their credit, at least they stuck with practical make-up and effects rather than CG.

The movie its…

The Science of God

Not too long ago, two of my friends had posted their thoughts on evolution and creationism. Both friends shared similar sentiments on the topic (you can view Skylar's here and Keith's here). Coincidence or not, shortly before they made their postings, I purchased a book called The Science of God by Dr. Gerald Schroeder, which was based on the same topic. Unfortunately, at the time of my friend's postings, I had not finished the book, but now I have.

In The Science of God, Schroeder attempts to debunk the dichotomy that exists between science/evolution and creationism. He tries to show that there can exist a duality between the two and that discoveries in science actually prove the story of creation in the bible.

The book can be roughly divided into three categories that being the concepts of time, the second with the biology of evolution, and lastly the concept of free will.

In describing time, he focuses on the 6 days that are explained in the beginning of Genesis. Duri…