Sunday, September 25, 2011

Halloween II

(2009) **1/2

I actually gave this a half-star bump over its irksome predecessor. For one thing, I don't revere the original Halloween II like I do the first one, so Zombie's clumsy bootprints aren't tracking mud on one of my personal classics. And he does one or two things to which I must give a grudging respect.

As with the original, we start just after the events of the first movie, but Zombie decided to take the entire hospital experience and condense it into a brief dream sequence, cutting to Laurie Strode waking up in terror one year later. I wonder if there was an outcry at this, but for me it's one decision I kind of like. I mean, why not? Maybe the first thing you need to make a good remake is to have the courage to make it your own. I also thought (at first) that characterizing Laurie as an emotional wreck of a person a year after last Halloween was a bold move, too. Much better than the vapid, horny caricature of a teenager she was. There's even a nice touch of realism. Her family all dead, Laurie now lives with her friend Annie Brackett and her dad the sherriff. The scene I liked is when, despite how generous Annie has been, Laurie is a bitch to her. It makes sense.

There was another scene I liked in which some farmers discover Michael Myers out in their wheat field at night, realizing he's the guy who's been poaching their livestock (apparently for the bulk of a year). They go to beat him up and get dead for their trouble -- but Michael also mercilessly kills the woman in the group who had urged the men not to hurt the giant, scraggly homeless person who eats raw sheep. As with the killing of Danny Trejo's character in the last flick, Zombie does a good job showing that Michael's murderous tendencies just don't give a fuck.

That is the last nice thing I will say about this movie.

Unfortunately Rob Zombie's hillbilly lust that I griped about before has not been replaced in this movie but only slightly broadened. Laurie's descent into despair ultimately plays out in a glorified and lurid fashion, like watching an episode of the Jerry Springer show. Dr. Loomis, famous because of his connection to Michael Myers and the book he wrote about him, is ludicrously famous, constantly shown trying to get into his limo while crowded by reporters and assistants who he isn't listening to because he's on his cell phone. And while he's turning Michael's origins into pop psychology describing the "perfect storm" of external and internal conditions to create his form of insanity (yawwwn), the real cheese bomb is what's going on in Michael's head.

The plot element that Laurie and Michael are siblings was a creation of the original Halloween II and not the first movie, in which Michael zeroes in on Laurie for no other reason than he sees her drop something off at his old house. I know their being family is considered canon, but I've personally never liked it. Not only is remake Michael compelled to find and kill his sister, but he's also being egged on to do so by a haunted, angelic apparition of his mother. Sometimes she's with young Michael in his clown suit and sometimes she's with a big white horse, the equine symbolism having been crammed into Michael's backstory. Not only is this 1) silly as hell, 2) a rather obvious move on Zombie's part to get some more work for his wife Sheri Moon, it's also 3) guilty of casting Michael's murderous rampage in a sympathetic light.

While I do think it's possible to make a good movie full of unlikeable characters, when you have such a cast and then throw in something like the noble glowing horse lady, any notion of caring about these characters is evaporated. So he kills Laurie, so what? She's a bitchy lightning rod for murder and then the family will all be together again, apparently on a very clean ranch in the afterlife. No prob.

A couple more sins for the scorecard: The setting for this movie is no longer a town but a vast collection of dark fields punctuated by the occasional house or barn. And if you're a serial killer you can move through the fields like wormholes. Michael shows up at some barn rave and whacks one of Laurie's friends in the parking lot, which is a senseless move even by his standards because Laurie leaves the party right afterwards. But then somehow when she gets home he's already hiding by a nearby tree. Later on enough of Michael's mask falls away so you can see what he looks like (just like Tyler Mane, the very tall dude who plays him), and unbelievably he even speaks (!). It's just one word, but still. Grownup Michael Myers doesn't talk.

Laurie's final fate will elicit and eyeroll and shrug: she's in the booby hatch herself, hanging out with her luminous dead mom just like Michael was. Is it a ghost or is she crazy? I really don't care, and I do not officially recognize the gravitas Rob Zombie thinks he's operating with here. As I've said before, I'm not automatically anti-remake, but the Halloween examples are the worst of their kind.

4 comments:

DKC said...

I haven't seen any of the remakes, but I still feel like I have a right to say: "Rob Zombie, get over yourself."

And stay off my lawn.

JPX said...

I’m sorry I’ve taken so long to comment on this excellent review. I wanted to go back to my old review of it to re-read all the comments.

I agree that Zombie’s decision to present Laurie as suffering from severe PTSD a year later makes perfect sense and is very realistic. No one would be able to survive the events of the first film without some psychological damage. That’s about all I liked about this film.

You note,

“The setting for this movie is no longer a town but a vast collection of dark fields punctuated by the occasional house or barn.” So true!! In my review I noted,

“In Carpenter’s Halloween, Haddonfield is a middle class neighborhood that could stand for “everytown”. In Zombie’s version Haddonfield is a grim, backwoods sea of rednecks, drunks and hookers, which brings up another complaint; why does Zombie insist on making all his characters greasy, filthy, and generally revolting? Zombie’s rednecks are not exclusive to his Halloween films and it begs the question, just where in the hell did Zombie grow up?”

I love your observation,

“Not only is remake Michael compelled to find and kill his sister, but he's also being egged on to do so by a haunted, angelic apparition of his mother. Sometimes she's with young Michael in his clown suit and sometimes she's with a big white horse, the equine symbolism having been crammed into Michael's backstory.”

When she first appeared I immediately thought, “This is the franchise’s jump-the-shark moment!” Seriously, I can’t believe Zombie would look at this and not immediately cut it from the film. I didn’t like the movie as a whole but this just made it laughable.

I think we both had the exact same reaction to this film. I like the original Halloween II a lot more than you though. I don’t believe Halloween should have had any sequels but Carpenter’s Halloween II is the only worthy sequel in my view because he retains the look and feel of the first one. It’s also the last time the Myers mask looked right. When I was at Universal Studios I saw the original mask and snapped a picture of it. I’ll use it in a post some day.

Johnny Sweatpants said...

I just reread JPX & 50P's reviews. This is one of those movies I watched last year but never reviewed. I've been meaning to do a Rob Zombie roundup for a while now. Maybe next year.

JPX - Rob Zombie grew up in Haverhill, MA. Also Halloween 3 is a misunderstood masterpiece!

JPX said...

I love Halloween III bit I don't consider it to be part of the Halloween cannon. I think it's a terrific example of the "mad scientist" sub-genre of horror. I also love the soundtrack.

Malevolent

 2018  ***1/2 It's 1986 for some reason, and a team of paranormal investigators are making a big name for themselves all over Scotland. ...