Disclaimer: Contains spoilers!
Plot Summary: After being shot SIX TIMES, Michael Myers continues his killing spree and attempts to hunt Laurie down at a hospital.
Review: Funny how many times Loomis stresses he shot Michael six times yet the sound effects crew idiotically added SEVEN shots! Yeaaaah, that's how you knew they done goofed right out the gate! Believe me, Loomis fired six times in the first "Halloween," yet, somehow they couldn't get this right when splicing new material with the original's ending? Needless to say, "Halloween II" isn't exactly the sequel fans had hoped for. I hadn't read my original review again since 2012, and it still summed up my thoughts perfectly. John Carpenter did not want to make this movie and you feel that. Still, "Halloween II" is not without its merit and has chances to shine. I'd still classify this as good--not great or anything above and beyond. Just good.
So what did work? I mean, we are only at the second entry in a franchise of 10, soon to be 11, entries. Well, the atmosphere and cinematography are still almost as good as part one. The use of lighting effects helps with Michael lurking in the shadows, but it's still nothing out of the realm that part one didn't do already and better. However, the consistency in the look does help make this sequel feel complementary to part one as they're supposed to take place in the same night. Considering three years passed in real life, I give credit for pairing the films together so well. Another aspect worth acknowledging is the look of Michael; he appears worn from the night, and it makes him appear slightly creepier given the Terminator-esque invincibility he displays this time around. Of course, I've always liked the ending of this film with Michael getting a proper and definitive defeat. Adding to this, I also always preferred Michael versus Loomis instead of Laurie against Michael. Michael was Loomis' responsibility and he's obsessed with the guy...the two going out in flames together redeems the character and brings closure to both he and Michael's arcs.
As for where "Halloween II" goes wrong...the story is simply not polished and doesn't add anything new outside of the main twist that Laurie is actually Michael's sister. As stated with my previous review, Michael having no motive felt scarier to audiences. Besides, this creates a potential plot hole of figuring out Laurie's whereabouts when Michael killed Judith as a boy. Why were there no signs of her existence either--like toys or bottles or whatever--lying around the house? A two year old leaves a trail in her wake! More to the point, if Michael is just trying to kill his sister, why doesn't he simply gun for her room instead of meandering about the hospital? The same logic could retroactively apply to part one, thus, creating continuity errors. I'm not saying the twist is completely bad, but it does create problems and cheapens part one to a degree. However, I'm more concerned with part two just building up a body count without a reason. Also, keeping Loomis on the peripheral felt forced with the whole subplot with Ben Tramer dressing exactly like Michael. Give me a break. Then we have Laurie doing absolutely nothing all movie long too. What the hell?
The last thing I want to mention is that the supernatural elements were definitely played up already in this entry. Besides the whole Michael absorbing bullets aspect, we get the scenes discussing Samhain. Yeah...who wrote that? If it really was Michael, why did he do this and to what end? More importantly, WHEN did Michael have time to do this?! I don't know why I didn't realize this over the years, but it is implied Laurie has a psychic connection to Michael when she sees the blood dripping in her dream, and it's connected to the murder of the one nurse we come to realize. Eh, this is all so vague...I don't know what John Carpenter was thinking with all of this. Obviously the sequels would run with this material.
All things considered, I do still like "Halloween II" for the most part. Much of the appreciation comes from the technical aspects and the respect for making the first two entries feel as though they could feasibly take place in one night. Loomis is still a fantastic character, Michael looked effectively scary, and the ending worked as the perfect sendoff for the franchise. On the other hand, Michael's motive is nonsensical and creates story problems, Loomis and Laurie are ultimately wasted by doing nothing through the majority of the film, and little is done to make this a worthy followup. Obviously the expectations were high after the brilliance of "Halloween," but part two is just an okay entry in the end. Mr. Carpenter could have done better that's for sure.
Notable Moment: I still like when Michael kills the blonde nurse toward the end. The way he keeps her hovering there for a second is just disturbing.
Final Rating: 6/10
No comments:
Post a Comment