 |
| HALLOWEEN KILLS |
HALLOWEEN KILLS: D+
There were positives about this film but it's difficult to focus on them as every time you point out a positive it reveals one of the negatives. The ole cliché, "For every step forward, two steps back" fits this film like a well oiled glove on a veteran catcher.
For one, I absolutely have to point out the contradiction that this film made in comparison to HALLOWEEN 2018. The prior film was adamantly Hell bent on making Michael Myers out to be more human with winces of pain, grunts of excursion and signs of physical exhaustion. It was painstakingly critical of how other depictions of Michael Myers showed him to be an unstoppable force, unrealistically powerful, like that of a supervillain with powers comparable to that of Darth Vader or The Juggernant from X-MEN. HALLOWEEN IV: THE RETURN OF MICHAEL MYERS was far too powerful of a Michael Myers. By George, they were going to make him more realistic. They achieved that goal, only to completely abandon it in this film. Michael was incredibly powerful in this film. Incredible Hulk powerful. There was nothing even rudimentarily realistic about his strength or his stamina. He was so powerful in this film that not even a mob of angry, armed and crazed citizens could even remotely give him challenge. It begs the question as to why make Michael this unbeatable opposition? Why make him out to be as if there is no stopping him? We'll answer that question as you read along.
The original HALLOWEEN (1978) created a purely and simply evil character that killed without motive or reason. One that was deprived of conscious, that left the mystery behind his rage unanswered. This film completely missed the point of that concept. Michael Myers of HALLOWEEN (1978) was precise, stealthy and calculated. We may not have known why he was doing what he was doing, but he did. He picked out his victims, studied and stalked them. He knew when, where, why and how to attack. He wasn't simply going from house to house, place to place, person to person killing everyone in his sight. There was reason to his madness. We didn't know his plans, but we knew he had them. In this film, his killings have no plan of attack. No strategy of execution. It's an absolute chaos at random.
Which leads me to the violence. This film was ridiculous with the amount of violence and gore. Absolutely ridiculous. Inexcusable how bloody and violent Michael's kills were. Ever watch the original HALLOWEEN (1978)? There were seven kills in the film and that included a dog. There were over thirty in this film and all of them were extraordinarily graphic. There was no art or mystique to his craft. It was blood and guts galore. What made HALLOWEEN (1978) such a unique, masterful standout from the rest of them film? That it didn't need the violence, the blood or the gore. That it relied on the elements of suspense, surprise and fear. This film had the blueprints laid out to formulate the perfect structure and instead seemed to blindly build from scratch. Again you have to ask why and again, we'll get to that answer as you read along.
It was a treat to see so many characters back and furthermore even more of a treat to see so many of them portrayed by the same actors. Kyle Richards back as Lindsay Wallace, Nancy Chambers as Marion Chambers and Charles Cyphers as Sherriff Leigh Brackett. Even though he was portrayed by a new actor (Anthony Michael Hall) it was rewarding to see Tommy Doyle back as well. Yet there was no time to enjoy these characters or fall in love with them again. A false premise was set up to make the audience think that they were going to serve purpose and be a part of the resistance to defeat Michael. Instead they were killed off one by one, eliminated like flies by a swatter. Raising yet another question. Why go to the effort of bringing back so many characters if the only goal is to immediately get rid of them?
Now we begin the investigation that will lead to the answers to all of these questions.
When HALLOWEEN H20 came out twenty-three years ago, I made the case that the only reason Jamie Lee Curtis came back to the HALLOWEEN series was because Donald Pleasence had passed away, thus closing the door on the Dr. Sam Loomis character allowing the sole hero, the sole protagonist to be Laurie Strode. I was laughed at and made out to be a fool, but this is far too convenient to sum up as coincidence. Curtis was asked back to HALLOWEEN multiple times throughout her career and she declined each time. Her reasoning was that she had grown as an actor and felt that while she was thankful for HALLOWEEN jump starting her career, she had become too big to resort to horror. Some have argued back that her career had began to founder in the late 90's and her reasoning to coming back to HALLOWEEN was to revive her career. I don't buy it. Pleasence passed in February of 95', with Curtis being approached for a fourth time shortly after, this time agreeing to make a comeback. Production began shortly afterwards, with HALLOWEEN H20 being released in August of 98'. I felt 23 years ago that Jamie Lee Curtis would not have returned had Donald Pleasence still been alive and I feel even stronger about that today than I did then.
Jamie Lee Curtis has to been the center of attention. She feels that this film is all about her and that Laurie Strode is the only character besides Michael Myers that is the face of HALLOWEEN. She wants to share the spotlight with absolutely no one and this film illustrates that impeccably. Let me provide more evidence if you're not convinced.
Danielle Harris petitioned to try and get in on HALLOWEEN: 2018. Laurie was going to have a daughter in the film, why not bring back Jamie (Harris's character) from HALLOWEEN IV, V and VI? The kibosh was quickly put on that idea, Curtis with influence on the decision. I don't think it's too much of a stretch of the imagination to think that this again is an example of Curtis not wanting to share the spotlight. Jamie was established throughout two prior films as being a resilient character capable of avoiding Michael. One who did so without the guidance, advice and protection of Laurie. I say that having Jamie back might have weakened the Laurie character based on this fact and even if it didn't, it certainly would have shifted the focus so that it wasn't 100% on Laurie. Curtis would never stand for that.
There was even talk of originally bringing back Josh Hartnett as Laurie's son John from HALLOWEEN H20. Again, too established of a character with too much risk of having his own focus to dare risk getting in the way of Curtis.
I know the rebuttal I'm going to get for this, but tell me I don't make a convincing argument.
Michael Myers is extremely strong and powerful. So strong and powerful that not even the entire town of Haddonfield, Illinois can stop him. He plows through everyone like the NFL's #1 lineman of the year against 1st year Pee-wees on their first day of practice. This film's goal was to present Michael Myers out to be a force that no one with exception to Laurie Strode can defeat. No one else is strong enough, smart enough, clever enough, or able enough except Laurie. Only she can has the ability. No one else. That's why Michael is so powerful and relentless and that's why all of these characters were brought back only to be killed off.
At this point if there is ever a television series made out of HALLOWEEN like there has been for SCREAM and like there is currently for CHILD'S PLAY, I would insist that it was written into the character. I would have a scene shortly after the explosion at the Hospital where Laurie is reading a newspaper, listening to the radio or watching the news on T.V. Have her read or hear of how a young girl and a psychologist stop a crazed killer and have her resentful that she wasn't given sole credit. Have her convinced that she was the real culprit and that Loomis has little to nothing to do with protecting the community or putting an end to Michael's terror.
I've always been a fan of the Laurie Strode character. I want to make that clear. I also think Jamie Lee Curtis is a talented and gifted performer. She did a great job in HALLOWEEN I and HALLOWEEN II of pulling off the brave and courageous heroine. I will always praise the way the character was written and the way she performed, but this obsession with sole focus is a major turn off. HALLOWEEN H20 was enough of a shrine as it is and HALLOWEEN 2018 and HALLOWEEN KILLS have become unbearable. We get it that Curtis wants HALLOWEEN to be Michael Vs Laurie and Michael Vs Laurie only. That all other characters are moot points and she is the real focus. We get that. Not sure if we need what will be eventually four films to get that across. I think one was enough to hammer it in.
