31 Days of Halloween

Watching The Birds, it's pretty clear where Shyamalan got a lot of his inspiration for Signs from.

I remember being 11 or 12 and going to theaters to watch The Waterboy. I walked out satisfied after having seen the funniest movie ever put to film. Walking out I saw the theater playing John Carpenter's Vampires and walked in for a couple minutes. I was able to watch the scene where the head vampire sticks his fingers into a guys crotch and pull up cutting him in half length-wise. That was pretty sweet.

In the Mouth of Madness is probably the closest thing to full Lovecraft Ancient Ones we'll get in theaters.

It's just.... the perfect amount of crazy for a rad B movie.

Film Eleven: The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari (1920)

What is the first horror movie? I guess if you’re being really strict it was Edison’s Frankenstein and I’m sure there are a handful of other obscure shorts you could point to, but usually when discussing things like this people usually jump forward to the German expressionists, but is the true granddaddy of the genre The Dr. of Caligari or Nosferatu? Obviously Caligari predates Nosferatu by two years so I guess the big question is whether it counts as a horror movie. The answer isn’t quite as clear cut as Nosferatu, which was a full-on vampire movie. Caligari was certainly nightmarish and a sequence where the somnambulist stalks a woman certainly has a genre feel, but the whole film feels a bit artier and surreal, it doesn’t really feel like it’s trying to scare people so much as unsettle them. One way or another this is certainly a great movie. The way it uses skewed and clearly artificial sets and backdrops to make the film looks like a modernist painting come to life is really striking and its story of psychological breaks was pretty innovative.

****
out of Four

HALLOWEEN II (1981)



In the original Halloween, Michael Myers goes after a trio of babysitters and whoever happens to be caught in the middle. The only survivors are Laurie Strode, played by Jamie Lee Curtis in her film debut, and the two kids she was looking after. Laurie sacrifices herself for the children and is then rescued by Dr. Loomis. Loomis shoots Myers six times and the impact pushes Myers off a balcony. When Loomis looks out the window, Myers is gone. The sequel picks up at that exact moment. Loomis continues his search for Myers while Laurie gets medical attention. In the end, all three characters end up at a hospital for one final confrontation… or so they think. On paper, this is a good idea, but it is executed poorly. For starters, Laurie ends up at the emptiest hospital I’ve ever seen. There’s less than 10 people there in general. It feels like a movie set instead of a real location. Secondly, if she was attacked by a serial killer that is still on the loose, then why is there no security around her? Or better yet, why is there ONE security guard in the entire hospital? And finally, if Loomis is so smart, why didn’t it occur to him that Myers might show up at the hospital to finish the job? He spends 97% of the movie running around town and causing mass hysteria while Myers is at the hospital killing people. Then, in a twist ending, it is revealed that Laurie is Myers’ sister. She was put up for adoption after Myers was locked up. So now, Loomis is like, “Oh! He must be at the hospital then.” And by the time he shows up, everyone is dead except for Laurie. Then he must rescue her again. This time he does so by setting himself and Myers on fire. If only he could have set this film on fire as well. Look, no one expected director Rick Rosenthal to top, or even equal, the original. But he could have at least tried. This is a very lazy sequel and put the franchise on life support right from the get-go.

D





HALLOWEEN 4: THE RETURN OF MICHAEL MYERS (1988)

John Carpenter didn’t direct any of the sequels but he remained as a writer, producer, and music composer for Halloween II. And as far as he was concerned, that was the conclusion of Michael Myers’ tale. So for Halloween III: Season of the Witch, he decided to turn the franchise into an anthology series. Each movie would feature a new scary story that takes place on Halloween. For that installment, he hired Tommy Lee Wallace to write and direct while he remained as producer and co-music composer with Alan Howarth. What Wallace created was a spooky tale about a mysterious company releasing a magical mask that will kill children on Halloween night. Like Halloween II, it’s a good idea executed poorly. But for mass audiences, it was more than that. Without Michael Myers and his iconic theme music, they didn’t care and the film flopped at the box office. At that point, Carpenter and his producing partner Debra Hill sold their rights to the franchise and paved the way for Michael Myers’ return.

Released and taking place 10 years after the original, Halloween 4 revolves around Michael Myers’ niece Jamie Lloyd, played wonderfully by Danielle Harris. Without much explanation, it is revealed that Laurie and her husband are dead, and so Jamie is now living in an adoptive home. Following the events of Halloween II, Michael Myers has been in a coma all these years and suffering from severe burn marks. Out of nowhere, he awakens and escapes once again. And once again, Dr. Sam Loomis, with his own battle scars, chases after him. This time, however, the stakes will be raised. In a brilliant decision, screenwriter Alan B. McElroy and director Dwight H. Little devise a structure of escalation. In the beginning, Jamie and her adoptive sister Rachel, played very well by Ellie Cornell, are having a rough morning. Jamie is depressed because of nightmares and Rachel has to cancel plans with her boyfriend. Afterwards, we see Jamie getting bullied at school for being the niece of The Boogeyman while Rachel has a fight with her boyfriend. Later that night, while trick-or-treating, Rachel catches her boyfriend with another girl and Jamie momentarily gets lost. Then, when they believe the worst has happened, Michael Myers makes his move. He cuts all the power and telephone lines in town. That causes mass hysteria and he uses the opportunity to massacre the police department while crazed gun-nuts start shooting innocent people. In the middle of all this, Jamie and Rachel seek shelter at the Sheriff’s home. Unbeknownst to them, Michael Myers is already in the house. After battling him there and later at Jamie’s school, they get on a car and drive out of town. But once again, Michael Myers is one step ahead. He’s under the car, then climbs up and attacks them. What follows is a brief moment of luck when police arrive and shoot Myers until he falls on a ditch and hopefully to his grave. Now there should be peace again - but - the movie ends with a twist. Back at her house, Jamie grabs a kitchen knife and stabs her adoptive mother while Dr. Loomis screams in terror.

Wow! Halloween 4 is an edge-of-your-seat thrill ride from beginning till end. In my opinion, it’s - by far - the best sequel in the series. As well as one of the greatest slasher films ever made. Fans, in general, have issues with it for various reasons but none of those bothered me. Halloween 4, to me, is a very enjoyable movie.

A+


HALLOWEEN 5: THE REVENGE OF MICHAEL MYERS (1989)

Halloween 4 ended on an amazing cliffhanger suggesting that Jamie would follow in her uncle’s footsteps. Instead, it ignores all of that and restores the status quo. The movie begins with Michael Myers once again surviving after being shot. He goes into hibernation and awakens the next Halloween. Meanwhile, Jamie has spent that year at a mental institute and as soon as her uncle awakens she has a strange psychic link to him. Every time he kills someone, or is just simply lurking in the shadows, she gets visions of it. Eventually, she escapes the institute and tries to stop him. Keep in mind that this is a 9-year-old girl. When she shows up, he remembers that he hasn’t killed her yet and goes after her. That’s when Dr. Loomis shows up and saves the day again. This time, however, he’s fed up with all of this and uses Jamie to set up a trap for him. It has its hiccups but it ultimately works. Michael Myers is arrested and there’s peace in the world again. Right? Nope. A mysterious man dressed in black shows up, kills everyone at the police station, and sets Michael Myers free. Oh boy! Well, overall, this is a very flawed but enjoyable sequel. The filmmakers made a lot of stupid decisions and some of the new characters are annoying, but they counter that with excellent kill scenes and riveting performances by Danielle Harris and Donald Pleasence.

C


HALLOWEEN 6: THE CURSE OF MICHAEL MYERS (1995)



It has been six years since the disappearance of Michael Myers and his niece Jamie Lloyd. Then one night, Jamie’s voice can be heard on the radio. She’s pleading for help. It catches the attention of Dr. Loomis and Paul Rudd. They investigate and discover the in-bred child of Jamie and Michael. I kid you not. Meanwhile, the Strode family has moved into Michael Myers home. As you can imagine, Myers returns to kill everyone at his house and chase after those who took his child. That all leads to the revelation of the man dressed in black as well as the supernatural cult that’s controlling Michael Myers. This is, of course, the simplified version of the plot. To the movie’s credit, it’s very ambitious and has fascinating characters. However, the film had a very troubled production. Everyone was fighting over creative differences and it resulted in two versions of the movie. Both of them are a mess. But, they’re worth watching because they explore the mythology of the franchise. They even manage to squeeze in Season of the Witch. Nonetheless, it’s tough to overlook the flaws, so I have a lot of mixed feelings. By the way, Halloween 6 features the last film appearance by Donald Pleasence. He passed away shortly after shooting wrapped. It’s also the last installment in the series to be scored by Alan Howarth, who took over musical duties for John Carpenter. He generally did a good job.

C


HALLOWEEN: H20 (1998)



I remember when this movie was released, everyone made fun of the title. “Oh, does it take place on water?” was the very common joke. But the title stands for the 20th anniversary of the original film. To celebrate, they made a movie that ignores all the sequels. Although there are some vague references to Halloween II. But it is generally accepted that this is a direct sequel to John Carpenter’s original.

The film begins, well, 20 years later. Laurie Strode, once again played by Jamie Lee Curtis, has changed her identity and now lives in Northern California with her son. Then, Michael Myers randomly shows up and tries to finish the job. This time, however, Laurie is tired of being scared and fights back. The movie ends with Laurie decapitating Michael Myers. That would have been a fitting conclusion to the original series but they had to ruin it with one final sequel.

Halloween H20 is directed by Steve Miner. He is a veteran horror filmmaker whose credits include two Friday the 13th installments. Miner goes back to basics and brings Michael Myers back to reality. Because of that, this is generally considered the best sequel in the franchise. However, I’m going to disagree. To begin with, it was silly to ignore the other sequels. I understand things got messy but they could have just retconned a few things instead of flat-out ignoring them. By making this decision, they’re creating a giant plot-hole. I mean, what exactly was Michael Myers doing for the past 20 years? Was he living a quiet mid-western life? Secondly, for like an hour, nothing happens except fake-outs. That’s the most annoying thing you can do in a horror film. Especially one featuring Michael Myers. What makes the character standout is the lurking, but since Laurie lives in a gated community, he is nowhere in sight till the end. So instead, they use fake-outs to make up for it. It’s cringe inducing! And finally, the movie was produced by Kevin Williamson and the Weinstein brothers. They literally had just struck gold with Scream and used the same playbook. The script, the casting, and the visual style are Scream-esque. They even use Marco Beltrami’s music from Scream in many scenes. I want to watch Halloween not Scream!

C-


HALLOWEEN RESURRECTION (2002)



Like Halloween 6, I have mixed feelings. On one hand, they slap fans in the face by resurrecting Michael Myers in the most idiotic way possible. Then, they have the nerve to kill Laurie Strode. It’s unforgivable! But on the other hand, I enjoyed everything else. Basically, the movie revolves around a group of people staying at Michael Myers house on Halloween night and broadcasting it on the Internet. Director Rick Rosenthal, who helmed Halloween II, does a great job of exploring the technological side of the story. In particular, the scene where the main girl is sent texts of Michael Myers whereabouts while running away from him. Also, despite the criticisms, Busta Rhymes is hilarious. He plays the organizer of the web show and steals every scene he’s in. Even the ones featuring Michael Myers. And for the last film in the original series, it was a good decision to have it take place almost entirely at Michael Myers house and then burn it down with him inside it. Granted, H20 had a superior conclusion but this is second best.

C

Halloween II gets a D but Resurrection a C? Come on now. You make good points about II, but I still think it's the best sequel of the series other than H2O which you also didn't like. Resurrection should have an F or a D-, that movie sucks in every way. And an A+ for the 4th one? You're crazy. We are way off on our views of this series. The 6th one is a trainwreck, way too complicated for it's own good and immensely stupid as a result. Nothing is more uninteresting and non-scary than explaining every element of motivation for a killer/evil. I, II, and H2O are good, the rest are varying degrees of meh. And then there's the Rob Zombie films, both of which make Resurrection look good.

No. A double-D for that naked nurse.



Resurrection is hilariously bad. It's not Jason X funny, but close enough.



Halloween II made zero sense. I've seen more intelligence in Friday the 13th movies. I think Dracula agrees with me on this. He also hates the movie, if I recall correctly.



The fan hatred for Halloween 4 always seemed petty to me. Every time I hear or read someone complain about the movie, it's over the silliest things. The truth is, Halloween 4 is one of the better written slasher films. You can tell a lot of thought was put into it. The theme of escalation is one I don't think I've ever seen in a slasher movie.



Yes. It's a trainwreck, but again, a lot of thought was put into it. I think that's what ultimately set the Halloween franchise apart. They TRIED to come up with interesting storylines. Friday the 13th relied on gore and nudity. Freddy Kruger relied on special effects. And then you have Halloween, where effort was actually put into the screenplays. That's why I'm so harsh on Halloween II. It has the laziest script of any Halloween movie. I can almost guarantee that John Carpenter did Halloween II for the money. You can tell he didn't give a shit.

I think I would give Freddy the edge cause those special effects in 3 through 5 made the series rise above the cheapness of the genre. Plus, Freddy is a WAY better character than Michael and Jason. But if we're talking individual movies, then yeah, Halloween is the obvious winner. 

A NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET (1984)

A child murderer named Freddy Krueger is set free after a technicality. So a group of parents get together and burn him to death. Years later, he returns by haunting the dreams of their children. If they die in their dreams, they die in real life. It’s a brilliant premise - but - director Wes Craven doesn’t execute it as well as he could have. The sequels did a great job of depicting elaborate dream sequences. Here, the best he can do is get Johnny Depp, in his film debut, to be sucked into a bed. Regardless, I’ll give him credit for launching one of the greatest horror franchises and for making a genuine horror movie instead of a dark fantasy film. Credit also has to be given to the cast. Robert Englund delivered an iconic performance as Freddy. Heather Langenkamp is fun to watch as Nancy the lead character. And John Saxon, who plays her father, continued his reputation as one of the most commanding presences in B-cinema.

B+


FREDDY’S REVENGE (1985)

Everybody says that Freddy’s Revenge sucks. It’s also considered alongside Top Gun as one of the gayest films of the 1980’s. Both claims are an exaggeration. The movie takes place 5 years later when a new family moves into the home of Nancy Thompson, the lead character from the original. Apparently, she suffered a mental breakdown and her mother killed herself. That makes no sense because Freddy was defeated when Nancy stopped being scared of him. The sequel even acknowledges this by stating that Freddy’s spirit remains in the house and is weakened by lack of fear. But with a new teenager in the house, he gets a new idea. He possesses the body of the young man and uses it to start a crime spree. It’s a great concept and pulled off very effectively. Then, when fear is restored on Elm Street, Freddy escapes the body and attacks people in the real world. Although he retains his magical powers even though that’s a contradiction from the other installments in the series. Nonetheless, Freddy’s make-up effect is incredible, and arguably, the best in the franchise. Now with all that being said, there are flaws and it’s understandable why there’s hatred for Freddy’s Revenge. For starters, the cast is horrible. The death scenes lack imagination. And nothing that happens here seems to matter in the rest of the series. The film comes across as self-contained and doesn’t flow well with the other sequels. As for all the gay subtext, there’s a few here and there, but people exaggerate for comedic purposes. Also, just because the lead character has to be rescued by his girlfriend doesn’t make him the woman in the relationship. It’s an outdated belief and this movie should be rewarded for switching the gender roles.

C-


THE DREAM WARRIORS (1987)

Written by Frank Darabont (The Shawshank Redemption) and directed by Chuck Russell (The Mask), The Dream Warriors is, arguably, the best film in the Elm Street series. It’s also the one that made Freddy Krueger a mainstream success. Unlike the first two installments of the franchise, this isn’t really a horror movie. It’s a fantasy film that takes full advantage of the dream sequences in the story. Nancy Thompson (Heather Langenkamp) returns as a mentor for the next generation of Freddy’s victims. After she defeated him, he moved on to the next age-group and they get locked up in a mental institute because the adults don’t believe their outlandish Freddy stories. But now they have Nancy and she learns that one of the girls (Patricia Arquette) has the ability to bring others into her dreams. So Nancy devises a plan where they team-up to fight Freddy in the dream world. That’s why they’re called The Dream Warriors. However, in order to finally destroy Freddy, his bones must be found, buried on hollow ground, and then drop holy water on the grave. That becomes the mission of Nancy’s father, played once again by John Saxon, and Bill Maher look-a-like Craig Wasson. Overall,The Dream Warriors is an awesome movie. Freddy is hilarious. The new characters are very well-developed. And all the set pieces are as imaginative as the budget would allow. This was the peak of the series.

A+


THE DREAM MASTER (1988)

Before the worldwide acclaim of Lord of the Rings, New Line Cinema was the studio that Freddy built. The mainstream success of The Dream Warriors put Freddy Krueger on the pedestal of the horror genre and so New Line Cinema followed it with a sequel that did nothing but attempt to replicate the winning formula - but - lightening doesn’t always strike twice. With so much studio meddling, The Dream Master lacks the passion that made The Dream Warriors a beloved classic. Nonetheless, there are some good qualities. Alice, the new lead character played by Lisa Wilcox, is fun to watch. Plus, her friends are memorable and get excellent death scenes. That leads me to the special effects which are all great. It’s a shame it was paired off with an uninspired storyline. And yet, despite the lack in quality, The Dream Master was an even bigger financial success and remains, adjusted for inflation, the highest grossing film in the series. That’s without counting Freddy vs Jason. This was such a big deal that director Renny Harlin (Die Hard 2) got a phone call from Steven Spielberg to congratulate him. You have to love Hollywood sometimes.

C


THE DREAM CHILD (1989)

The Dream Master was a disappointment but it was the biggest financial success in the series, so there was no doubt there would be a 5th installment. This time, however, the screenwriters came up with a great concept. Alice, played once again by Lisa Wilcox, is pregnant so Freddy gets the genius idea to haunt the dreams of her unborn child. As a consequence, all the nightmares literally come to life since she’s awake but her son is not. We also get a lot of backstory on Freddy. In The Dream Warriors, it is mentioned that he’s the bastard son of a hundred maniacs. Here, we get to see how his mother was gang-raped by patients of an insane asylum. It’s fascinating to say the least. And then the spirit of his mother shows up at the end to save the day. Overall, this is a pretty cool movie. However, New Line Cinema rushed it into production. So director Stephen Hopkins (Predator 2) had to half-ass many of the effects and visuals. The Dream Child is basically the opposite of The Dream Master: good script but poor production values.

B-


FREDDY’S DEAD: THE FINAL NIGHTMARE (1991)

The Dream Child would have been a nice conclusion to the series. Freddy’s mother drags him into the underworld and Alice, his final victim, gives birth and enters adulthood. There’s no where else to go from there and this 6th installment is evidence of that. It takes place in a future where Freddy has killed all the children of Springwood, Ohio. Even though there’s nothing “future” about this movie. It very much looks like 1991, especially when Freddy is plugging the Power Glove from Nintendo. So anyway, since there’s no kids left, Freddy needs to find a new town but he’s trapped in Springwood. So he uses his daughter to serve as a gateway. None of it makes any sense. What spiritual/supernatural entity is making up all these rules for Freddy? Actually, when you think about it, the entire franchise never explains how Freddy is able to do all these stuff. But let’s not over-think it because Freddy’s Dead is a big joke and nothing matters. They turned a horror-fantasy series into slapstick comedy. They even had the nerve to make the final scenes in 3D. Why? What’s the point? And why just the final scenes? The filmmakers just don’t seem to care about anything. This is just one last paycheck before putting the franchise to sleep for a few years. But I’ll be nice for a moment. There’s two things I liked: Johnny Depp’s cameo and the way Freddy was killed. They drag him into the real world and blow him up. That’s how you nail the coffin on a once beloved horror series.

D-


WES CRAVEN’S NEW NIGHTMARE (1994)

Wes Craven never wanted A Nightmare on Elm Street to become a franchise, but it did, so he returned 10 years after the original to write and direct a prototype for the Scream series. This time it takes place in the real world with all the actors playing themselves. A new Freddy Krueger movie is in production but it keeps getting interrupted by supernatural forces. It turns out that a demon is using Freddy’s physical characteristics to unleash hell on Earth or something like that. Honestly, I really don’t care. Most people claim this is the 2nd best Freddy Krueger film but that’s ridiculous because Freddy Krueger isn’t technically in the movie. We see Robert Englund, as himself, play Freddy. And then we see the demon use Freddy’s image. But Freddy, as a character, is nowhere to be seen. So why should I care? If you used this same concept on a Michael Myers or Jason Voorhees film, it would definitely work. But with Freddy Krueger it doesn’t. He’s too rich of a character to be replaced by some boring demon. Some people would say that Freddy is too silly to be taken seriously but I disagree. What makes him standout is the enjoyment he gets from torturing and killing. That’s more frightening than some silent murderer. I understand what Wes Craven was trying to do but it doesn’t work for me. Besides, he did a much better job with the Scream franchise which uses many of the same themes explored in New Nightmare. So that makes this movie even more pointless to watch.

C-


FREDDY VS JASON (2003)

Once again, Freddy Krueger is in a weakened state because of the lack of fear among teenagers. So he goes into the depths of hell to find Jason Voorhees and return him to the world of the living. Then, after Jason goes on one of his trademark killing sprees, Freddy has the strength to invade dreams once again. However, when Jason kills one of his victims before he gets a chance, Freddy realizes he has to eliminate Jason as well and it isn’t an easy task. Freddy vs. Jason works because director Ronny Yu and his screenwriters don’t hold back. We see Jason murder with extreme violence. We see Freddy conquer dreams in creative ways. Then when they fight each other, they battle in the dream world and real life. They left nothing for a potential sequel. They explored every scenario they could think of and that makes it more enjoyable for the audience. We got everything we wanted and there’s never a dull moment because new ideas are being followed by other new ideas. Freddy vs Jason is one of the most entertaining and crowd-pleasing horror movies of the 21st century.

A+


THE REMAKE (2010)

There’s nothing worse than a remake that lacks the understanding of what made the original work in the first place. This remake gets things wrong right off the bat with its interpretation of Freddy Krueger. In a genre filled with silent serial killers, what made Freddy standout was his goofball personality. He’s like The Joker in Batman. He likes to have fun. So why would you take that away? Plus, the awful make-up effects doesn’t allow for much emotion to come through. Freddy is almost stuck with the same facial expression throughout the whole movie. And if that wasn’t bad enough, the remake does nothing new till the third act. Before then, it’s almost a shot-for-shot remake. Did they learn nothing from Gus Van Sant's Psycho? It’s a shame that talented actors like Jackie Earle Haley and Rooney Mara had to waste their time with this project. I hope they, at least, got paid well. In conclusion, avoid this remake at all costs.

F

The Last Warning (1929)




Paul Leni's final film is almost 90 years old but can still manage to creep out a viewer.  Leni might be better known for being the man behind other silent horror films like Cat and the Canary and The Man Who Laughed.  As I've stated many times, I'm not a horror movie fan however to me the silent horror films from the 1920s are strangely effective with me.  I think it's because I'm in a way watching a moving time capsule, seeing old sets of that time period and stars from generations ago who have long since passed away.  That already gives me an eerie sort of feeling.  Leni used some of the same soundstages from Universal's Phantom of the Opera just a few years before to create a film about another theater that's supposedly haunted by the ghost of an actor who was killed during its final performance.  Years later the original cast and crew returns to revive the theater with the same play but the ghost starts making his presence known.  Most people would find silent horror films to be tame compared to horror movies to come but movies like The Last Warning do have pretty neat editing and themes that seem sharp for a movie from that time.  If you like seeing Hollywood history on film then this would be worth your time.

Hate is strong.  I dislike it certainly but there are definitely worse slasher movies from that era.