
Not everyone immediately appreciates Halloween II, and I suppose I can’t really blame them for not being extensively impressed with the film. At a glance, the lead criticism is that, while the original Halloween was an original horror masterpiece, Halloween II brought very little to the table. John Carpenter’s original vision for the franchise was a series of individual Halloween-themed films every few years. However, the demand for more Michael Myers action led to this sequel, which was meant to conclude his story. The end of this film makes it expressly clear that neither Michael or Loomis were ever meant to make a comeback. Rick Rosenthal does a fine job emulating Carpenter’s directorial style, and indeed, many mistake this film for having been directed by Carpenter himself. Never-the-less, it’s all just a little too…boring.
Picking up immediately where the first film left off, Laurie Strode (Jaimie Lee Curtis) has been taken to a hospital to be treated for her wounds while psychopath Michael Myers is still on the loose. Dr. Loomis (Donald Pleasance) continues his mad quest to eliminate his former patient, and while tracking his prey, uncovers a terrible secret which links Laurie and Michael together. Meanwhile, Michael makes his way to the hospital to finish the job on Laurie and a massive slaughter ensues.
The original Halloween was more of a thriller along the lines of Alfred Hitchcock’s Psycho. Halloween II, however, is more in tune with the slasher genre and gratuitous violence everyone recognizes the series for. I won’t say that’s a bad thing, as I adore gratuitous violence and slasher mayhem, but it does result in a marked decline in quality from one film to the other.
While the original Halloween scarcely had a drop of blood visable on screen, Halloween II goes out of its way to lay on the gore. One of my favorite kills involves a woman getting her face boiled off in a therapeutic hot tub. Michael Myers’ weapon of choice in this installment is a scalpel, as opposed to his more notorius weapon, a kitchen knife.
There’s also the big revelation that Laurie and Michael are blood related. This concept would play a big role in future Halloween films, particularly the Thorn Trilogy (Halloween 4, 5 and 6) which states that Michael is driven to kill every member of his family. While some appreciate knowing Michael’s true motivations, I, personally, would rather be left in the dark. All we knew about Michael in the first film was that he was nuts and wanted to kill people. And really, that was enough. A convoluted back story linking the two characters together is really unnecessary.
Still, at the same time, I recognize the need to add a little more depth to the story than “he’s crazy” since, had they gone that root, all future sequels featuring the character would have been incredibly thin.
While I’m harping on this film rather fiercely, I won’t say that I absolutely dislike it. Halloween II is one of the better installments in the franchise and, despite some story elements I don’t particularly appreciate, is a worthy companion to the original. Even though they had been produced three years apart, the two films run together fluidly and you can almost view them both as one really long horror film.
Grade: C+
Comment with Your Facebook Account
5 Responses for: Halloween II
1 | Rick
May 16th, 2007 at 5:53 pmI loved the original and I’ve heard good things abou this sequel. And from your review, it sounds even better. Unfortunately, I haven’t seen it for sale at any of my local video shops (I guess because it’s so old). The only place I have been able to find it so far is online, but I would have to pay extra to have it shipped. So what I have decided to do is check it out with Netflix first and see if it’s worth purchasing. I just registered for Netflix not too long ago but I can already see why it’s so popular. It’s a great way to preview a movie you are interested in before you actually shell out any money for it. Netflix isn’t the only mail rental service out there, there are others. Depending on where you live there may even be some local chains that offer similar services. Here is a good guide (www.dealsdepot.com.au/a91/The-Benefits-of-DVD-and-Movie-Rental-Services/article_info.html) that compares some of the different ones out there. I requested Halloween II to be sent to my apt after reading this review. Once it arrives and I’m able to watch it, I’ll come back and share my thoughts on the movie. Hopefully it’s as good as everyone has made it out to be.
2 | Dvds
June 29th, 2007 at 2:26 amHi there,
This is the above poster checking back in. Just wanted to say that I thought Halloween II was almost as good as the original, but not quite there. I think it had a different approach though that set it apart from the first film, especially the hospital scenes and the ending. Horror sequels are usually horrible, but this one was surprisingly good. I liked this film enough to go out and purchase a copy for myself. I highly recommend it to anyone else who is interested in watching it.
3 | Portrait artist
August 8th, 2007 at 11:27 pmI think the only problem with these films is the underlying motivation. Halloween was a labor of love, made by people committed to creating the most suspenseful and compelling motion picture they could. Halloween II, however, was impelled by the desire to make money.
4 | Halloween 666: ‘the Producer’s Cut’ - Movie Reviews Blog
August 18th, 2007 at 12:25 pm[...] The Thorn idea may not sit well with most Halloween fans, and I agree, it was a rather silly concept. However, the Producer’s Cut of the movie flows MUCH better with the Jamie arc of the franchise (movies 4, 5 and 6) than the theatrical cut, and is a far superior finale to that continuity (Halloween H20 ignores 4-6 and is a direct sequel to Halloween 2). [...]
5 | Fine art oil paintings
June 20th, 2008 at 5:46 amThis is the usual problem with horror films. As much as they want to catch the attention of viewers and as much as they want to impart scary feelings towards the viewers, they tend to forget about the importance of other aspects. Indeed, too much of something is bad enough. Therefore too much of being scary is really not good.
Leave a reply