Halloween (2018)

So I'm back from this. I enjoyed it quite a bit… for the most part.

I'd say this movie's main flaw is the excess of superfluous elements. As many pointed out, the two podcasters are pretty much just expo-dump machines, but there's also Laurie's granddaughter. She's not unlikeable or anything, it's just that the entire part about the Halloween party and her love woes does little outside of introduce more victims to throw at Michael. Laurie's daughter was enough to give some family context, to me.

Now with that said, the directing was pretty damn solid overall. The deaths were gorier than in '78 for sure, but the camera doesn't linger unnecessarily on the corpses. It just gives us enough of a glimpse to know that Mike hasn't lost his artist soul. And the last part had this nice cathartic vibe you would expect after 40 years of waiting for revenge. You know, if there hadn't already been a shitton of sequels and reboots in-between…

Having seen the original before has its upsides and downsides. On one hand you can catch the subtle and less subtle references and call-backs, but on the other… it makes the movie pretty damn predictable. The only real surprising element was the twist of not!Loomis' wanting to protect Michael, but even that went nowhere… Speaking of which I know Michael is inhumanly strong, but can you really squash a human head that easily…?

Now a sequel is about guaranteed but I'm not sure what more there's to tell, really. Michael Myers is a terrifying character in his concept, but once you've said he's evil incarnate, there's really not that much you can do with him…

Edited by Lyendith on Nov 7th 2018 at 2:33:04 PM

I don't think that surprise you mention went "nowhere." More importantly, I believe the entire reason for that surprise is so we can better rationalize the entire point of a sequel. Ask yourself, "Would it have been 'better' if Michael had just so happened to manage to escape on his own?"

While on this topic... I found it very peculiar on first viewing when Dr. Sartain insisted he'd ride on the bus because Michael Myers is his patient and wanted to see his job through to the very end. Nevermind that anybody would already anticipate Michael escaping from that bus. Why would his transfer to another facility mandate that his doctor ride with him? Even more peculiar was how Dr. Sartain was revealed to have survived Michael's escape, despite being seated on the bus directly next to Michael. Again, anybody would already anticipate Michael's escape, but how on Earth was the person seated next to him avoid becoming his first, easy victim in that very escape?

The fact that Dr. Sartain was actually helping Michael to escape to satisfy his own mad, morbid curiosity not only wonderfully explains these peculiarities, it adds another layer of unexpected "criminal insanity" and depth to a sequel narrative, and twists the expectations of his character's role as a simple substitute for Donald Pleasence on its head.

That's… also true, and I did consider it. But it's shown later that Michael has absolutely no qualms killing him, so why would he have spared him during his escape…? He doesn't strike me as the kind of guy who would spare people based on their "usefulness"… Then again, he never had anyone actively helping him in his murders before, so who knows…

Edited by Lyendith on Nov 7th 2018 at 2:32:27 PM

Why Sartain was initially spared on the bus is an unsolvable mystery, and we can only speculate (although I don't think it's an awfully important detail). The simplest explanation I can offer (imagine) is that, during whatever Noodle Incident that Sartain likely incited, he simply managed to get (far enough) away from Michael, once freed from shackles, that the ensuing chaos forced Michael to turn his immediate attention to other priorities, like guards on the bus or the driver. Or, perhaps, an even simpler explanation can be however anybody chooses to explain how Michael spares a crying baby.

Why Sartain was later killed is just as unknowable and unexplainable as Michael's own evil psychology. Perhaps the mere mention of Michael's sister, by name, suddenly triggered Michael in some way? Most importantly is how to interpret it as an age-old moral in the horror genre about man's curiosity and hubris—how our dark desires to either get to know or control something more powerful than oneself, like Michael's own capability to commit evil, not only turns oneself into a type of monster but always comes at a severe price or punishment.

Michael doesn't kill everyone he meets. He kills who he feels like killing.

It makes him even more terrifying.

Yeah he's completely random in his killings. He can literally bump into someone, and just let them run off unharmed. Or see someone standing right in front of him, and do nothing to them. But he can also notice a random person nearby, and decide to stalk and kill them. And the terrifying thing, is the randomness of WHY he picks some people to kill but not others. Because it could literally be anyone at anytime for any reason, which is chilling.

As for Allyson (Laurie's granddaughter), I'd actually like to see her take more of an active role in things in the sequel (since it's almost assuredly going to happen and DGG and Danny Mc Bride have said that they originally were going to make two films shot back to back, so presumably they have ideas for where to go next). I kind of think that her role makes sense given the setup here, but seeing her grow from it would be a nice character progression imo.

I should see this film soon before it closes off due to being past Halloween but I will say that regarding sequels, I do want the filmmakers expand upon the idea of that the ending of Halloween 4 gave us (before 5 threw it away). Michael Myers can't live forever, but his evil can. Which is much more terrifying than the boogeyman somehow surviving a fire.

That last shot of Allyson holding the bloody knife did make me curious about that. Especially in a film that established that Michael can "inspire" some people in the worst way possible. A little bit far-fetched, but if they're to do a sequel, that's as good a direction as any other…

The Vader Breath at the end of the credits could not be Michael's, but someone else's for example.

Edited by Lyendith on Nov 8th 2018 at 12:46:06 PM

I seriously doubt that, nothing else in the film supports it at all. I think that people are reading WAY too much into something so minor.

They've tried to do that plotline like six times in horror movies.

It NEVER works.

Tommy Jarvis, Laurie's daughter, and so on

What really ought to happen is a resurrection of the Anthology idea, as some interesting stories could be thought of for Halloween stories rather than have to rely on Michael. Especially since he’s actually old now

If that happens, then said anthology should be titled something else than "Halloween", considering the franchise has become undistinguishable from Myers now.

But yes, a remake of Season of the Witch to kick off a new anthology series would be nice.

They're making it a trilogy now. Halloween Kills opens next year, followed by Halloween Ends in 2021.

Well, hopefully this will be continuing the new trend of the movies actually being good.

Someday Michael Myers will stay dead. Eventually. Probably. Maybe.

Freddy Krueger and Jason Vorhees are taking their time reviving, so who knows.

Friday the 13th is going to be mired in legal red tape for the next two years. No development of new entries, new merchandise, nothing.

And apparently WB wants to finish milking the Conjuring franchise before they even consider revisiting Elm Street.

As for these next two movies, sure, bring them on. The last one was fine.

Let's hope the new two sequels are not of Pirates of the Caribbean quality, due to the second and third installments of that film series being filmed back-to-back, just like Halloween.

Edited by The12thDoctor on Jul 22nd 2019 at 10:13:42 PM

Those movies were both successful and well-liked by the fanbase at large, at least over the two dumpster-fires that followed. Change my mind.

Anthony Michael Hall has joined Halloween Kills as a grown-up Tommy Doyle.

Michael Myers is very strong for someone his age.

In other words, unlike other icons of terror, Michael Myers does age visibly.

Edited by JoLuRo075 on Aug 27th 2019 at 10:06:12 AM

Not great news:

• Halloween Kills has been delayed for October 15, 2021 while Halloween Ends is now coming October 14, 2022.
• John Carpenter tweeted a response.
• And here's a micro-trailer to compensate:

I'm surprised they're not sending it to VOD... especially since the entire plot leaked months ago.

Some people have even actually seen it...

The explanation it offers for Michael's survival is... not great?

There have been worse bullshit explanations for Michael surviving. For example, floating down river and falling into a coma for a year or replacing yourself with some random stooge at the last second so he gets his head chopped off instead.

This retcon is only slightly less galling than the one in Resurrection when you consider that Laurie had a plan that was implicitly a considerable amount of time in the making, and it fell through because she didn't account for the fact that firefighters are gonna fight fires. Seems like a pretty significant contingency issue, Laurie...

The escape itself reminds me of every idiot who presses his head to a door the killer is on the other side of when they should know better.