I loved this movie! It was an excellent way to bring Laurie Strode back into the story. Although, it seems more like a Scream movie than a Halloween movie, it is actually a worthy addition to the franchise. It's much better than H5 and H6, and it has fantastic music, and the movie has amazing pacing. I really liked the opening with Dr. Marion Crane, she was such a great character in H1, and H2, and it was sad to see her go, but it was done very well. I really liked the whole Private College Dorm setting, it added a lot of claustrophia feelings, and tension to much of the scenes. Since there is practically nowhere to hide, and it seems wherever you go Michael always finds you. The cast was exceptional. Josh Hartnett was good, Michelle Williams was good, and Jamie Lee Curtis was great. All in all the performers were great. The guy who played Michael Myers was really good too, he obviously did a lot of research for the role, and I loved the ending. It was awesome how they wrapped everything up, but Dimension are greedy bastards, and they had to make another one, that sucked much more than this one.

A-

The only Halloween sequel I've seen, and while it wasn't very scary or very well made, I always enjoy Jamie Lee Curtis. This is probably the only horror franchise I like, and I feel like this one deserves a very generous B.

C

What a terribly uncovincing and throughout average bore.

But, but, it had Jamie Lee Curtis, and a schoolboy Josh Hairnet,

Really, though, without sounding like BKB_TheMan, :razz:, who doesn't love Jamie Lee Curtis in everything she does? [-(

Hairnet

Well, it is not a D, is it?

Movie was very well made and effective. It actually brought the series back into a respectable light, even with some mediocre sequels. I think that this should count as the end of the original series, which I consider in three spectrums of storylines B+/A-

#1 is the True Halloween which is 1,2 and finishes with H20- I'd give that easily one of the best slasher trilogies of all time Solid A and the original is a masterpiece. 2 is a worthy followup, and H20 is a fitting conclusion

#2 is more of the 2nd rate storyline involving Dr. Loomis hunting Michael, and Jamie. They tried the best to actually add soemthing to the mythos. Though at times they may have gotten too bold for themselves. This trilogy includes 4, 5, and 6. 4 was very effective, 5 fell flat with some of the terrible characters, and 6 was just a production nightmare that turned an ambitious film into dreck. I'd give the 2nd trilogy a B grade.

#3, oh number 3. This is where the Mythos is thrown out the door, and really dont belong in the series. These are basically alternate universe tales. Includes the very odd 3 and Resurrection, which on there own may be respectable films, but as Halloween films, just never cut it.

B+

Neck-and-neck with Halloween 4 as my favorite sequel. I love the focus on Laurie, the finale (great use of the Halloween theme), and the return of the 2.35:1 frame!

One of my favorite slasher films, and the only sequel to really hold a candle to the original. This is the real end to the series for me, let's just forget that Resurrection ever happened

A-

The only film I've seen from the original franchise, apart from the first film, and it's actually not bad. From what I can remember.

That's probably for the best. None of them are worth watching (except maybe the third for how insane it is) except for H20 and the original.

Halloween 4 is worth watching.

I think the 2nd is still great, and while they show a little too much of Michael, his Shadowy presence is still effectively creepy. Oh, after the shitty remakes, I'd take sequels like 4 and 5 anyday. This one was probably the only A grade horror film outside of the first 2.

Halloween II is fucking awful for the first hour. People only give it a pass because Carpenter's name is on it and they think the fact it's set on the same night as the first somehow makes it worthy of it.

You're way off, its not the first hour, more like the first 20 minutes, as most of it is catch up of what happenned, but the scenes with Michael are very well done. The film is no where near the original, but its the last film in the series that had any influence on the horror genre, not to mention the last time Micheal looked intimidating until H20

The over positive reaction to the 4th film is more ridiculous.

Michael stalking the security guy is well done? If you say so. It sure looks like six minutes of just staring off in the dark and getting scared by cats to me.

This is Halloween II:

-You have a protagonist who doesn't do anything because she's drugged in a hospital. So she literally spends the first 70 minutes just lying around.

-You have a near-midget playing Michael Myers, and he's so robotic in his movements as to be amusing.

-There isn't a single damn interesting new character in the movie. You have Boring Cop Guy Helping Loomis, Boring Ambulance Guy Who Likes Laurie, and... do the others even deserve silly names?

-A twist that is both utterly nonsensical and retroactively hurts the original film.



You mean the fourth film with a protagonist more likable than Laurie? A fourth film where Donald Pleasence liked the script and game a damn? The fourth film with Rachel, and Brady, and Meeker (even Kelly!); characters who make some sort of impression?

Fuck Michael. Michael's easy to do. You need characters to go along with him, and H2 doesn't have any. And it's boring on top of it.

You mean a 4th film where it brought back two characters from the death, A 4th film where they kill the central character of the series with a line of dialogue, a 4th film with really awkwardly bad kills (Thumbs to the forehead, 2 thumbS to cheek, and of course 5 hillbillies. Lol none of the characters outside of the leads were good, compared to the 5th there great, but they are still pretty god awful. Rachel was the best character in the film, but she was an obvious Laurie clone, and Jamie was an above average child actress but more likable than Laurie? Jamie is a little girl being stalked, its a cliche response to not want to see children harmed in films by audiences, add a better than expected average child actresses and anyone could do it. And Donald Pleasance took Dr. Loomis into Hammer Van Helsing territory, as much as I love the man, while he was definitely going nuts in the 2nd he had some real badass moments.

And of course a 4th film with an even worst/predictable twist then the 2nd film (which while stupid and predictable now, was pretty shocking at the time.) 4 is almost a complete remake of the original, with terrible actors outside of the leads, cheap production values, and inspired too much by other horror films to be considered one of the best of the series.

I'm not saying 2 isn't faulty, I agree completely about the new characters, Carpenter was at least smart enough not to give them anything much more than standard lines to say so they at least weren't annoying. But come on, 2 had the first cat fake out, and back then it was extremely effective. And some of the deaths and choreography and creepy setting were very innovative and matched the original at times, you won't convince me otherwise. My Rankings

Halloween- 9/10
Halloween II- 7/10
Halloween III- 3/10
Halloween IV- 6/10
Halloween V- 4.5/10
Halloween VI- 3/10
H20- 7/10
Resurrection- 5/10
Halloween- 5/10
H2- 2/10

On to H20, after watching it recently it is a very solid horror film in general as well as to bring the franchise back some respect.

Yep, that one. Though their survival is of course ridiculous.



Better than chasing her around a mental institution for 10 minutes, having her make a rookie mistake, and chucking her off a rooftop!



Hammer to head, death by hot tub, IV drain, death by shock... what was that about awkwardly bad kills?



Which means you admit there are two good characters, as opposed to H2, which only has one in Loomis.



Bull. Shit.

Ignoring the fact H4's twist isn't particularly predictable, the family twist ruins both the first film and the rest of the series. It's the worst thing to happen to Halloween outside of commercialization.



Yep. Which means it understands what worked in that film. H2 doesn't.



What reason does Halloween II exist other than to capitalize on Friday the 13th again?



I don't care about "back then." It's a cheap scare.



Oh boy. Here we go.

Halloween - 10/10
Halloween II - 6/10
Halloween III - 7/10
Halloween 4 - 8/10
Halloween 5 - 3/10
Halloween 6 - 4/10
H20 - 7.5/10
Resurrection - 4/10
Halloween '07 - 5/10
Halloween II '09 - 7/10

(Yep, I like the Director's Cut of Halloween II. Sue me.)

2 has the Nurse and of course Laurie in addition to Loomis, and the Deputy is pretty good as well, Laurie's not given a whole lot to do but react, but her chases are still a highlight and better than any in the 4.

As for the deaths in 2
First of all, hammer to the head isn't that original, but it was still a classic kill
Great choreography of the guy being strangled in the background= very well staged
Making the girl Drown and Melt her face off in a hot tub= inventive
Blood Draining- Absolutely inventive
Needle to the Eye- First time ever seen in film
Stabbed with Scalpel and raised until dead (Not that inventive, but looked cool)
And a throat slit is always welcomed

Part 4
Thumb to the forehead (No, Friday the 13th knockoff)
Thrown on power lines (Again no)
Stabbed by Shotgun (it's a cool kill)
Thumb into Cheek (Already happened once in this movie)
Throwing 4 hillbillies off a truck, and then squeezing a guys head (Third time, that means half of the 6 people killed died that way)
Then Shoddy Halloween intro remake

Despite that I still like 4 a whole lot. And our scores for the most part are very similar, so there's no real reason to argue. Though the synopsis for Carpenter's 4th film sounds very interesting, I would have liked to see how it ended up (well if it at least replaced 5 with the current 4)

Roof. Top. Fo sho, as BJ would say.



This should be where I say that I really don't actually care about the kills and never have, you just felt the need to slam H4 and I responded in kind. I think just about every non-butcher knife kill is silly.

I'd love to see the first cut of Halloween 4 before they brought in John Buechler to gore it up in reshoots. (Suppose I could say the same of H2; I'd like to see that flick before Carpenter reshot and re-edited chunks of it.)

I agree too, though Rosenthal had his chance with the 8th film too, so I'm not sure how much better 2 would really be. And Shape, I only bashed the 4th because you bashed the 2nd first. Both films are massively flawed to ripped apart easily, but I like them both a whole lot anyway for different reasons.

But I don't like H2. I think it's a bad movie. If I had no affection for Halloween, I wouldn't be able to stand it. It sums up so much of what I hate about lazy 80s horror.

Malek Akkad's first pic for H8 director was Dwight Little. Wonder what he would've done with it.