I haven't watched this movie, or many of the Halloweens, in a pretty long time. I decided to come to this page and ended up realizing something. Halloween Resurrection makes no sense. Laurie DID kill Michael. I always overlooked that. I accepted the whole, "it wasn't actually Michael" garbage that they give in Resurrection. So like some, I am dismissing Resurrection and saying that Halloween ended here, right where it should have.
Also see the other side of the coin, where fans like me didn't want the franchise to end as a tribute to being a Scream clone. Had they embraced more of the things that made the original great, instead of ripping off what ripped the original off, then I would've been happier with that being the end. Resurrection was indeed worse, but H20 left a bad taste in a lot of people's mouths.
"He came home." - Dr. Sam Loomis from the original HalloweeN
I liked both h20 and part 8. That being typed, eight was dead in the water from the start, due, in large part, to the truly dire acting at the very start in the sanitarium or asylum or the other s word place. (Curtis excepted) it don't get much better after that...
shareYes, the movie went downhill when it went back to Haddonfield.
"He came home." - Dr. Sam Loomis from the original HalloweeN
I have to disagree. At that point in a series, part 7, you couldn't have asked for a better entry and more final finale. Sure its a lot more hip & stylish bit it had to be being released in the late 90s. I thought it did a pretty good job of blending the new age techniques with that very Carpenter feel (i.e. the shape appearing outside the classroom window then vanishings, Michael's mannerisms, the score... We even got our original heroine back, accompanied the amazing nurse from part II, even a cameo from the chick from Psycho for Christ's sake (theme music intact). I think this one of the best examples of a later paying real tribute to its previous entries and predessecors.
"Oh... I'm not afraid."
-Pamela Vorhees
To counterpoint, the mask was terrible, CGI at one point, the man in the mask was the worst Michael in the series, including Tyler Mane, there didn't have to be blood, which the original had none. Scream 2 did not have to be the movie the women were watching. The horrible rehashed soundtrack, which basically screwed John Ottman. The unlikeable cast outside of JLC. Adam Arkin, bad fit for the boyfriend and came off hornier than the teens. Adam Hann Byrd was annoying. The others were meh and no stand out performances. Really didn't like the Tom Kane voice over, even though I understand now why they did it.
This movie could've been a whole lot better. Could've been worse, too, I suppose. Having grown up with 1-6, I just felt that kt didn't need to be anything other than itself. As for the homages, they were nice, the best parts of the movie.
A better finale would've been a bloodless well paced tension building journey, not some hip, stylish film where everyone was trying to get laid. You know, something with an independent feel, low budget, something like the original.
"He came home." - Dr. Sam Loomis from the original HalloweeN
[deleted]
I totally agree with you. I never understood the hate for H20. Despite being a product of it's time (post-scream and more stylish with hot young actors from television) it was a pretty good and respectful sequel. If you're willing to forgive the late 90s feel (which for some reason many people seem to hate every late 90s horror now despite eating them up at the time) the film has a lot of positives to offer; the best acting in the whole franchise by far, a tight well written story that connects to the original, and a lot of tense scenes. I thought the final 20 mins with laurie vs. michael was absolutely awesome. It's still my favorite sequel in the series and the only one I re-watch regularly.
shareI liked Scream, I know what you did last summer, Urban Legend, etc. But once you stick a Halloween label on that formula, it's not a Halloween film anymore. As bad in parts as the rest were, the films had their own dark tone, not so teeny bopper feel to it. Even 1995's Curse. Halloween was fine on it's own without all the Scream references, the clip from Scream 2, the recycled score, etc. It would've been a decent film if it tried to be it's own film instead of somebody else's. I mean hell, you even had Kevin Williamson and Steve Miner from Friday the 13th working this film. How much not Halloween can that get?
"He came home." - Dr. Sam Loomis from the original HalloweeN
i guess i just dont agree that being a part of a certain time and influenced by the films of that time makes you "not a halloween film".....h20 was absolutely a late 90s movie and it shows, but part 4 and 5 were certainly 80s movies and had a totally different tone and feel than the 78 original. and the 80s halloween sequels were absolutely influenced by the gore ridden over the top horror of the 80s. and curse in 1995 was already showing early signs of the hip 90s horror (the cheap grindhouse look of the 70s and 80s horror was dead by then and not coming back) it just took scream to re-energize the genre on a commercial level. that's the kind of thing you're going to get with a franchise spanning decades. things change, times change etc. the recycled score was dumb i agree, but as for steve miner i think he's really underrated. he directed the best sequels in 2 horror franchises (friday part 3 and h20). i also liked lake placid for what it was. im surprised he didnt have much of a career after the 90s
shareI liked Scream, I know what you did last summer, Urban Legend, etc.
What can I say? I've grown to appreciate them in their time. Keep in mind I was a child of the 80s. I grew up on that. I was in my 20s by the time these other films came out. And look where we are now, Saw, found footage, remakes. They all have their place. I was biased then too. I preferred Halloween, Friday and Nightmare, because that's all I knew. I didn't like them messing with the formula. I've since grown less rigid in defense of Halloweens, though they are still my favorite franchise films.
I grew up. Scream on it's own, not influencing anything (like H20, which never should've happened) was a decent film, Scream 2 was okay, but 3 and 4 just were plain bad. Urhan Legend, I have to admit, have a crush on Alicia Witt. Redheads. Anyway, that's where that came from. I Know, again, Gellar, especially Hewitt, oh man. Way better than anything I saw in the 80s, for sure. But the movies themselves weren't terrible. Except the sequels.
So in short, time changes a man and his opinions. Were any of them better than Halloween? No. But they had their merits and certainly their place in cult classic status, among others, Phantasm, Child's Play, even the Wishmaster series. Hellraiser, the first 4 then the rest sucked. But I digress, it all shaped the horror genre for their decades and I appreciate and respect that. Still have favorites, biases, but more tolerance.
"He came home." - Dr. Sam Loomis from the original HalloweeN
[deleted]
It was the first "changing of the guard" for me. I was too young to have seen black and white films and monster movies in their prime. So Halloween late 70s early 80s style films were all I knew. Now in my 3rd "changing" behind the Scream movement and now found footage, I can appreciate the genre evolving. 4th if you count remakes. Some are more misses than hits, but you can't really blame Hollywood for jumping on the bandwagon. Too bad they saturate the market. Lightning in a bottle is hard to capture.
Times change, people change and you have to adapt, but it's not easy to accept sometimes. In the end, though, it's best for business and I do admit the eye candy got way better in the last 20 years, so that's a huge plus.
"He came home." - Dr. Sam Loomis from the original HalloweeN
They did embrace what made the original great. And it was in no way a Scream clone. And Scream did not rip off Halloween. You are an unbelievable idiot. And not a true Halloween fan.
shareNo, they turned it into a 1990s teeny bopper B flick. If you can't see that, you're the idiot. The Scream writer, Kevin Williamson, wrote this film. The Scream composer, Marco Beltrami was used in this film. Scream 2 was on TV in this film. What about any of that makes it *not* a Scream clone?
And you absolutely have no idea what you're talking about when you call someone you don't know not a true Halloween fan. I was a fan probably before you were born. Given your lack of maturity in the way you present yourself. It's not for you to say who is or isn't a fan. The formula was changed for this film completely from the previous installments.
"He came home." - Dr. Sam Loomis from the original HalloweeN
I think out of all the films of that time, Urban Legend was the only real "clone". Super identical who-dun-it, just a different gimmick.
I feel that this movie was clearly influenced, which is fine for me, except that they took a bit too far. Like you said, the score, the Scream 2 scene (when Laurie'a boyfriend calls out to Sarah, and Sarah Michelle Gellar turns around too... cringing at that 90s pop culture).
Had they toned it down, gotten the mask right and added some more suspense, I think this could've easily been one of the stronger sequels.
Maybe a couple minutes longer, too.
Agree, as a fan you wanted Michael to return so badly that, back in the days, you actually went with the rubbish explanation of "Resurrection". That certainly was no paramedic with a crushed throat at the end of "H20", it was Myers !
Halloween H20 is the true ending of the franchise and the best sequel next to 1981's "Halloween II". The fourth one was a good entry but 5 and 6 were bad. The Thorn curse and the 'mysterious man in black' almost ruined the series. Shame on director Dominique Othenin-Girard (Halloween 5) for not even having one clue about what the series was about. (and I include his version of the Myers House in Part 5)
"Halloween H20: 20 Years Later" was finally the sequel we were all waiting for.
Halloween H20 is the true ending of the franchise and the best sequel next to 1981's "Halloween II"H2O makes such a good follow-up/conclusion to the first HALLOWEEN that it makes the others seem unnecessary to me, though I've never seen them.
One thing I never got was fans whining about how this is just a Scream clone. Urgh....how?
Yea, it's a slicker looking film than the first...BECAUSE IT'S 20 YEARS OLDER. Duh.
It has a hip young cast? So? I love how fans magically forget the dialogue in the first film was filled with witty teen banter. Or, what Carpenter and Hill thought was witty teen banter. Nothing g about the teens in this film are any different than the teens in any of the previous films.
The tone plays it straight. It's not a winking self aware film like Scream. It's actually a pretty well rounded, slow burn of a film. It's still all about Laurie. Hell, I'd even say it's a character driven film over a plot driven film. Pretty ballsy for a late 90s slasher film.
Some of the humor sucks, but that's about it.
H20 rocks and it's a perfect end to the series. Resurrection did not happen in my mind.
Maybe because of the person who wrote the script, Kevin Williamson, also wrote Scream. Maybe because they used Macro Beltrami's Scream score instead of using Ottman's, Carpenter's or someone else's score. Writing music isn't that hard. Carpenter did it in less than a week. Maybe because Scream 2 was playing unnecessarily in the girl's room, which is indeed a wink at yourself moment.
Halloween 2-6 didn't have to borrow from other franchises like Nightmare or Friday to make it's own feel. They had their own style and tone in the decades they were made, so the 20 year old excuse doesn't fly. Had H20 been it's own movie without all the other influences, like the previous installments were, then *maybe* it would've been better received.
Given that the characters : from Marion, who died, Laurie, who was a trainwreck and Will who was a horny smarmy guy, to all the teens who were poorly written, stupid and you didn't really care what happened to them, unlike the original film. So plot would be better than those characters any day.
This didn't feel like a Halloween movie, it didn't act like a Halloween movie. Much like Rob Zombie's efforts, they forgot what made the franchise successful and here we are.
"He came home." - Dr. Sam Loomis from the original HalloweeN
Kevin Williamson DID NOT write the script. I don't know where this blatant falsehood is coming from.
The Scream 2 reference is not nearly on par with the constant state of tongue-in-cheek the Scream films play with. It was an isolated incident in a film that played it straight.
Speak for yourself. I fail to see how H20 borrowed from anything. I don't watch it and think "Scream with Michael!" I watch it and see the only good (Myers) sequel since the second film. The only thing about it is that it feels late 90s. Gee, kinda like how the original feels late 70s...so odd how films feel of their time ain't it?
And I'm sorry, but Annie and Lynda are just as annoying as the horny douche in H20. And to top it off, the horny douche isn't in the film as much as Annie or Lynda. I mean christ, I can only hear Annie shriek "Lindssseeeeyyyyy!" so many times before I beg Mike to kill her. I can only hear Lynda spout corny teen dialogue so many times before I want Mike to give her the old chokey-chokey. I know criticizing the original is a sin, but objectively NOTHING about the characters is any different from any other slasher. You get one or two characters you like, the rest can f--k off and die-and they do. The original film is brilliant for it's atmosphere and low budget, maverick craft. Not the characters. The script is pretty damn basic. It's what the filmmakers bring out of it that make it stand out.
I actually cared for more of the characters in H20than I did the original. In the original I only cared about Laurie and Loomis. In H20 I cared about Laurie, John, Molly and Ronny. So while Miner does not fill Carpenters shoes, he still manages to execute tense scenes of stalk-n-slash while the script gives us a character driven narrative supported by mostly stellar performances.
Way to go, T-eschberger.
I agree 1000% (and could not have put it better myself).
------
Wait a minute... who am I here?
T-eschberger i completely agree with you and already made a similar argument in a comment in this thread previously. i dont understand the hate for h20. i think it comes from a general resentment that scream made horror briefly popular with mainstream audiences in the late 90s....and horror buffs feel the need to disown anything that made money and wasnt niche market fodder. i dont know, but thats the only explanation ive ever come up with.
in a franchise spanning decades you are going to get a bit of a change in tone and feel.
halloween very much felt like a 70s films. a slow burn atmospheric suspense thriller
halloween 4 which came well into the 80s was definitely influenced by the over the top gore and effects driven slasher films
h20 was a stylish late 90s film
the rob zombie films clearly borrowed from the torture porn that was popular after the success of saw and hostel.
and im sure this decade's incarnation will bring a new spin on it....
we're 5 decades into this franchise and they have all been clearly influenced by what was popular at the time.
It takes place in the 90s so why not have a reference to a current 90s slasher?
shareBecause it never did before (referenced 80s slashers) and didn't have to, it was successful without it. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
"He came home." - Dr. Sam Loomis from the original HalloweeN
It referenced the thing so it did reference other horror films.
shareYes, the horrorthon. However, it was a plot device used to entertain Lindsay so they're not just staring at each other or the windows the entire time. While Laurie and Tommy did other things, Annie and Lindsay barely interacted. So it was necessary. Having Scream 2 on TV wasn't. Had it been any other film, I know what you did last summer, Psycho (hey she looks familiar) Hell, it would've been funny to show Halloween III since that one showed the original, it would've been okay by me.
Plus Halloween was the first, not the 7th. Halloween was an independent film that needed all the rub it could get. H20 did not. It was a well established on it's own franchise by then.
"He came home." - Dr. Sam Loomis from the original HalloweeN
You're literally getting bent out of shape by a non-issue. It's kinda sad. Scream 2 was on TV for a few seconds. Thats it. That's LITERALLY it. And you're trying to make a case that it's something bigger than it is.
Not getting bent out of shape, just trying to make a point. I didn't have a problem with The Thing from another planet or Night of the Living Dead, or even the other movie playing in the first 2 films, as it was part of the plot, Dr. Dementia and 6 straight hours of horror movies. That was necessary and they didn't influence either films' tones in any way. Halloween III had the original on TV, it was essential to the plot. Scream 2 was not essential to the plot, not part of a horror marathon and completely unnecessary. By itself, that would be okay, still. Hell, I had no problem with the Psycho references. It's more Kevin Williamson, Marco Beltrami (both Scream alums) that bother me, but still not bent out of shape. I am a fan of the franchise and didn't think it needed to do what it did in H20 to succeed. They screwed John Ottman, which is unprofessional at best.
The crappy mask, the horrible acting, all of these things, on top of shoving Scream at us (they could've gotten anybody else to score, Carpenter, Howarth, even Lux, Resurrection's scoreer and that would've been fine). They also could've gotten anyone else to write it. I doubt Steve Miner would've peppered in Friday the 13th.
But they didn't. So it's not just the unnecessary TV shot (there are 1000s of horror films I'd have been okay with). Much more than that.
"He came home." - Dr. Sam Loomis from the original HalloweeN
You just spent a paragraph being bent out of shape, trying to explain how you're not bent out of shape.
It was Halloween...why wouldn't a recent horror movie be on TV? And why wouldn't a couple of teenagers be watching it?
Ok, short and sweet this time. Why not have another horror movie, *any* other horror movie other than a Scream (Williamson) or Friday the 13th 2 (Miner) that the principal creators involved weren't involved with? Hell *any* Dimension owned property would do. Or just do like Carpenter did in 1 and 2 and pay for another classic. Psycho shower scene, for example, hey's that's Norma/Janet Leigh. My quibble is with what they showed, not that they showed one.
"He came home." - Dr. Sam Loomis from the original HalloweeN
Dude. It was a brief nod. That's literally all it was. You're reading so much into it it's insane.
You act like the scene was some tongue-in-cheek, winkwink meta reference or something. It wasn't. It was literally a respectful nob to the current reigning champ of slasher films. It was nothing more than a quick background reference-because, y'know, Halloween was referenced in the first Scream.
There is nothing Scream like in H20. H20 is a rather slowly paced, character driven affair for it's first two acts. It's a straightforward narrative.
there are actually quite a few scream like scenes in h20 an its clearly influenced by scream the very fact scream is on tv an when the woman drives off from psycho you hear the music from the film psycho also the hip young stars are all something brought in from scream the comedy also feels like scream the film also feels like its trying to be hip by casting hot young stars an ll cool j the best part of the film is the finale fight with jamie which is a great ending to the franchise but the rest of the film is bland an feels like an ok film at best it trys to recapture the slow build of the first 2 but the directing an suspense just arent there also its useless to try to surprise people with here comes myers because we know the game after 6 films halloween as a franchise is very bad 1-2 are great 4 is good 5 is crap 6 theatrical is passable 6 producers cut is good h20 is bland but with a great ending brings it to ok its better then 5 6 but not better then 4 6 producers cut 8 is horrible an should never have been made remake is good but not great it works because its its own film an dosent try to repeat the original the sequel to the remake is the worst of the series
shareTotally agree with everything you said.
"He came home." - Dr. Sam Loomis from the original HalloweeN
lol thanks thats my entire opinion on the franchise i love halloween but as a franchise its so screwed up there are so many timelines hell if they want they can just make a film that brings in any random sequel an ignore the rest lol h20 isnt a great movie but its a good finale for the franchise because of how myers died an it leaves enough room if people want to they can fit the other films in the timeline with it if they use there imagination the real story of halloween ended with the second thats truly the end of the franchise for me its clear the real story is finished by then but if they had to be more they shouldnt have chickened out on the ending of halloween 4 the only way to continue the franchise after 2 is a new direction i diddnt like halloween 3 not because of no myers but just because i thought it sucked 4 is a good movie not great but very easily could have taken the franchise in a new direction with a new killer but it was wasted so it makes the film appear useless 5 is an embarrassment 6 is passable but has to many plot holes the producers cut of six is a good movie an better then either 7 8 3 5 by a land slide even if i dont like the thorn story the plot of the producers cut is just better told an feels closer to a halloween film there are really only two opitions for a new film either ignore everything after the first an do a new story with new characters or do a straight sequel to part 6
shareI think they should just go back to Michael killing babysitters with no family connection. God knows we've seen the other way play out. To me, 4-6 are closed. They were good for the time they were made, without Laurie/JLC, but once she came back it was moot. When Pleasence died in 6, Loomis died with him. There was no one alive who knew where Tommy et al went, including Michael and whatever was left of the cult, so finding them would be impossible. No file, no Stephen.
Once Laurie "died" in Resurrection, Busta and Bianca aka Freddie and Sara could not carry their own movie. Besides,it's been 14 years now. Too much time has passed for people to care. 21 years since 6. So even without the remake and it's sequel, it's time to start fresh.
Granted 10 films in 40 years is a pretty good run. Compared to the other franchises, Friday and Nightmare, where they went to NY, a body hopping worm and space while Nightmare went meta and Vs. they've really torn those franchises apart. So much so Nightmare remake killed Freddy, while Jason is in the midst of his second reboot, with his Mom as his tag team partner which totally destroys the mythos, at last word.
So bottom line, Halloween has made a mess, painted itself in a few corners, but not as bad as others and has one last shot, esp. with Carpenter exec. producing to go out on top. Or not, either way at this point nothing could be worse than the last film.
"He came home." - Dr. Sam Loomis from the original HalloweeN
as far as i know the new jason film with his mom will be part prequel an thats why his moms in it were supposed to get a jason origin an see his father as for a halloween a sequel to 8 would be stupid an if it has busta im out as for a sequel to 6 i feel thats possible to do a film that takes place later or follows that one i do agree a new film that ignores everything after the first is the right way it would bring myers back to his old self an get rid of the family angle it could pick up years after the first an bring myers back to being mysterious were his motives are unknown like why is he after so an so maybe he he isnt even trying to kill them maybe he sees some of hiself in them or what ever theres so many ways i would make it were we dont really know why hes after this person maybe he wants to kill them maybe its something else they should put the ideas in the film but leave it to the audience that would be perfect an bring myers back to a more mysterious figure
share[deleted]
the scream score is a big deal breaker for me, everytime i hear it, i see scream and it takes me out of the movie. I can't enjoy the myers/laurie chase scene cause of that damn score. Otherwise it's a solid Halloween sequel. Could have been better, but it was satisfying in 98. It was also the first Halloween movie i saw in the theater and should have been the last lol
I hated Jaws, it had too much shark, and dont get me started about King Kong, waaay too much gorilla
Well in reference to your problem with Scream 2 being showed
you do know it originally had 'So I Married An Axe Murderer' playing instead - in a meta way of saying 'Mike Myers is on TV whilst Michael Myers is slashing teens up' - so if they had gone with that one for the final cut would you have been happier?
It is a very trivial thing to be critiquing the film for
Also you whine about how the teens in H20 were just wanting to get laid and that is a problem for you - isn't that what Annie and Lynda wanted to do in the original? in fact, Annie tried to get Laurie laid - so H20 is inferior because it focused too much on the horny kids yet the original gets a pass for the exact same thing????
Btw i am in no way, shape or for sayinh H20 is on the levels of the original, because it's not - but that critique sounds like one of those typical hypocritical, contradictory critical reviews from rotten or something that is fine with a certain aspect in one movie but hate it in another
[deleted]