Thoughts on Halloween (2018)

Image courtesy of hdqwalls.comHello, everyone. This is the second of two special holiday-themed reviews, so if you haven’t read the first, go ahead and do so, and then come back. Before I get started here, I’ll need to clear a few things up surround…

Image courtesy of hdqwalls.com

Hello, everyone. This is the second of two special holiday-themed reviews, so if you haven’t read the first, go ahead and do so, and then come back. Before I get started here, I’ll need to clear a few things up surrounding the subject of this review.

Even though it has the same title as the previous one, it is not a remake, but a sequel. Those who are at least familiar with the Halloween franchise may be wondering why I am jumping right to covering this movie when there are so many others in between, and therefore think I am breaking my franchise rule*. That’s because this new movie is a direct sequel to the original that ignores everything else, meaning the timeline of events is easier to follow and any inconsistencies or plot holes from those previous movies are now gone. In fact, the most you’ll get here regarding any of those are references. Other than that, story-wise, it’s just the first one and this one.

Now, on to the review.

Upon barely surviving her first encounter with Michael Myers, Laurie Strode believed he was dead, only to discover that Michael’s body had disappeared. His psychiatrist, Dr. Loomis, would then reveal to her that she essentially was dealing with The Boogeyman the whole time, despite not having been convinced otherwise prior.

It has now been 40 years since the ordeal. Dr. Loomis has since passed away, but Michael has been locked back up. Meanwhile, Laurie, knowing Michael’s return is inevitable, has been preparing for him during that time. However, that first encounter took a huge psychological toll on her to where it’s been affecting her family. When history starts to repeat itself, Laurie now has her chance to finish Michael once and for all.

What Worked: First of all, the performances are excellent. Jamie Lee Curtis really sells how Laurie’s trauma has affected her, as well as her dedication to conquering the source of that trauma. She is fantastic in this movie. For those who remember from the previous review, I compared her to Linda Hamilton’s original portrayal of Sarah Connor in The Terminator, and hinted at another parallel, which is in this movie. Like Sarah in between the first two movies of that franchise, Laurie Strode is basically the same way here. She also goes from being a reluctant protagonist who doesn’t realize that what they’re up against isn’t human into a strong female character with a survival instinct preparing for the event that the threat comes back.

In addition to Jamie Lee Curtis, they also brought back Nick Castle to portray Michael Myers again, which I felt was another nice touch in keeping with continuity (it’s more than just him, though; I’ll get to that in a moment).

There is another one, but it’s more of a cameo. It’s also not in the way you would usually expect when I mention cameos. I’ll say where to look for it: After Laurie is reintroduced here, a couple scenes later, listen closely. They also do something similar in the movie to reference Loomis in a way that pays tribute to both him and Donald Pleasence, the actor who played him.

As for the new characters, there’s Judy Greer as Laurie’s daughter Karen, who has had a rough relationship with her, but tried her best to move on from it. Although she has played these types of characters in the past (Ant-Man, Jurassic World), the "strained relationship” aspect was not as significant. Then you get to this movie, where it goes much deeper, being part of both the main narrative arc and the characters’ own personal ones. Because of its importance here, you not only see and understand how well their family dynamic works, but there are times where you may actually feel it.

I also really liked Allyson, Karen’s daughter, played by newcomer Andi Matichak. Whereas Karen thinks Laurie is just paranoid, Allyson is the kind of family member that is a bit more compassionate. She recognizes that her grandmother has been through a lot, but focuses on her own problems more. All three of them have great chemistry with each other, and you do feel like they’re a genuine family (maybe slightly dysfunctional at points, but a family). What’s even more impressive with her is that (as the original was for Jamie Lee Curtis) this is her first movie, and she’s still great.

I enjoyed the friend characters more this time around, too. While Laurie’s friends Annie and Lynda were good performance-wise, character-wise, they were okay, but not entirely likable. Here, Allyson’s friends are more likable because they feel more charismatic, and some of them are actually funny.

The other new addition worth mentioning is Will Patton as Frank Hawkins, who, as it turns out, is the deputy who recaptured Michael following the events of the original. He isn’t in it that much, but he is good for the time he is in it. He does have several interesting scenes, including some great banter with Laurie.

Now to get back to Michael himself. The reason why he’s kind of a gray area here is while they did bring back Nick Castle, there are only a few scenes where it actually is him under the mask again. For the most part, though, it’s an actor and stuntman by the name of James Jude Courtney. However, he manages to emulate the way Nick Castle’s original Michael would move to where it still feels like it’s him.

They also brought a particular crew member back: John Carpenter himself. Now, he didn’t write nor direct this one, but he did come back to do the score for it. Of course, it has been updated somewhat, but it is more or less the score everyone knows and loves, including the theme.

As for the director and the writer, it’s a case of "the last people you’d expect to make this type of movie work somehow actually did": The director is David Gordon Green, and he co-wrote it with Danny McBride (whose previous association with horror was Alien: Covenant, which was among the first reviews I ever did). The surprising part is that they’re doing a horror movie, and a new installment in a franchise, no less. However, they’re mostly known for comedies, the best known of which is probably Pineapple Express. How did it turn out? Shockingly, they knocked it out of the park. They happen to be huge fans of the original, and the amount of effort put forth into getting it right shows in the movie. On top of that, they do have humor, but it's just the right amount needed if you’re going to use it in a horror movie that isn’t also comedic.

What Didn’t Work: I would have liked to have seen a bit more of Will Patton’s character Hawkins. To me, he ended up being an interesting character with a very clever connection to the ending of the original. My main issue, though, is with the character who’s replacing Loomis. I liked the character and the performance, and I also liked where they were going with him… at first. My issue with him is where his part in the story ended up going. He’s supposed to be a replacement for Loomis, and he does have an obsession with Michael to about the same degree that he did. Without giving too much away, he ends up being the complete opposite, mainly by doing things that Loomis would never do (there is something else, but it’d likely be a spoiler).

Overall: This Halloween isn’t just a solid sequel in general, it’s one that treats the original with the utmost respect while bringing something new to the table. It also reflects how times have changed since then in regards to how violent you could get with a horror movie. For those who wanted the kills in the original to be more bloody and gory, this more than makes up for that. The best way I can put it is this: you’re going to see some crazy stuff go down in this movie, especially with one kill near the end. It is balanced out by having some welcomed humor, including one particular moment in the middle.

Even looking at it on its own, it’s still entertaining. Those who haven’t seen the original, but are interested in this one, it’s understandable if you’re wanting to have this be your first time seeing a Halloween movie. You’ll just be wanting to have a fun time, and you’ll definitely get it with this. In fact, you might have so much fun, you’ll want to watch the original as well.

I would say see the original first, and then as soon as you can afterwards, see this one. It helps even more if you go at night (which is what I usually do for horror movies), and since it’s been out for a couple weeks, although you may not get as packed an audience now, just hope it’s close enough to that, and that you get an audience who knows what they’re in for.

One thing worth mentioning: There is something at the very end of the credits (but like with cameos, not what you usually expect when I bring this up). All I’ll say is this: keep a significant moment in mind when it gets to what I am alluding to.

*For those who are new here, one of my rules for reviewing new releases is this: if it’s part of an established franchise, having already covered the previous installments is the best way for me to review the latest one properly. The original exceptions were for prequels or reboots that have franchises of their own, but now, I can add “direct sequels to the original that negate everything that came in between.”

This is probably a big reason for my absence these past few months: so many franchises receiving new installments this year that I may have been able to marathon them, but not immediately get to covering those newer movies, although it’s more important that I was able to ensure that I could.