(Note to LaughingMan + CheshireCat: don't worry about posting this anytime soon, I was just in a writing mood).
Once upon a time, there was a man named John Carpenter. In 1979, he made a little independent film about a masked killer who hunted down babysitters. This film was
Halloween, the definitive film that helped launch the sub-genre of horror called the slasher. For the next decade, many other films would bring about their own influence on the face of horror, like
Friday the 13th and
A Nightmare on Elm Street.
Fast forward two decades later to the 2000's, the Remake Years; Hollywood devised a plan to remake classic horror films beginning with
Texas Chainsaw Massacre in 2003. In 2007, a young and up-and-coming director called Rob Zombie decided to rehash a legend among legends: Halloween. There were mixed reactions amongst fans, but it was universally panned by critics. Although the story was mainly left intact, it was a brutally violent mess with annoying, out-dated characters, out-of-place themes, and a misinterpretation of the main villain. Instead of an average-sized man who is the representation of pure evil, we get a wrestler with a vengeance. It wasn't that good. However, this wouldn't be the last of the Rob Zombie Plague.
Attachment:
halloween1.jpg [ 284.92 KiB ]
In the summer of 2009, Zombie struck again with the release of another trainwreck,
Halloween 2. If you think the first was bad, it looks like
Evil Dead 2 in comparison to its sequel. It really wasn't groovy. I had to bring a friend with me to see this thing because I didn't want to brave this hurricane of crap by myself.
SHIT.-Synopsis-
This film starts where the last one left off, Laurie Strode (Scout Taylor-Compton) being rescued from Michael Meyers's rampage. While she is trying to adjust to life after the horror, and after Dr. Loomis survived his encounter, the killer's corpse is taken from the scene of the crime. Pulling a Jason Voorhees, he wakes up while being taken to the morgue and shit hits the fan. Meyers follows Strode, and the horror begins again. We also have an interesting sub-plot where Dr. Loomis (Malcolm McDowell) writes a book about the events of the last film, battling with his inner-demons.
To prevent myself from making this totally biased, even though I despise this film, let's try and find some good things about it. This will be quite an effort, but I'll be damned if I didn't try...
-The Good-
Rob Zombie has a nasty habit of inserting some bizarre, weird visuals into his movies. He did it with
House of 1000 Corpses, and he did it with this movie as well. What do I mean? Gothic motifs and imagery that predominantly occurs throughout his movies. Even though this film is terrible in its own right, some of the gothic aesthetic is visually appealing. For instance, when one of the characters goes into a dreamlike state, Michael takes Laurie Strode to a gathering of strange creatures with pumpkins on their heads, the Lords of Halloween. Granted, while this really had no relation to the actual movie, it was neat to stare at for a second.
Also, while another motif was in itself fucking
retarded, the white horse was also visually appealing.
The only other good thing I can really think of in terms of this movie was the Dr. Loomis subplot going on between the nihilism, gothic imagery, and unflinchingly brutal murders. I'll admit, I wasn't that big of a fan of how Zombie portrayed Dr. Loomis in this film, but I'll leave that for the bad section. However, the way that Loomis is constantly battling internal demons is interesting in itself, being accused of making a profit off his book, which in a way is like profiting off of the deaths of innocent people. While he constantly battles these accusations, he soon discovers that he was absolutely wrong. There was even a part where he was brought onto a talkshow where the host and... Weird Al?... ridicule him in a funny way. Honestly, this was my favorite part of the movie, and the whole subplot was the most enjoyable part of this movie for me.
Nou!There was also one truly touching moment when Strode's step-dad discovers that his own daughter has been brutally killed, and Laurie has been kidnapped. You actually felt his pain, and I was able to actually feel something for the brief nanosecond that it happened.
Unfortunately for this movie, I wouldn't be here if I were actually praising this godawful atrocity. Let's move on!
-The Bad-
...wait, where do I begin? There was so much wrong with this movie that there will be a hell of a time actually figuring out what to put first. Maybe it's best if I start from the beginning.
First off, let's talk about the characters. As I have said before, characters are the most vital portions of any good story, but what happens when there aren't any characters you can even relate with? Major and minor characters suffer from having some form of disease called Cuntheadcitis, and can be diagnosed from these symptoms:
- A desire to
have sex with corpses: Yes, I'm not kidding here. In the beginning of the film, when the coroners are taking the bodies of the supposedly-dead Meyers and his victims, one of them tells the driver how the bodies of one of the dead
teenagers was still oh so very attractive and fuckable even after that little thing happened with
dying. Is Zombie trying to project his lust for corpses in a not-so-subtle way? Well, one of his movies IS called
House of 1000 Corpses...
Attachment:
633615975060589818-necrophilia.jpg [ 56.09 KiB ]
- What we call "Drunken Teenage Idiot" syndrome. Further into the movie after Laurie discovers that her brother is Michael Meyers (big surprise there), she goes to her friends for help. They're not really good friends when Laurie suggests that they go out and drown her sorrows in a kegger, and
they let her. Yes children, the best way for your friend to get over the emotional trauma of knowing her brother is a notorious serial killer is to
drink until you can't stand.
Classy
The main characters, aside from a FEW, are also completely unlikable. Especially Laurie Fucking Strode. First, let me give you the characteristics of the original, played by Jamie Lee Curtis. Throughout her appearances, she has been the good girl. She didn't get drunk, she refrained from ditching her responsibilities, and she tried to do the right thing. Even after the first film, she kept it together and didn't let her daunting encounters with Meyers destroy her life.
The new Laurie Strode, Scout Taylor-Compton, makes me want to... okay, here's a visual for you. Imagine somebody you really don't like, whether it be an ex-boyfriend, a school bully, or Hayden Christensen. Got that? Good. Now, imagine you were a cross between Jigsaw, Leatherface, and a Bond villain, and imagine you just built the most painful, diabolical deathtrap of all time. Now imagine subjecting said person to that. That's how I feel about this new Laurie Strode. After the events of the first film, her life has completely gone to shit, and she has completely changed her outlook on life. That's right, Rob Zombie has raped the character of Laurie Strode beyond recognition. Nihilist, gothic/emo, hateful of everyone and everything, probably a cutter, and heavily anti-Capitalist... wait, what?
We go from this...
to
this?!Oh yeah, did I mention Rob Zombie also threw in some heavily political messages in here? Yup, he managed to make a slasher POLITICAL. In one scene, Laurie and her Nihilist buddies even talk about it in full detail and say "fuck Capitalism, it's evil!" So when did we get launched into the 1960's - 1970's, here? Zombie's anti-Capitalist message is emphasized by the characterization of Dr. Loomis, the representation of ultimate good in the last film, and in the original series. He was there to oppose Michael, and was against everything the villain stood for, much like Dr. VanHelsing and Dracula's relationship in the 1931
Dracula. In this movie, he's famous and exploiting the events of the last film to get mass amounts of money. Capitalism = evil, am I right Rob Zombie?
Zombie can't even get a book cover right.
Basically, what I was saying was that the two crucial characters from the original film have been malformed into something completely different and ill-fitting in this slasher film. The main point of the Survivor Girl is to
not be that one drunken bimbo at a party, and
not lose her cool even in the most dangerous situations. She is supposed to keep strong and prevent her whole world from falling apart while sticking to what she believes is right, not let everything come crashing down and reject her old lifestyle for one of excess and pessimism. The character of Laurie Strode has been destroyed by Rob Zombie, giving us a main character who I actually wanted to see get stabbed to death. The character of the Ahab is to represent the ultimate good, and try to crush the ultimate evil before he takes more lives. Dr. Loomis WAS this in the original and first remake, but now he's been reduced to a money-grubbing businessman with a lack of morals that not even his realization and confrontation with Michael near the end can redeem. We are in a Bizarro World, where the characters you are supposed to care for are the ones you care the least about.
While we're on the subject of characters, let's look at the star of the show, Michael Meyers. In the original, he was an average-sized man. In the remakes, he is a behemoth. In the original, his mask never came off, and his identity was always a mystery. In the remakes, his fucking mask comes off,
and you see his face. In the original, you know nothing about him. In the remake, he hallucinates/dreams to himself and has internal monologues with his inner-child and mother, who has a white horse... wait wait, WHAT?
Attachment:
h2-family.jpg [ 118.18 KiB ]
... you're kidding me... so wait, why on Earth did Zombie take a silent, deadly representation of pure evil, and give the audience insight to absolutely everything that goes on in his mind, thus making him more human and understandable to the audience? Well, in issue #286 of Fangoria, a respected horror magazine that has been providing news in the genre for 30 years, Rob Zombie said (and this is paraphrasing because I don't have it here with me) that revealing the inner-thoughts would make him scarier. NO IT WON'T. If you take all of the mystery of something away, it spoils what makes it frightening in the first place. For instance, children are afraid of the dark because it is the unknown; they have no idea if there is a monster under the bed, or in the closet.
However, if their mom or dad comes in and shows them that there is nothing in the room with the kid, they will feel significantly better because they now know there is nothing to fear. It was the same with Meyers. You never knew his true intentions in the original film, and he just stalked babysitters. This was what made him scary. In this remake sequel, Meyers is looking for his sister to have a family reunion. How is that scary? How does that make sense? It doesn't.
I've gone on for a good while on the characters, so let's focus on other things... like... like... the story? I hesitate because there is no real story to this except for the very vague explanation that Michael wants to bring Strode to some shack to have a family reunion. Aside from the Loomis Subplot, there is very little to work with in terms of story, since most of the movie is told via cryptic metaphors derived from dream sequences.
However, what I could definitely see from all of this was Rob Zombie's almost sexual obsession with deaths. Each and every single death in
Halloween 2 was drawn out for at least three minutes, the victim's suffering elongated, shown in full, and made to be gory as hell. I felt so bad for the nurse who was stabbed at least 30 times when Michael found Laurie in the hospital, and I said thank god not only when the sadist finally left the scene, but when that poor character was out of her misery. Jesus Christ, even
Dr. Loomis gets a horrific death, getting his head... crushed or stabbed? I forget because it was so traumatizing that my mind has blanked it out completely. All of these equated to maybe half of the movie, especially the scenes that had no relevance like in the strip club when Michael just rips through there and brutally murders one dude, and then two other people who were just about to have sex.
<you would think I would put a picture here, BUT YOU WERE WRONG>
Not only does the drawn out sadism bother me, but it's the fact that Michael actually put passionate "GRR. UGN. UGNs" into his killing that bothered me. Classic Michael just took a second to kill whomever, and moved on without getting too involved with it. That's the opposite of what Remake Michael does.
Another thing that really bothers me about this is how Remake Michael seems to resemble Jason more than he resembles Classic Michael, both in appearance and story. It's a bit obvious as to how he resembles Jason, but now he's also inherited his rival's mommy problems. From the cryptic dream sequences with his mom to listening to her every command, Michael Meyers is basically Jason Voorhees! The ending to this film is also ripped straight from Friday the 13th: The Final Chapter, where the main villain is killed and the protagonist is so mentally messed up that they actually inherit the mantle as the next mass-murderer. Tommy Jarvis did it in Friday 4, and Laurie Strode did it in Halloween 2. Don't believe me? Here's a review of Friday 4 I did for reference:
http://thehorrorcorner.blip.tv/file/2552462/ (shameless self-promotion? MAAAAAAAYBE)
Basically, Rob Zombie ripped off the Friday series, in more ways that one.
On one last note, it doesn't help when most of the story consists of the characters just cursing their heads off. There's one dream sequence where Strode has a dream where she's screaming "SHIT FUCK CUNT FUCK SHIT FUCK FUCK FAGGOT FUCK" for a good minute or so. Yay storytelling? The added psychological things don't help, but I already touched on a lot of that before, so there's no need to go back and dwell on it.
without the awesomeness, likability, or structure.
The technical aspects are also something to mention because Rob Zombie is a horrible director, through-and-through. On many of the shots, he breaks this one sacred rule of filmmaking called the 180 Rule, which is there not to confuse the hell out of the audience. This is probably one of the reasons why I was so confused while watching this movie. Many of the camera shots were also obscured by blood or rain, and that was just a poor choice in not fixing it. For instance, when Strode runs outside of the hospital to the security shack, Zombie chooses to have the camera look through the rainy window, which obscures the visibility of the shot to a point where it really pisses you off. I could comment on the editing as well, but at this point it would be like kicking a dead horse with how bad this movie is. A white horse.
-The Verdict-
Okay, let's make a checklist:
-Unlikable characters, in many more ways than one
-Poor filming, editing, and score
-Rip-off of Friday the 13th series
-Radical departures from original characters
-Ultra-sadistic violence
-Pretentious psychology
-Politics
This was a list of all of the bad aspects, many of which can be split into sub-reasons for your enjoyment. It doesn't help that the only good things about this are small and almost insignificant, one of which is canceled out altogether with Loomis's grisly demise. This movie is beyond help, and I'm only going to sound like many other reviewers when I say that Rob Zombie has made the opposite of
Citizen Kane. This movie is worse than
Twilight,
Repo! The Genetic Opera, and all other torture porns in existence. This was a waste of the $8 dollars I paid to see it, and t was a waste of an evening. I spent an entire week ranting about this to my friends, and it was for a very good reason.
0.5/5
Coming Soon: Horror Corner's Obvious Halloween Special
Go to page: 
SitemapIndex
RSS Feed