A Bloody Good Time 8.20.09: Halloween Franchise Breakdown

Posted by Joseph Lee on 08.20.2009

Halloween: The Legacy of Michael Myers.

Logo courtesy of Benjamin J. Colón (Soul Exodus)

Welcome again to A Bloody Good Time.

Last week I discussed the works of Peter Jackson, as it pertains to horror. There were a few comments, so let's look at them.

Chief Runs With Beer had this to say: Jackson's King Kong is one of my favorite movies. I really almost cried when Kong fell. That's a tribute to how well built the character (and his relationship with Ann Darrow) is built. I don't even like animals that much.

I completely agree. That's a testament to making Kong a character instead of a mindless monster. I cared more about the giant CGI monkey than I did Adrian Brody, that's for sure.

Truth Detector tried to dispute the status of Braindead and the original King Kong as horror, but other people called him out on it so I don't need to.

dennett316 replied: I liked Jackson's Kong, but Jack Black was miscast and the "ice skating" scene in the park was a bit much, it really could have been more subtle.
Braindead is indeed awesome, the puss in the custard scene actually made my uncle puke.
Also, love the description of LOTR - Midgets and Jewellery is the new title in my mind from now on.

I'm not going to lie. Braindead is just gross. And I actually like Lord of the Rings, I just thought it would be funny to gloss over Jackson's greatest achievement as if it were nothing, because it's not horror.

Now, for the next two weeks we will be focusing on a man that wears a mask. He also carries a giant knife and likes to kill anyone in his family, anyone that gets in his way...there's pretty much no one that this guy won't kill. I'm of course talking about Michael Myers and the Halloween franchise.



I've mentioned before that Hellraiser is my favorite series and Friday the 13th runs close...but Halloween has been a hit or miss series, for the most part. It's really easy to fall off after an astounding film like the 1978 original, but every once in a while you'll get a really bad entry, and sometimes they'll just be mediocre. Some would argue the original should never have had a sequel, let alone seven sequels, a remake, and a sequel to that remake. After all, John Carpenter's original vision is a stand-alone. It sets up for a sequel, but it was never intended to have one.

The point is, I love the Michael Myers character. I love his presence, that mask, and the way he can always appear scary even when in the worst films. He may be bogged down by some stupid moments (next week is going to be fun) but he's still great. With that said, let's take a look at the Halloween franchise in all of it's glory.



The first film in the series is regarded by many, including myself as the greatest horror film ever made. That's pretty high praise for a slasher film that came out thirty years ago and is incredibly basic in it's approach. At first glance, there's nothing about Halloween that differentiates or distinguishes it from other slasher films that would follow. But if you were to actually sit down and watch the movie, you'd soon realize that you were watching a true horror masterpiece.

John Carpenter was forced to take a minimalist approach to this film because of it's low budget. I'm almost sure he would have went this way without a low budget but this is what he did. You don't always see Michael, you rarely see any blood and it's more about tension and anticipation of the kill instead of Michael jumping out and stabbing someone. Although there is plenty of that as well, including the great moment when he pops out of a closet and pins a guy against a wall with a knife. Michael is portrayed not as a man killing people, but a force of nature that sweeps through the sleepy town of Haddonfield and leaves a trail of bodies in his wake. That's why when the nightmare is over, there is no body to be found. As Dr. Loomis suggests, Michael is not a man.

To be honest with you, I could write an entire column about why I think Halloween is the greatest of it's genre, and one of the greatest films ever made, period. But I won't bore you. This is a film I could talk about endlessly and considering I have eight more to get to in this column, I won't. But I will provide you an example of just how successful this movie is.

The modern slasher clichés that are seen today were practically invented by Halloween (and of course, Black Christmas, don't even think I'm going to slight that gem). The killer sitting up for one last scare, the virgin surviving, having sex and dying...it's all here. Other horror films would go on to run these aspects into the ground, but it was Michael Myers that perfected them. Halloween was incredibly influential, and on top of that, it was a huge success. At the time, it became one of the highest-grossing independent films. It was an extremely small budget (only $320,000) and ended up making what is equivalent to over 150 million(in reality it was 47 million, adjusted for inflation) in box office sales as of last year. That's not even including video and DVD sales. I don't think I need to point out how it was received critically.

After the release of Halloween, Friday the 13th would follow. It was also a huge success and because of this, the slasher genre boomed. Which led to a film that needed no sequel receiving one.



In 1981, Universal Pictures released Halloween II to the masses. It had everything a sequel should have (or at least that's what Randy would tell us in Scream 2): the body count was bigger and the death scenes were much more elaborate. The only problem was, all of the suspense that Carpenter gave us in the original was all but gone. Michael seemed less like an evil force and more like your run of the mill slasher. The very conventions that Halloween helped to shape ended up showing up and making this just like the other films of this period. That doesn't make it all that bad (and really, I've seen worse films in this series, let alone elsewhere), but it misses the elements that made the first so scary. Michael doesn't just seem like "evil on two legs" anymore, he seems like some crazy dude that can be hurt and can be stopped. That's my biggest problem with the film.

However, I do love the beginning. For all the films faults, the beginning fifteen minutes or so are perfect. Michael has somehow survived six shots (as Loomis is quick to point out, and often) and a fall from a second story building. He dispatches another teen, gets some weaponry and decides to pick up where he left off, hunting Laurie Strode. Of course as we learn in this entry, Laurie is Michael's sister. So the entirety of the film takes place in the hospital, where Laurie was taken because of her injuries. The thing I love the most about all of this is that it picks up at the very second the original leaves off.

Halloween II ended up making ten times it'd budget, and was considered a success when matched against other horror films of that year (such as The Howling and Friday the 13th Part 2). Critically, it had mixed reviews. The detractors felt as I do, that something is missing. The people who praised it basically felt that "hey, it wasn't as bad as other slashers of the time".

John Carpenter originally did this film because he wanted to kill off Michael Myers and use the Halloween series to make a different story every year. Michael's story was finished and it was time to move on. Which is what gave us...



I'm going to be completely honest here. I don't think Halloween 3: Season of the Witch(1982) is all that bad. When I originally watched it, I couldn't get over the fact that there was no Michael Myers and I think it slanted my opinion. So I rewatched it a few years back and it wasn't that bad. It's not great, or even all that good, but it shouldn't be considered as one of the worst horror films of all time, let alone one of the worst of this series.

For those unfamiliar with the plot, it's about a man investigating a bizarre death at his hospital...which leads him to a group of witches and cursed Halloween masks. Yes, it sounds bizarre, and it certainly comes off that way. For some reason, the masks will turn children's heads into bugs and snakes. There are also androids, but I can't ever figure out what their purpose is. All you need to know is that this film features Tom Atkins and some nice death sequences. Considering it came out only a year after Halloween II, it didn't have much time to get developed and considering those circumstances, it could have been a lot worse.

The film went on to gross $14.4 million. Sure that was nearly five times it's budget, but compared to the previous two entries it was a disappointment. It's also one of the lowest grossing entries in the entire franchise. In addition to that, most people hated it. Fans just wanted Michael Myers, and weren't really interested in trying anything new. Of course it could have helped if the movie wasn't rushed into production and the story was ironed out more. Maybe it wasn't the lack of Michael Myers, but instead crowds just weren't ready for a movie about deadly Halloween masks.

Moustapha Akkad was firmly in charge of the series at this point, and wasn't going to give up yet.



Halloween 4 is usually regarded as the lone bright spot in a series of terrible sequels. The addition of a little girl, and making her the target adds a new sense of terror to Myers. If he'll hunt kids, he'll kill anyone. Donald Pleasance also returns, before he began just showing up for a paycheck and actually provides another memorable performance. The ending is highly regarded as innovative in a series that was beginning to rapidly lose the innovation it had in the original.

I've called the film overrated in the past, and I stand by it. It, like Halloween 2 is no different from the other slashers of it's time. For the most part, it's just Michael killing teens: wash, rinse and repeat. But there are some great flashes of brilliance, such as the moment when multiple Shapes appear at different points, surrounding Jamie and Loomis. That scene was a stroke of genius, in my opinion. There were also some wild kills, and another instance of the beginning being much better than the rest of the film, as Loomis hunting Michael through the country would have made such a better movie than a return to Haddonfield.

Halloween 4 ended up making three times it's budget, and received mixed to positive reviews. This pretty much ensured a sequel, but which direction would they take it? The end of the film (spoilers ahead, so if you haven't watched this twenty year old film...skip ahead) features
Jamie picking up where Michael left off, and stabbing her aunt. Dr. Loomis screams in horror as she appears just as her uncle did in the opening of the original. In my opinion, that would have
worked. Why not? Like Tommy Jarvis in the Friday films, Jamie is generally a well-liked character. Michael was clearly tired by this point, as future entries would prove.

Once again, Michael was killed off and it looked as if the series may be going in a new direction yet again. But what happened instead was so bad I wish they had stuck to their guns and left Michael dead.



Halloween 5: The Revenge of Michael Myers isn't the worst of the nine films, but man...it is such a close race between this and Resurrection. I'd love to talk about why it's so bad...but I'll probably be inducting many moments from this film in the list next week. So let's just say this is a preview: This film sucks. It so bad that I refuse to watch it. I must have seen the original fifty times. I've only seen this twice. Once on my own, and another time to show a friend how bad it was. I won't watch it, and I own the damn thing (why? because I'm a completist).

It picks up one year exactly from the previous entry, as Michael has been in a coma for that long. He wakes up thanks to a psychic connection with his now mute niece (bwuh?!) and continues doing what he does best. Only this time, who cares? Michael is at his most boring here, as he slays as normal, but it's best compared to taking a knife and cutting through cardboard for as developed as these characters are. Considering the fact that Jamie was also ruined, and Donald Pleasance is clearly only there for a paycheck, there is no reason to enjoy this film.

Critics felt the same way, in case you were wondering. It received almost nothing but negative reviews. Financially, it's the worst of the series. It doubled it's budget, sure. But it was a $12 million gross on a $6 million budget. Moustapha Akkad would sell the distribution rights to Dimension and produce himself, with his son Male. At that point, Dimension was known for various Children of the Corn sequels and The Crow. Would they be able to get this fallen franchise on it's feet?



Not just yet. While Halloween 6 is certainly an improvement over the previous entry, it's still not by any means perfect...or all that good. It's merely an okay sequel, which I guess you should expect from a series that is in it's sixth entry. This film was the last film to feature Donald Pleasance and one of the first to feature Paul Rudd. Yes, that Paul Rudd. I've said this multiple times, but watch this film with the frame of mind that Rudd thought he was making a comedy. It makes it ten times more entertaining.

In this film, Michael quickly dispatches of his niece, after he knocked her up and she hid the baby. If something about that sentence sounds off to you, then you are in for a long ride when you watch this one. That's as much as I'll say for now because I'm getting into this, in detail, next week. But if you don't know what the Thorn cult is, you're better off.

Halloween 6 ended up making three times it's $5 million budget, but most people hated it. his could be because of the troubled production, and various edits and re-shoots made due to both Pleasance's death and bad test screenings. As a result, there is a "Producer's Cut" roaming the world, although it's never been officially released. Of course if you know where to look, you can find it. It's very different from the product Dimension released, and some would argue that it was a better film overall. I haven't seen it, so I can't comment.

One year after The Curse of Michael Myers, Kevin Williamson would write a little film called Scream, which single-handedly revitalized the state of slasher films. As a result, he would get hired by Dimension to save Michael Myers from cinematic hell.



Here's what I said in a previous column...and then I'll add some.

When it was time to bring back Michael Myers for his 20th birthday, they decided to go all out and use a newly popular formula to try and make him relevant again. They even brought in Kevin Williamson to do some touch-up work on the dialogue from the teens. What was the result? Michael Myers and Laurie Strode in a Scream film, the very series that mocked them to begin with. A lot of people enjoyed it, a lot of people didn't. I didn't think it was too bad, but it clearly should have remained more serious and without the cast (Josh Hartnett! LL Cool J! Michelle Williams! Joseph Gordon-Levitt!) that it had. If you're making a film about the final confrontation between Michael and Laurie, you don't need half of the things they threw in there. But at least they definitively killed Michael Myers (or so we thought).

I think Halloween: H20 is one of the better sequels, possibly better than Halloween 4. Why so many people hate it I have no idea. Sure, there are some faults, as I mentioned above. But what it gets right overshadows it. Laurie Strode's mental state after two encounters with her psychotic brother, the many references to the first film...completely ignoring everything that happened after 2, were all very good moves. Sure, the movie could have used a Dr. Loomis, but it could be argued that Laurie didn't need Loomis anymore. This was her story.

Michael was also back to being a force of nature, as he seems to appear out of nowhere and leave death in his path. Like an epidemic, or a haunting, the fact that the other sequels have been ignored means that Michael just disappeared for twenty years. Where has he been? What has he been doing? We don't know. He just shows up and starts killing again. Maybe he's not so much a force of nature as a nightmare or a specter. He's Laurie's own personal demon, and she has to deal with him. I liked that.

The movie went on to make 55 million. That meant a sequel would be made, of course. With Halloween 4 before it, they really should have kept Michael dead.



It's hard to talk about what makes Halloween: Resurrection so stupid when I'm going to be getting into it next week. So I'm going to just repost what I said when I brought this up as one of the worst horror films ever made, and elaborate next week.

This is the worst of the series and just a bad movie altogether. 2002 was also the year that gave us The Ring and the Asian remake boom, so the current self-referential slasher film era established by Scream had long since been on it's last legs. Halloween: H20 was thought to be the last of the series, seeing as how Michael Myers was decapitated and everything. But money demands sequels and so Dimension had this one made. At least they got Jamie Lee back.

Only to kill her off very quickly and move on to a brand new group of nobodies that we know nothing about. That's the movie's first mistake. You take the only other character besides Michael that the fans love, and you kill her off really early. You don't just kill her off, you do it in an extremely wussy way. Not to mention the way Michael comes back is very contrived and would have to have everything happen just so in order to occur. It's complicated but basically he wasn't decapitated, some stupid security guard was. Next, they have Busta Rhymes in the movie. That's fine. LL Cool J was in H20 and he was not only funny but not in there for very long before being written out and leaving Michael to go after the heroes. Not this time. Busta aint going down like that, yo. No they keep him in here for most of the movie, they let him beat up Michael Myers, and utter cringe-worthy lines like "Trick or treat muthafucka". Is it any wonder the series got rebooted five years later?

Of course, even though most people hate it...it was a success. It made $37 million on a $13 million budget. Normally this would ensure a sequel, but a sequel never came. Michael would be back, but it would be a completely different vision.



Never have I seen a more divisive movie among horror fans than Rob Zombie's Halloween. There are those that hate Zombie anyway, and couldn't think of why he would ever touch such a beloved film. Yes, they hated The Devil's Rejects. Crazy, right? You think that movie would give him free reign to do anything he wanted, as good as it is. There are those like me who thought Halloween was not only "not bad", but actually quite good. Halloween never should have been remade, it was perfect as it was, but damn I think that complaint blinded a lot of people.

The remake is, for all intents and purposes, a love letter to the original with Rob Zombie's own insane twist. The first two thirds of the film are an interesting insight into how a young boy becomes the world's most notorious serial killer, but yet it explains nothing. Sure, Michael has a bad home life, but that says nothing. He was already messed up, as evidenced by his torture of animals. All this film says is that Michael was a disturbed little boy and whatever elements of his life were bad, well that just made him become a killer much sooner than he probably would have anyway.

The scenes that are most intriguing, and Zombie's best script work to date, are when Dr. Loomis is trying to treat the boy at Smith's Grove. It is here that we learn that even with insight into Michael's mind...there is no explanation as to why he butchered his own sister. The final third of the film is the original on steroids, as the suspense is lacking but Michael himself is an imposing and intimidating force.

It has it's detractors...and I don't understand how so many people hate a man who loves horror films as much as Rob Zombie. My biggest complaint? The man just needs to get someone else to write his scripts. It was hated by critics also, because they didn't think it offered anything new from any other sequel. Financially, it was successful, making nearly $80 million...the most successful since the original. Funny how that works.

That's it for this week. I hope you enjoyed the look at the series as a whole. Next week, I get into Halloween's dumbest moments...which may be easier than both Nightmare and Friday combined.