I think he did a decent job with his first Halloween. Granted it didn't need the white trash cursing every other word, but that's his wheelhouse, so I understood it. He kept scenes, lines, even if he tweaked one "I do believe it was" so he definitely kept the original in mind there. Not sure if it was his call or the studio's to do that, but it worked.
My whole issue was the fakeout/hospital being a dream. The whole "in his mind" "in her mind" thing. That didn't sit well with me. In the first film, Loomis did write a book and cashed in, but he still cared for Michael and by extension, Laurie. He wasn't a complete ass or waste. The second one he crossed more than a few lines and was irredeemable. Laurie's meltdown was understandable, if tough to watch. H20 version Laurie was an alcoholic pill popper, but she wasn't crazy and didn't see things like her dead mother or younger brother. That to me was a bit much.
It felt like Rob cared less for this film than the first, doing what he did. Otherwise he'd have made it better, taken care of it. Michael is never unmasked and sure doesn't speak. Just doesn't happen. As I said, had the first film not had so many things I liked, not to mention the 8 previous films, I'd have liked his second outing more.
But a lot of factors took place that didn't sit well with many fans. So much so that the series has yet to recover. So it's not just me who feels this way.
Halloween II had it's good points, Trimbur, for me, Brackett, etc. but it had far more flaws.
"He came home." - Dr. Sam Loomis from the original HalloweeN
reply
share
ohsnapitskale
8 years ago
I mentioned the symbolism(Michael's mother/white horse/brother) and the overlong hospital scene in my original post. I agree those are problems.
However, despite it's problems, I still think The director's cut of H2 is a good film. I think the good heavily outweighs the bad. I also think it's a superior film to the original. The original's white trash element just overwhelmed everything for me. Every scene with the mother's boyfriend was unbearable. He was a complete stereotype. The rape scene when Michael escapes was ridiculous as well. Michael's bully was also way over the top. Plus, it was like two films in one. The first half was a backstory film and the second was a slasher film. Neither gets enough time to develop.
I don't see Loomis as a waste in the second film. His way of coping with his trauma is to sell out and ignore what's really going on with him. He embraces the limelight, the circus act, but deep down, he knows he's become a clown. That's why, at the end, he says "it's over." He even races to the shed at the end of the movie to TRY to redeem himself.
Laurie's way of coping is to medicate, rebel, and lose her *beep*. Played wonderfully.
Annie's way of coping is to play a motherly role to Laurie and probably ignore her own issues.
All of these characters have time to develop. That's what makes the movie so good. I think your main gripe is that it's not enough like the original series, which again, is understandable, but it doesn't take away from the quality of this film. In fact, there are many Halloween fans over at OHMB who love this film, and rank it better than most films in the original series.
reply
share
DragonbradZ
8 years ago
I think by the time this was being filmed, Rob was already on bad terms with carpenter, who he said was "cold to him" (of which John said that wasnt true and called Zombie a liar and a PoS later on) and already went back on his word several times when he said he wouldnt do a sequel (not to mention flip flopping originally on his opinion of remakes and sequels to begin with) until the greedy Weinstein brothers convinced him otherwise, and he did go on record saying that he could of made the story take place in outer space and the W brothers would say okay lol, so I think he just said whatever and did it for the $ and also didnt give a *beep* anymore about character assassinating the main cast.
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/escape-to-the-movies/797-Transformers-Revenge
reply
share