Halloween II (2009)

10 Comments

1. 

   Helltopay27 from United States
   30 Mar 2012, 3:14 am

   Rob Zombie should have named his latest film "Kill-****ing-Everything,"as it would have given audiences a better idea as to what to expectwhen paying for a ticket. It also would've been a signal not to expectany shred of respectability that Zombie was able to retain in his firstfilm. Unlike the first film, which was at least intriguing if not good,Zombie relies on every horror-cliché imaginable in order tounnecessarily pad the run time and the body count under the misguidedbelief that greatness is measured in terms of sheer brutality.

   Zombie must have decided that audiences needed an even greater reasonto hate the main character after he turned her into a typicallyannoying teenage tramp in the first installment. As a result, Lauriehas become a crust-punk vegetarian, no doubt altered by the events thattranspired a year earlier. She has continuously suffered fromnightmares and delusions since that fateful Halloween, and the audienceis reminded of this every five minutes by dream sequences that litterthe first half of the film. Meanwhile, Michael Myers has indeedsurvived the first film and is on a three day trek back to Haddonfield,killing any form of life that he encounters along the way. His arrivalis precipitated by numerous red herrings in the form of dreamsequences, and this back-and-forth pattern is continued throughout thefilm until he actually arrives and continues his habit of killingeverything in sight.

   In order to add another layer to a rather straight-forward plot, anexamination of post-traumatic stress is included, as Laurie is showncoping with her life after it had been shattered the year before. Thisremains the greatest aspect of the film, as Laurie's battle, even withthe saturation of unnecessary dream sequences, is a gateway foraudience sympathy. Apparently not satisfied with this connection,Zombie also attempts an examination of Michael Myers's psyche, despitethe perfect serial-killer development of the first film. This newexamination centers on the dream interpretation of a white horse, whichMichael constantly envisions alongside his deceased mother. In hisvisions, he is depicted as a child, and his mother instructs him tounite their family once again (meaning that he has to find Laurie).

   In essence, Michael is instructed by his dead mother to kill, a blatantconnection with the original Friday the 13th series that would havebeen impossible to have gone unnoticed by Zombie. These visions ofMichael's are also the main contributors as to why the film is aconvoluted mess. The constant appearances of the white horse motif aremeant as an explanation for Michael's behavior, but they instead becomea hindrance to the flow of the film. In addition, his insistence tokill everything he encounters is unexplained by his mother's desire toreunite the family, save for a brief instance in which his motherinvites him to "have some fun." Of course, murdering everything insight is the nature of the Michael Myers character, but as Zombie hasfocused on mental disease rather than the supernatural in his Halloweenseries, the new serial killer persona remains an insufficientjustification.

   By avoiding any supernatural aspect, Zombie also fails to sufficientlyexplain certain events in the film. It is never mentioned how Myers wasable to survive a gunshot to the face without hospitalization, nor isit explained why it takes a year for Michael to return to Haddonfield.It is vaguely mentioned that the police misplaced the body in transportfrom the crime scene to the morgue (which is depicted in a scene thatis dismissed as a dream of Laurie's), but this appears to have occurredin the outskirts of town. The delusions that Michael suffers are alsoshared by Laurie in the film's climax, which, barring any supernaturalconnection, simply doesn't make any sense.

   Finally, in what may be the most unforgivable aspect of all, Zombiecompletes his transformation of Dr. Loomis from the beloved, heroic,and selfless figure of the first series to an arrogant, self-centeredegotist. Loomis serves no function in Halloween II other than to informLaurie that she is Michael's sister. Other than this development, he ismeant as a spiteful center of rage that the audience is led to hatemore than Myers, and as a result, his inclusion in the film is almostuseless.

   In between scenes of Laurie's breakdown, Michael's visions, andLoomis's asinine ego-trips, Zombie manages to saturate the remainingrun time with close-ups of excessively gory wounds, unattractive bodilyfeatures, and every squishy sound imaginable. Zombie has never beensubtle with his depiction of the macabre and grotesque, but in thisfilm, it is so excessive that it becomes apparent that he isn'tinterested in any serious, albeit fictional, examination of mentalillness. Rather, he seems more focused on making the audience ill. Forseedy exploitation films of yesteryear, this is a perfect combination.In mainstream cinema, however, it has become a tired cliché that ranits course in the eighties.

   Reply
2. 

   madness30043 from United States
   30 Mar 2012, 3:14 am

   I was an extra in this movie, and even on the set I knew it was goingto be a disaster….what I was unprepared for was the level of disasterthat they took it to.

   I have no problem with language or violence, but I do have a problemwith it when there is no good reason. The script sounds like it waswritten by a middle schooler (honestly, who uses THAT many F bombs inregular conversation?). And the violence, while somewhat expected, wentWAY over the top as far as simply telling the story. On the plus side,whoever did the makeup effects for this movie has one heck of a demoreel to show off now.

   I'll agree that casting Maclolm McDowell as Dr. Loomis was a goodmove…it would have been even better if they had made him evenremotely likable. Same goes for virtually any of the characters in H2.

   Oh, memo to those who griped about Michael grunting….he grunted inCarpenter's original as well…just check out the scene where hestrangles Lynda, or when he's breaking into the closet, or chokingLaurie.

   And of course they had to go the whole "oh-my-God-she's-his-SISTER!"route, which was stupid in the first HALLOWEEN 2 and is even more sothis time around. John Carpenter came up with the idea in 1981 and evenhe admits it was a dumb one. Michael Myers is far more terrifying assimply the "boogeyman"…..anybody could be his victim, nobody is safe.With this lame subplot, as long as you aren't related to him or betweenhim and a relative, you're safe! Maybe it's nostalgia for the "good olddays", but I think I'll avoid any of Mr. Zombie's future HALLOWEENefforts and simply stick with Carpenter's classic….the unequaledoriginal…..

   Reply
3. 

   ethaskins from United States
   30 Mar 2012, 3:14 am

   First off, I am a fan of Rob Zombie's "The Devil's Rejects" and "HouseOf A 1000 Corpses." Also, I liked Rob Zombie's first Halloween. Itwasn't great, but it was decent. I was looking forward to having a lotof fun watching this sequel; only to be set up for extremedisappointment. The movie lacked suspense. Also, for some reason, Robmust have thought that to be extremely loud is to be scary. Wrong!Also, Laurie Strode a/k/a Angel Myers was so whiny and unstable, Icouldn't wait for her to be killed, which, sad to say, never happened.Every character was just a cookie cut-out waiting to be killed. Therewere many of the actors in which you didn't even get a good look attheir faces before they were killed. The movie was disjointed andextremely loud and gory. I love gory, but this was a bit over the top.Michael Myers was popping up everywhere. It was too much like a Wile E.Coyote cartoon. Oh, I guess Sheri Moon Zombie wanted a bigger role.Wow! What a big mistake! She cannot act. And she was annoying. Also,Sam Loomis's character was only there to be killed off. Believe me, bythe end of the movie, you'll be cheering for his death. I also didn'tlike the fact that the movie veered so much into her nightmares thatmost times you didn't know if it was real or just a nightmare; or wasMichael Myers like Freddy Krueger and he could be anywhere. All of thecharacters were white trash and severely stupid. I never thought amovie could be so violent and gory yet be so dreadful and boring at thesame time. As I was watching the movie, I kept thinking about theoriginal Halloween 2. It was a much better movie. Also, Rob Zombieshould know better! Introduce the characters and let us get to knowthem before you go and kill them. In this movie, Michael Myers went ona happy and silly killing spree, popping up everywhere at the sametime, with such silly and extremely loud stabbing sounds! Rob, do youknow what overkill is? Do you actually know how to write a decentscreenplay without excessive "F" words? And can you write a moviewithout having to put your wife in it? It's not enough to have style,Rob, you also need to have some substance in there. Halloween 2 (2009)was just a stylish piece of crap.

   Reply
4. 

   Marcus230 from United States
   30 Mar 2012, 3:14 am

   I don't know where to begin after coming in from seeing Rob Zombie'sHalloween II. The comments/reviews that I've read so far sum it all upperfectly. It's bad beyond belief. It's not scary or suspenseful. Thereare just back to back ugly, mean-spirited, and brutal killings. Themain characters aren't likable at all especially Scout Taylor Comptonas Laurie Strode. We cared for and wanted to see Jamie Lee Curtissurvive every time she played Laurie. Compton is so bad, she shouldhave been the first to get wiped out. There is no real story either,just ideas and visuals ripped from Freddy, Jason, and Leatherface plusother stuff that must have come from cocaine and or meth usage. Thinkof the worst Nightmare, Friday, Texas Chainsaw, or SAW volume you'veviewed. I guarantee that this is worse. Zombie should start payingpeople like Sam Raimi, Wes Craven, Sean Cunningham and others to ghostdirect his films. Uwe Boll could do a better job.

   Reply
5. 

   Film-Fan from Columbus, Ohio
   30 Mar 2012, 3:14 am

   I want a refund! This ranks as my worst movie-going experience of alltime.

   The first Zombie "Halloween" is eons above this disaster. My primarycomplaints (besides the ridiculous, convoluted plot): annoyingly loudsound effects that take the violence to comedic levels (all you needare SPLAT, CRUNCH and ZAP title cards a la "Batman" to make itcomplete), always way too dark photography (no one thought to plug in afew lights?), a Michael Myers that looks like Vincent from TV's "Beautyand the Beast" (what's with the flowing robes?), and a love forcharacters that give the phrase "poor white trash" a whole new meaning(do these people EVER clean anything?). I also resent the introductionof characters just to butcher them off 45 seconds later.

   The actors try their best, but have nothing to work with. A scriptoverburdened with profanity (The F Word over and over and over) reallydoesn't allow for much "acting." I love Malcolm McDowell…but NOT inthis movie. What a waste of a good actor.

   I admit horror movies are not my greatest love…but HALLOWEEN II isjust plain painful to watch.

   Reply
6. 

   wttstrange from United States
   30 Mar 2012, 3:14 am

   I am a huge Halloween fan, so I am not foreign to the series. Iunderstand that Rob Zombie tried to create a whole different movie andnot follow the original movies but really? ghosts? seriously…

   So right when the movie started I loved how it continued right on fromthe end of Rob Zombies first Holloween where laurie is walking down thestreet covered in blood with the 357 still in her hands, but what iloved about Rob Zombies first holloween is that there is a lot ofcriteria covered showing Myers life at the beginning, but this goesstraight into killing with no motive.

   Even though it is a new movie not a remake I do believe that Dr. Loomisshouldn't have sold out, Loomis has always been the badass trying tohunt Myers down, now he is a sell out who dies in the end… there isno where to go with a sequel on this because it wont be Holloweenwithout Loomis.

   But the number one thing that ruined this movie is the ghosts…seriously what the hell, Ghosts? this is a slasher film not a ghostfilm, keep casper out of this, throughout the whole movie his mom'sghost, and him as a kid ghost(by the way the kid taking Daeg Faerch wasterrible, he was a terrible Micheal he no longer had the creepy kidambiance) just keeps popping in and saying these terrible lines like"were ready Micheal", seriously rob zombie what were you thinking…

   So if you are as big of a Halloween fan as me don't see this movie.

   Reply
7. 

   J_Trex from Philadelphia
   30 Mar 2012, 3:14 am

   This movie has badly damaged the Zombie brand of horror movie. I likedRob Zombie's earlier slasherhorror flicks. Movies like "DevilsRejects" and "House of 1000 Corpses" combined genuine real life psychocharacters with tongue-in-cheek humor that made the movie viewer feelin on the joke. These movies didn't take themselves very seriously, andwhile gory, were also at least a little bit fun to watch.

   Zombie obviously tried to bring some of that camp levity to "HalloweenII", notably by including "Weird Al" Yankovic in a cameo role, whichhelped a little. I think the movie could have used a lot more of "WeirdAl" and a bit less of Mrs. Zombie (Zombie's wife played a leading rolein this turkey, some type of angel of death as Jason's Mommy…don'task, too stupid for words).

   Unfortunately, this move really stunk. It was just bloodydisembowelment after decapitation after evisceration. It was a stupidand bloody mess and a complete waste of time.

   Stay away from this stinker.

   Reply
8. 

   dyl_gon from Canada
   30 Mar 2012, 3:14 am

   It was quite the dilemma deciding whether Halloween II was a good filmor a bad one. One thing is certain: it's a "weird" film, undoubtedlythe most bizarre major studio release of the year. Rob Zombie's sequelor "vision" – as it's being touted – seems to have been envisioned withthe aid of various hallucinogenics and mind-altering substances,withering away whatever was left of the original John CarpenterHalloween mythology after Rob Zombie's remake and leaving anonsensical, uber-violent mess in its wake. This isn't aso-bad-it's-good movie, nor would I call it a just-plain-bad one; thisis a so-weird-it's-good movie, a blood-drenched collage of absurditiesand irrationality, which like a train wreck (a term some would use torefer to previous Zombie efforts), is hard to look away from. Little ofthe iconic original Halloween is left here – all that's left is MichaelMeyer's mask, which itself is less recognizable beneath the grime andtorn pieces – but perhaps it would be foolish to try to match theoriginal masterpiece anyway. Zombie has crafted something entirelydifferent; something quite frankly silly, dumb and, for lack of a morepolitically correct term, "retarded", but nonetheless entertaining, notin spite of, but because of this.

   Picking up where the remake left off, Halloween II sees Laurie Stroderecovering from her ordeal with psychopath Michael Meyers.Mentally-traumatized after both the Halloween day massacre of nearlyeveryone she knew and her own dispatching of Meyers – by way of shot tothe head -, Laurie finds herself dreading the one-year anniversary ofthe serial killings, plagued with the irrational fear that the deceasedMeyers will return to small-town Haddonfield to finish her off. Well,low-and-behold, Meyers is alive, and he makes it his mission to trackdown Laurie and finish what he started.

   The general plot outline is as generic as can be, but it's hard tofathom or comprehend the insanity that occurs. Michael Meyers, theoriginal mask-wearing soulless psychopath, the "pure evil" murderer,the "Big Cheese" of all horror movie villains, has now been transformedinto a homeless vagrant who randomly eats dogs. Yep, that's right, he'sa hobo that eats dogs now. When a film is remade, one expects somealterations, but this is akin to remaking Indiana Jones and turning himan extraterrestrial who molests children. There is practically nosemblance of the original character…and the new ones just messed. Aswell, Meyer's is followed by his deceased mother, himself in child-formand a gigantic white horse, seemingly all figments of his imagination.Except they interact with Laurie as well…making them ghosts? ExceptMeyers isn't deceased, so it makes absolutely no sense for there to bea ghost version of him. Maybe Laurie is inexplicably psychic and seeinginto Meyer's mind? Or maybe Zombie just ate a few too many shrooms.Either way, this mom-boy-horse trio follows Meyer's around as he killsvarious victims, instructing him on what to do next. It's as stupid asit sounds.

   Dr. Loomis has also been changed significantly. The remake hinted atLoomis profiteering slightly off the Meyers incident, but here it hasbeen taken to ridiculous proportions. He's now a prima donna celebritywho travels around in a jet black limo with his publicist, throws hissyfits at reporters and threatens to beat on woman. One sequence has Dr.Loomis appearing on a talk show alongside Weird Al Yankovic, with thefamed disc-joker lampooning the doctor and Michael Meyers (making punsabout whether this is the same guy who starred in Austin Powers) untilLoomis finally explodes with anger on air at the hosts assertion thatMeyers is a shark. If it sounds like this has nothing to do with thefilm, it's because it doesn't. This irrelevance not only pertains tothe Weird Al scene, but all of Dr. Loomis's scenes. His entire role isa completely separate, unrelated tangent in which he gallivants aroundthe country promoting his book. For that matter, even Laurie andMichael have about ten minutes in the way of plot. Laurie, up until thelast fifteen minutes, never encounters Michael. The near entirety ofHalloween II is Michael fighting random people – farmers, strippers,tough-guy scumbags – while Laurie lives her life as per usual.

   The rest of the film is a compilation of pumpkin people, vans runninginto cows, "golden showers", discussions about fornicating withcorpses, and sex with a guy in a wolf costume who sounded suspiciouslylike Michael Cera. It's weird, undoubtedly convoluted, but in the endit's pretty entertaining. It's punctuated with displays of headsmashings, throat slittings, and other displays of excessively graphicviolence. Nudity is slightly down from the first one, but there arestill several scenes involving bared breasts. In the end, between allthe nonsense, gore and nudity, Halloween II is a big-budgeted,toned-down Hollywood stab at a Troma movie. In other words, a prettyfun movie.

   I'm one of the few who actually enjoyed Rob Zombie's remake ofHalloween – a lot. For reasons I won't get into here I enjoyed itimmensely, but at the same time I could completely understand why somany disliked it. It took some of the things that made the originalHalloween so great in many people's eyes and switched them aroundcompletely. Those who despised the first Halloween for that reason willlikely loathe this second installment with a passion. However, if onecan go into Halloween II not expecting a Halloween movie – or even areasonably scary horror – they might just have a good time. It's not"bad" per say – although it's hard to say what Zombie intended it to be– but it's enjoyable in its bizarreness. Worth checking out if youdon't mind Carpenter's story being completely bastardized.

   - Dylan, allhorrorfilms.com

   Reply
9. 

   Jonny_Numb from Hellfudge, Pennsylvania
   30 Mar 2012, 3:14 am

   In my review of Quentin Tarantino's "Inglourious Basterds," I wrotethat those put off by "Death Proof" would also likely be put off by hislatest. Go figure that one week later, I am applying the same notion toRob Zombie's sequel to his 2007 remake of "Halloween." One of the mostheatedly derided remakes to date, I found Zombie's take impassioned andsincere while transcending John Carpenter's minimal, workmanlikelow-budget-horror-flick terrain. While not a perfect film, "Halloween"epitomized (to me, anyway) the creative potential of the remake whenplaced in the right hands.

   "Halloween II" finds Zombie returning to the Michael Myers maelstromwhile tightening already-established character arcs, employing aharshly gritty style (courtesy of DP Brandon Trost), and topping it alloff with a heapin' helpin' of carnage. Whereas "Halloween" focused onthe inception and evolution of Michael Myers (Tyler Mane) from amurderous youth to the hulking masked madman we all know and love,Zombie's thematic focus this time out is "family" (and its manyincarnations), using the traumatized character of Laurie Strode (ScoutTaylor-Compton) as its axis.

   Picking up one year after the fateful night her brother decided to comehome, Laurie has become a punked-out version of her former virginalsuburbanite self, and now resides with Sheriff Lee (Brad Dourif,sporting a Ted Nugent hairdo) and Annie Brackett (Danielle Harris).Meanwhile, the Eve of All Hallows is looming over Haddonfield like ashadowy blanket, with a rejuvenated, hooded-angel-of-death MichaelMyers making a pilgrimage back home, guided by the specters of hisyounger self (Chase Wright Vanek) and his mother, Deborah (Sheri MoonZombie). In the meantime, Dr. Sam Loomis (Malcolm McDowell) has becomea pop-psychology celebrity, authoring yet another book on his lastrun-in with the notorious Myers.

   With "Halloween II," Zombie drops the slick, polished look of theinitial film, replacing instead with dark, grainy stock punctuated byflashes of neon and the soft focus of black & white. In many ways, thedirector has created a film that, like his characters, is schizophrenicin its style, cleverly threading complex dream sequences into reality,and cutting away from scenes with little warning. While the employmentof dream sequences in most films is a cheap tactic for a "GOTCHA!"moment, Zombie keeps his motives ambiguous: do the dreams represent apsychic link between Laurie and Michael? the erosion of Laurie'ssanity? Michael's distorted concept of pilgrimage? Either (and every)way, they give the proceedings a richly layered psychological weightthat, in addition to their shock value, make us feel that thecharacters each have something at stake. The events leading up to thebrilliantly-staged climax are both unpredictable and surprisinglyaffecting.

   Unlike the "Saw" sequels (which have become the bane of thediscriminating horror fan's existence), bathed in a hypocriticalmorality amid all the twisted flesh, spilled blood, and dungeonlocations, Zombie is cognizant of death as something horrifying anddestructive–the murders in "Halloween II" are played straight,executed with a fury that is disquieting; Myers has become a drivenbeast whose path of destruction possesses a joyless, workmanlikequality, removing any potential glamorization from the act. Everyflesh-tearing slash, every helpless scream, cuts to the bone.

   Quite admirably, Zombie uses his second go-'round with Myers as achance to tie up character arcs and plot threads that felt truncated inthe over-ambitious "Halloween": Loomis, who seems detached from most ofthe main plot, is given a chance to redeem his greedy, bottom-feederways; Sheriff Brackett gets to exhibit a paternal side, but also anauthoritarian mentality once the code of law is broken (he has severalgreat, emotionally wrenching scenes near the end of the film); asDeborah, Sheri Moon Zombie's detached, trancelike performance is aptfor the physical manifestation of the voice guiding a psychotic mind.Amid the carnage of his corpse-strewn landscape, Zombie's interest incharacter interaction and moral ambiguity gives "Halloween II" a depththat, for those with the stomach to take it, is downright refreshing.

   Reply
10. 

    Kristine (kristinedrama14@msn.com) from Chicago, Illinois
    30 Mar 2012, 3:14 am

    A couple years ago we had the release of the re-make Halloween,directed by Rob Zombie, he claimed that it wasn't a re-make as more ofhis own vision. I was very much looking forward to it and was greatlylet down. So when I heard that Rob was working on the sequel, I justlaughed and knew I wasn't going to see this movie. But then I saw thetrailer for the film and darnit, curse Rob Zombie for feeding my hungertowards scare and gore. The trailer looked so great, I just had to seethe sequel, I don't know maybe it had hidden messages saying "see thismovie" or something. But I saw Halloween 2 today and once again, I fellfor it! Now I think Rob Zombie is a very talented director, hisvisionary style is incredible, coming from a graphic design background,I admit this movie still has some great and creepy images. He has thisknack for these gritty horror films and I believe that down the linehis film The Devil's Rejects will be a cult classic. The reason why;despite the fact that The Devil's Rejects is somewhat of an homage tothe old gritty dark horror films of the 1970's, it was exactly meantfor Zombie as it was his vision that made it into the classic that itwill be. Halloween is not meant for Zombie and the reason why is in oneword: Simplicity.

    Simplicity being the reason why this isn't Zombie's picture to messaround with, Michael Myers is evil, no specific reason why, he just is.As we saw in the first movie, Zombie tried giving Myers a soul and ittook away the scare more than give it to the audience. He's madeMichael Myers into a bum, or at least he looks like one, take forexample: The Mask. Myers does not wear the mask for most of the film orat least it's ripped off and we can see a good amount of Myer's faceand it's not Michael Myers without the iconic mask. His look for me isjust all off as well, I don't see his height as much of something to bebothered by, while his kills are extremely creative and fun to watch onscreen, he still didn't do much for me as he looked like a hippie bumwith that long black cloak. Zombie also has all his trademarks in thismovie, as his love for the 1970's, strippers/boobies, gore, sex, drugsand dirty ugly bums who look like they still haven't figured out thatthe tooth brush has been invented. But here's Zombie's version of whathe thinks the sequel should be.

    Taking right where we left off from the first film, Laurie has avicious nightmare that Michael is still after her, but she wakes up.It's one year after all the murders and Laurie is now living with theBracketts. Michael's body has been missing since last Halloween,presumed dead, and Laurie has been having recurring nightmares aboutthe event. While Laurie deals with her trauma through therapy, Loomishas chosen to turn the event into an opportunity to write another book.Meanwhile, Michael has been seeing visions of his mother's ghost and ayounger version of himself, who instructs him that with Halloweenapproaching it is time to bring Laurie home.

    Scout Taylor-Compton, this girl, I have no idea why she was picked asthe strong female Laurie Strode, because she spent 98.9% of this moviecrying, sobbing and blubbering "he'sgonnagetmeeeee!I'mnotwhoyathinkiam!", and how in the heck was I supposed to root forthat kind of a female lead? Scout is a lousy actress and the writingwas all wrong for the character as well. Another trademark that Iforgot to mention earlier that Rob loves putting in his movies, hiswife Sherri Moon, pretty woman and over all a talented enough actress.But how in the heck was her role needed in this movie? Zombie isripping off Psycho by making Myers see his dead mother all over theplace saying for him to kill everyone. Again, I like the simplicity ofMyers just being born evil with no explanation. Rob Zombie delivers inimages and gore, but not in the scares. While the movie has someawesome kills, it's not worthy to add to the collection of Halloweensequels which the first 7 are actually good and worth watching. Thiswas a project that wasn't meant for him nor should have it been foranyone, Halloween should be left alone. With Zombie making this intohis vision, he's turned Mike Myers into a bum who dumb people for someodd reason pick a fight with and then get killed in the end and I'msupposed to feel sorry for them? Not likely, just skip it.

    1/10

    Reply