October 4, 2018
Written by: Michael Jacobs, Dominique Othenin-Girard
Starring: Donald Pleasence, Danielle Harris, Ellie Cornell
Budget: $3,000,000
Quote: "No, of course you don't forget. How could you? You never looked into his face, did you? You never saw his eyes. You never saw that- that nothing, no expression, blank. My memory goes back twelve years to the night I offered... I'm gonna show you- show you something. Look."
Trivia: In the infamous laundry chute scene, Jamie was originally stabbed in the leg but the shot was cut from the film by the MPAA because it was deemed "too disturbing" (as Jamie exits the chute, a bloody wound is visible on her leg). Danielle Harris still owns the prosthetic leg.
I'm starting to doubt if I should really watch the sixth Halloween, because they are getting worse and worse. This movie is more of the same except with the late-1980's watering down that horror movies in general, and slashers in particularly, went through. I'm not an expert on the issue, but I have been noticing a trend in the chronology of horror movies. The first half of the 1980s had horror movies become more gratuitous in both nudity and gore. These movies focused primarily on teenagers (or college kids), were lower budget, contained less of a plot, and had a much darker feel to them. 1987 seems to be a high water mark because after this the nudity and gore in horror movies seemed to be toned down. Then, movies focused on children as the protagonists in their stories, the budgets go bigger, the plots more convoluted, and they had a lighter and sillier atmosphere. The reason for this, I believe, it two part. First, outside influences such as the moral majority and the increasing power parent groups were gaining (like the PMRC) were putting pressure on politicians, movie studios, and the MPAA to censor movies. The second reasons involves the inside influences of the movie studios and producers themselves. The beginning of the 1980s had shown that horror could be incredibly profitable and these people wanted to see these profits continue and one way to do that was by appealing to the largest audience possible. Movies became watered down, nudity rare, and mommy and daddy could feel fine letting little Johnny watch Freddy Krueger make puns. I have gone on a long enough rant... Here's a five word review, inspired by @5WHorrorReviews on Twitter: Michael's back, but who cares?
This movie begins right after the ending of the previous film when Michael is shot and falls down a mine shaft. A homeless man then cares for Michael who is now in a coma. A year later, he burst out the coma, kills the homeless guy, and returns back to Haddonfield to kill his niece Jamie (Danielle Harris) who has now gone mute but is telepathically linked to Michael (she killed her mom at the end of the last movie while possessed or something). Loomis (Donald Pleasence) is also back, bumbling about and trying to talk sense into Michael. Oh, and he spends a significant part of the beginning of the film verbally berating Jamie, who is in the hospital, to tell him where Michael is. So much so that others have to step in to tell him to leave her alone. After killing a bunch of people close to Jamie, including her sister, Loomis is able to lure Michael back to his original home. There, Michael easily subdues Loomis and tries to kill Jamie in a laundry chute. Jamie talks some sense into Michael even convincing him to take his mask off but he goes crazy again. Now Loomis has the brilliant idea to use Jamie as bait to catch Michael which actually works. He shoots Michael with a tranquilizer gun and then Loomis has a stroke (he has been pretty high strung for four movies now). Cops jail Michael, but he escapes. The end? No. Not the end.
This movie is not without merit. In the movie there is some kid who is supposed to be a badass, which is completely unbelievable. Michael ends up killing this dummy with a rake to the head, but not before the kid can exclaim "Okay asshole, trick or treat!" Who's a badass now, punk? In another scene, Jamie's friend's friend is ready to lose her virginity. She starts to bang some other dummy in a barn when Michael stabs a pitchfork right through his back. Coitus interruptus. The half naked girl then has to stumble around the barn covered in blood before she too is killed.
Unfortunately the MPAA was pressuring the filmmakers about the violence and gore in the film (although it seemed rather tame for a horror movie). During the laundry chute scene at the end of the film with Jamie, Michael was originally supposed to stab her in the leg a few times, however the MPAA said this would cause the film to get an "X Rating," a death sentence for a film (no theaters will show it). Jamie's sister was also supposed to have scissors stabbed down her throat, but the actress thought it would be too gruesome (it's a horror movie, right?) so instead Michael stabs her in the chest, creating a completely forgettable scene.
There are also some just ridiculous moments that really ruin the film. The sheriff has two dumb cops that work for him who get their own clown music complete with slapstick horns and honks. Wikipedia quotes the Halloween: 25 Years of Terror saying this was to pay homage to Wes Craven's Last House on the Left. I definitely do not remember this in the movie, but if it was there, I imagine it was to lighten up the mood in the dark rape revenge movie. Halloween 5 is so goofy it did not need lightening up. Also, Michael spends a significant part of the film wearing a different mask and driving around town. He is actually a really great driver which is just stupid. I think he even shoots someone with a gun... or maybe I just imagined that. There are also a ton of fake scares as the characters in the film do pranks on each other. This is meant to trick the viewer but comes off as obnoxious. It's the filmmakers saying, you want death? Here's a cool killing! Just kidding... now more Loomis.
Speaking of Loomis... so in this movie, he berated a mute girl in a hospital for a good thirty minutes, he tries to have a civil conversation with Michael but cannot figure out why it doesn't work, he is easily subdued allowing a child to be put in danger, he then purposefully puts the child in danger as part of a trap, and finally has that stroke that has been building over four movies. Worst doctor ever.
I'm hoping the next Halloween movie is better than this one and the last one. Anyways, what's your thoughts?
No comments:
Post a Comment