There's an old, rather overused, phrase that goes "don't believe the hype". Although I have no idea of the intention of whomever first said this phrase it has come to mean that something which is praised or lauded is actually terrible. I bring this up because this applies on so many levels to my thoughts on the new Halloween movie. I really want to say "don't believe the hype" on a basic language level but not to say this movie is terrible, or even bad. And so I'm conflicted, torn about how I feel and what I really think. And ironically that is a perfect metaphor for the way I felt after watching this film.
Firstly there are some things you should know before even setting foot into the cinema to see this movie. Don't worry, they're not spoilers;
Whilst the film obliquely hints at these things in dialogue I think it's best the audience know in advance, and for the purposes of this review it's important because it raises a question that could apply a lot; why? Why does the film throw out all of the other sequels/reboots/timelines etc? It should be for valid story purposes. Some may even feel like it is. But I left with the overall sense that it was more to build up hype than anything else. By positioning this movie as the only definitive sequel to the original classic Halloween (1978), this movie is basically assuring you before you buy a ticket that it's better than all of those movies. For me personally, this is not the case. Although I don't want to start the game of ranking this alongside other sequels or against similar examples of the genre I do feel it's fair to expect that given it's function as a direct replacement for a couple of existing movies (Halloween 2, Halloween H20) that it's of a high enough quality to earn it's usurping of them. I'm not sure that's the case, and thinking on it I truly believe that I personally prefer at least Halloween 2, and would argue that it's a better movie. It's worth pointing out that this film even copies a couple of important plot beats from it, which also seems rather like a cheat, or at least a bit lazy.
The only other possible reason for this film's retconning of the franchise is a legitimate story one. Without getting too spoiler heavy it should be obvious that this film wants to set up that Laurie Strode (a returning Jamie Lee Curtis) has both a daughter and a granddaughter (thus contradicting previous sequels in various ways). This film is unashamedly a feminist story about three generations of women from the same family finding power and fighting against an aggressive, predatory male force. Read into that what you will, I'm not prepared to step into that powder keg. I will say though that I found the treatment of male characters in service to this narrative to be just a tad troubling to me. It's a minor niggle but the father of Laurie's daughter is never even mentioned, even when it should be important to the plot. Other men are either inept or inexplicably evil. It's not a big deal though and not really noticeable within the movie, and there are male characters who get to be funny and somewhat caring if you really go looking as well.
This is the women's story though, and especially Laurie's. The decision to have her be basically Sarah Connor in Terminator 2 could have been handled badly but actually makes perfect story sense, and the one part of the hype machine I will agree with wholeheartedly is that Jamie Lee Curtis absolutely knocks it out of the park. Although I feel it would be unfair to expect this movie to come anywhere near the original I will happily say that her performance is greater than anything from 1978. Kudos should also go to the rest of the cast, but especially Judy Greer and Andi Matichak as Karen and Allyson Strode, who manage to hold their own alongside such an outstanding bit of acting.
But this is a horror site reviewing a horror film and I should definitely take some time to examine through that particular lens. My thoughts on the original Halloween are pretty clear (just do a search on this blog). I feel that it's greatest strength is the spooky and menacing atmosphere it creates throughout. Does this new movie do that? Sometimes. Tonally the film is certainly interested in that mood, but not all the time. As such it almost seems to have ADD, as if we'd be bored to feel one emotion for a protracted amount of time. But what about the kills? Despite a couple of iconic moments the '78 film isn't really all that bloody or gory and kills remain mostly off screen. For the most part this is true here, and that would be fine except that the movie itself points out (through a character's dialogue) that audiences in 2018 are far more desensitized and less easily scared. The film says that but then at every opportunity to really shock completely chickens out in ways that make certain scenes baffling and again left me asking that big question: why? Why was this scene here? At least a couple of times I didn't really find a good answer to that.
Let me point out however that there are still a few moments that are gory, and more sensitive viewers might well find them really extreme. I personally didn't but maybe I'm just one of the desensitized generation the film hints at. Likewise the film has lots of "jump scares" but they're almost all "Lewton's bus" situations. Named for the scene in Cat People (1942) where the director, Val Meet in, builds tension then pierces it with a shock that is a perfectly normal non-scary event, like a bus pulling up. I find these types of scares in 2018 to be cheap and ineffective myself. Some people will jump, several in my screening did, but it just annoyed me as I sat scowling at the lame effort. There is one really good and effective scare but unfortunately it's spoiled by being included in the trailer. It's still a great moment though. And there are some nice horror moments like these to be found alongside the other attempts to scare, certainly I wasn't scowling the whole time.
On other positive notes if you are a fan of the 1978 Halloween movie as much as I am then there is a lot you'll get a kick out of. Moments including camera angles, shots, props, kills and even the on-screen naming of Myers as "The Shape" all call back to that original film. It never comes off as just fan service though and is pretty pleasing to watch throughout.
As for Myers, yes he remains a force of nature. The film has no interest in humanizing (like Rob Zombie tried) or trying too hard to add complexity and extra ability. He still doesn't talk, run or even move especially fast (although in fairness he is a man in his 60s at this point). As such he remains as eerie and powerful a presence as ever, for better or worse. It fell down on the far more positive side for me.
In conclusion the film has an overall rather incoherent tone, veering between moody horror, extreme gory horror, comedy, revenge flick and PTSD drama. Things that shouldn't work often do though. I heard some people annoyed at the comedic moments when a lot of others were laughing and I myself found them to be some of the best parts of the movie. Additionally the film takes the idea of using shadows to it's extreme and to a point where several times I literally couldn't make out what I was seeing, on a giant cinema screen. There was honestly a murder which I suspect had a gruesome aftermath but I'm judging purely on another character's reaction because all I saw was smudged blurs against pitch black. In 2018 spooky atmosphere should be possible without making your audience literally unable to see what's on screen. What really works here is the film's subversion of the traditional "final girl" trope. Far from damsels in distress struggling to survive the ladies in this film are capable and pro-active, although outside of the Strode family there is still vulnerable teenagers for The Shape to hack his way through. A particular story moment that occurs around the middle of the film is something I can see being very divisive. The movie seems to be playing this as a huge shock moment but it just fell a little flat for me. The film is also not really interested in exploring it, or anything outside the Laurie vs. Michael dynamic and moves on quickly. This is a problem throughout as characters disappear from the story never to be addressed again, leaving us wondering exactly what their fate is and what their purpose was to the story being told.
Halloween 2018 overall though was not bad. I was just hoping to come out of this film with far more glowing things to say than "It's not bad". Don't believe the hype but do go and see it and decide for yourself what you think if you have any interest in this franchise.
***1/2 (3.5/5)
MM
