Halloween II (1981)

 

Director: Rick Rosenthal

Screenplay: John Carpenter and Debra Hill

Cast: Jamie Lee Curtis (as Laurie Strode); Donald Pleasence (as Dr. Sam Loomis); Charles Cyphers (as Leigh Brackett); Lance Guest (as Jimmy Lloyd); Pamela Susan Shoop (as Nurse Karen Bailey)

A Night of a Thousand Horror (Movies)

 

One of the crap shoots with horror franchises, not just Halloween, is how their existence to continue a huge success, and then sustain the newly made franchise, will cause confusion in the time line let alone divided opinion on the entries' interpretation on the original premise. By the point of Part 6: The Curse of Michael Myers (1995), you are also contending between the released theatrical cut and the intended "Producer's Cut", let alone the occultists introduced to explain Michael Myers when he was a literal boogieman in the first film without need for context, and that is without the reboots of the chronology of this franchise to match the Texas Chain Saw Massacre's. Halloween II at least in its slow, glacial tone is more effecting, but alongside the confusion now between this and Rob Zombie's Halloween II (2009), there is also already from the gate even with John Carpenter and Debra Hill on the script immediately struggles with following the source film.

Setting the film directly after the first was a risk, particularly with three years passing enough to have changed the fashions, and it is felt with issues as much as there are virtues, such as a more manic Dr. Loomis for Donald Pleasance to play, as his desperation is felt and the aftermath of the first film has a psychological effect on everyone that adds to this immediate continuation. There is a perturbing sense of the film, despite having enough years to capitalise on Halloween's success, and the boom in slasher films at the time, to feel rushed. For a film which originates from Carpenter's original, which was very precise in creation, this feels more an issue than a new slasher film made at the time made quickly and trying to find its audience off the back of the likes of Friday the 13th (1980). Contextually, a huge factor to consider was that, whilst Carpenter himself did direct a considerable portion of this¹, and there is a real schism here between the film recreating the original's languid ill-ease and a visible upping of the adult content for the new slasher audience. This could have still worked as a pairing, especially s the production value is still here, where Dean Cundey's cinematography is still magnificent as it was in the prequel, the mostly if not all nocturnal setting for this film having an immense effect particularly for the isolated hospital setting, and Carpenter's music as naturally as good as his other work. There is however a sense, especially with the plot, that this was not allowed to fully flesh out the ideas in the simple premise.

More so as that simple premise works fully as a sequel, even if this should have come out quicker than it did. Laurie Strode (Jamie Lee Curtis) after the fallout of the first film is taken to a hospital and Michael Myers, learning of this from a radio boom box in a moment of actual plot logic despite the absurd image, decides to finish the job. Yes, jokes have been made of Lee Curtis' wig worn in the film, which stands out, but the idea of Strode being more vulnerable, especially when already injured adds a new threat. As much as it sadly means Jamie Lee Curtis is not allowed to show the great performance she showed in the first film, having her medicated to the point of lethargy and having to drag herself around from Myers is actually a scary proposition in terms of a viewer imagining themselves in her hospital gown. That the film has the least populated hospital you can find, even at night for a small town, does however raise issues that, whilst fun as a slasher film, its struggling in a way you can pass with other slashers, where I have slowly come around to them with charm, but here shows a slip in making the premise not have logistical holes, especially as even a contrived series of reasons could have made the premise of struggling through an isolated hospital actually make sense in premise.

The little details become the things which undercut Halloween II in truth, where we will have to accept that, whilst therapeutic hot tubs are not a strange thing you would not find in a hospital, we only have one here clearly for a prominent nude scene for actress Pamela Susan Shoop, a concession to the slasher film tropes of the time, with the more absurd idea being that the temperature settings able to go up to "Scalding". Even that Michael Myers got bored and started using more creative ways to kill people, from syringes and even bleeding someone in the most patient way possible, feels less incongruous than things other slasher films from this period, the early boom, were managing to figure out like making sure you got time to like even the characters who were cannon fodder.

Spoilers have to be brought up, but the aspect of the film which does feel like the most divisive aspect is when it is revealed Laurie and Myers are siblings. It is a plot twist which would be used to good used, redeemed by the likes of Halloween H20: 20 Years Later (1998) in the nineties, which managed to have more power than if Myers was just as homicidal non-entity trying to finish off a surviving victim he randomly choose. In context here, when first introduced however, it is a contrived plot twist. It presents not only the issue with trying to continue franchises, and trying to explain to the viewers the back story, but as well the desire people have with real life murders wanting to know why they were committed, when many can be utterly irrational and un-explainable. The world of horror movies can deal with these real events through a safe veneer, but the fact you could write in why the fictitious killer committed their crimes can completely negate the point of such films as a healthy way to release fears about such violence. There is also the fact that in context to this, Halloween II does not really even work with this plot twist either, which makes it pointless until films decades later would begin to flesh out the weight of it.

It becomes a film which feels, when last time I came to appreciate it, less interesting as a result of me now appreciating slashers for what they are. The sense of expectation should not distort the film's virtues by itself, but it cannot be denied that, after the weight of expectations of the follow up, this feels flat than if we gotten the over-the-top ridiculous sequel instead, the Friday the 13th: A New Beginning (1985) sort of sequel. Films like Psycho 2 (1983) managed to overcome the fear of this leading to disappointment and took stock of the slasher boom, with a film decades older from its own sequel too, whilst The Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2 (1986) managed to have its cake and eat it in being both a proper follow on and mad as a box of frogs even next to the slashers. In comparison, Halloween II does feel a weird way to try to continue the series, more so as this was meant to finish the story too. Halloween III: Season of the Witch (1982) is its own idiosyncratic creation, the attempt at an anthology scenario with an entire different narrative story which was doomed to have been too late to begun, forcing the franchise back to Michael Myers, but in itself, this definitely feels like a letdown for the follow up. A fun one in the right mindset, but you really should not attempt to compare it to the prequel to avoid the shadow that casts.

 

====

1) Halloween II: Behind the Scenes, from HalloweenMovies.com. Archived from the original on June 29, 2012.