Halloween (2018)

Now there's only one question: Did this film succeed as the new Halloween II?

I have ever so slight gripes about this movie, personally for my first Halloween film in theaters, it was really good. Not an outstanding film, but a very good if not great movie. It pretty much did what I thought it was gonna do, show some events prior to Michael escaping, set up some very likable and good characters, drop the hammer, let the bodies hit the floor, cap off the series, and throw in some easter eggs for the fans. And it did all that great. I only have two issues with the movie but one was impossible not to change, they half retconned the ending of Halloween so instead of Loomis not finding his body they add in some side cop who they claimed stopped Loomis from finishing off Michael and taking him into custody. Fine, that had to have been done because Halloween 2 ended things pretty definitively, so did this movie do a better job at ending it than Halloween 2? Kind...of? I guess it depends on your point of view of the ending. I still sense there may be something more after this. So story and characters are done well, some people could have gripes with more trivial matters, like for me we actually hear Michael breathe ragged and make sounds when he is injured and I just didn't like that. Little things like that, but the pros outway the cons. It's great seeing Jamie Lee Curtis back, she has outstanding chemistry with Andi Matichak who plays her grandaughter, and she legitimately puts up a fight. I think fans will appreciate and enjoy the movie, I know I did. Several nods to mainly the first and second movie, it wasn't distracting because it happens more at the beginning and as the plot wheels gain momentum you're invested in the story. And it does have moments of comedy but I laugh sometimes when I'm nervous, and there is a lot of suspense in this movie. Though, and I somehow forgot to bring this up in the last movie, but if I took a shot for every false scare or jumpscare I would have had to been dragged out of that theater. Like seriously, it gets old quick in both movies but when shit happens you feel that fear. I have absolutely no doubt I will see it again on Halloween night to cap off the year's festivities. Go see it if you haven't already, you only need to contend with one, maybe two movies before it and one of them is a shining example of greatness in the horror genre, so you got nothing to lose. Thankfully ending on a high note after that patchy middle of the week, so I'm a happy camper, and I will see you next week for some more classic and loved horror movies.

Halloween 5

I think it's at this point you can stop watching Halloween for awhile.

Not to say Halloween 5 is terrible, that honor belongs to the next movie we're talking about, but this movie is a step down from a really damn good sequel. Okay, what do we need to know? It's been a full year since Michael returned to Haddonfield, Jamie has formed some odd psychic connection with her uncle after the end of Halloween 4, Loomis is still on his crusade and even more unhinged than usual, and we get a bunch of sucky side characters that were created only to die. I will stand up for one character though Tina, played by Wendy Kaplan, I actually really like her in this movie. And I don't think I've heard one good thing about this character, that she's over the top, doesn't fit the style of the movie, blah blah blah, and to that I rebuke on the case of one small scene. Jamie has lost her voice and doesn't start speaking until the halfway point, she sees Tina and starts to talk and genuinely does not want her to go out and to stay with her to the point of having a breakdown, but Tina leaves and speaks with Dr. Loomis and for one brief moment she holds back tears. She acts silly to hide the fact she is on the verge of tears, that one fleeting moment can be read into very deeply. So leave Tina alone, she is a welcome addition to the Halloween family. And Danielle does a great job, most people brush off her performance as just this sobbing, incoherent, and annoying girl but honestly you would be freaking the hell out in her situation! You would be living in constant fear and worry! Piss off, that is real. But I think easily the best performance is from our good friend Mr. Pleasance. I've heard tons of people say his performance feels tired, but that's how Dr. Loomis would be after hunting this guy for the better part of a decade, you get the sense he is taking his obsession to the next level. It's pretty intense. But there's one scene, I'm not gonna say it for I want to people to be surprised who haven't seen the movie yet, but for those who have you know the scene at the end with Dr. Loomis. My jaw still drops to the floor everytime I see it, cause I just can't believe he did that. It's incredible and even a little disturbing. Just wow guys, great job there. So the film has redeeming qualities, it's not that bad but by no means does it top the previous film, and I am quite happy I saw it again after quite a few years. I remember when these two movies came on all the time on AMC in October, hell I think I saw Halloween 4 and 5 before even the first one when I was around 9 or 10. But now we are approaching the Halloween movie I never saw nor ever wanted to see. Tomorrow we look at The Curse Of Michael Myers. I'm going to die.

Phantom Of The Opera (1989)

I'm actually happy this was the last Phantom movie I did for this week. Not only is it fully deserving of the horror genre but honestly, the Charles Dance and 2004 version don't qualify as horror so we ended on an incredible high note.

This might be my absolute favorite Robert Englund role ever, blasphemous though it may be to others. It's a pretty out there version of the story starting off in 1980s Manhattan where we meet Christine who discovers a manuscript titled Don Juan Triumphant who uses it for an audition. Unfortunately she gets whacked in the head with a sandbag and then it becomes a very, very different movie. She time warps to England in the 1880s. It's not a dream, she legit time warps. Hwhat?? My previous statement about how each version keeps the story interesting and different has reached new heights of truth. Then it kinda follows the story set in the book, young singer coached by a mysterious figure, love triangle ensues, masquerade ball, a graveyard scene not once recreated since the 1925 movie, etc. but there are either completely idiotic or completely brilliant story changes. The character of Erik has been completely built from the ground up, here he's an aspiring composer who makes a Faust deal with the devil that causes his disfigurement leading to him actually having to skin people alive and stitch their flesh onto his face. Whoa. Oh, and he's immortal which they actually had a reason for, believe it or not. This was actually supposed to be the first part of a two picture deal, they made The Phantom immortal so they had a film that could focus on the 1880s and then a film that would pick up in the modern day of then 1989 or perhaps 1990. And I for one greatly want to see that second movie, they were working on the script and Robert Englund was very excited to do the next part. And I can't blame him, this is a fun character! It's such a shame he got typecasted as Freddy because he genuinely has great presence and charm, able to be suave and bloodthirsty without making it stupid. They did great with Robert's version making The Phantom more creepy and disturbing, with some great lines throughout. So story is out there but great, but it doesn't stop there! The cinematography is gorgeous, the music by Misha Segal is beautiful particularly with Don Juan Triumphant, the gore effects are grisly and get under your skin (full pun intended), Jill Schoelen is a gorgeous and lovely Christine, there's so much to love in this movie! It's easily top 3 in my Phantom films and it put me in such a good mood after finishing it. An excellent, excellent way to end the week.

Well this was coming since my first yearly trip down Halloweentown, join me in Haddonfield next week.