Halloween Kills

Halloween Kills ½

Random notes (because why bother?):

-JJ Abrams' filmmaking

-A movie in search for a safe place, but more importantly better times prior to current events and it all falls down to moronic ideals of suburbia that make no sense within the construct of the film or the series. There were never better times, there were never a safe place and just because these people were ignorant about the terrible roots of the narrative at heart doesnt mean it was safe, but both the characters and the film insist so much on this angelical memory of the good American land that what we are left are characters that feel redundant in their placement within the massacre, semantics that feel redundant/contradictory within the placement of the series, and sequences that conceptually play more like comedy sketches than actual horror scenes. Seriously, why did they let McBride co-write these films?

-Will never understand the “Michael was all a killing machine and a paranormal monster” that both fans and these films try to paint. Certainly, he was a symbol, but there was something in Carpenter's voyeurism that elevated him to more than plane and simple mysticism. There’s a reason why the film starts with him as an "innocent" boy and how close we are when he watches every inhabitant of Haddonfield. He enjoys looking at them as well as we as the audience are paying attention to him hiding and waiting in the shadows. He’s both a representation of the season as much as a vivid fan of it (something that Zombie will add a layer of tragedy in his films). So when the ending happens it could mean many things: we were betrayed by Michael himself, now looking for the guy that has trusted us this gaze until that point; we have embodied Michael, leaving his physical form and looking at those places where he was comfortable with the act; maybe Michael has only being allowed to exist because we as audience let him be, because we (Carpenter included) erased the child. It is all reinforced through a naturalism, day to day vignettes, prior to the big night that make the last minutes even more impactful in the delivery.
Green is, in the other hand, too literal to make the slightest of implications, to leave anything ambiguous, about Michael. Now the deaths have the Friday The 13th series vibe of getting bigger and graphic with each new iteration; Michael is brutal, but never human when it comes to his attitudes towards his victims; and the worst part is that Green can’t just shut the fuck up and create atmosphere at all. We start with a massacre and end with a massacre, and it never feels like it leaves momentum to either characterization or development of ideas it wants to explore so badly. His camera never feels steady, almost calling attention the amount of coverage that it has, but is also confuse on wether it wants to make us close to the characters or sideline us in our own understanding of them. It’s just the extended sequence of Michael entering and killing people inside their house from the 2018 film, but even more insufferable.

-True to the spirit of the franchise by being the second film in it that is pro-lynch mob.

-Also, what was David Gordon Green's deal by using two little knives to symbolize that the two gay men in the house are weak in front of Michael who has the bigger weapon?

-It’s incredible that Jamie Lee Curtis try to paint this as a feminist work when it’s incapable of defining Laurie as nothing, but a trauma delivery machine. completely defined by it and nothing more, and being mostly sidelined (with her family) by everyone in town.
It’s all logistics with nothing barely resembling a human being. It’s all in pro to the moment to moment, never in function as a cohesive narrative. 

-We owe Rob Zombie a fucking apology.

-won’t bother with the sequel. Unbelievably pointless if we see it as chapter two of a bigger story.

Josephine (Docma) liked these reviews