Halloween H2O

[baumer]

Discuss

[baumer]

How do you capture the feel of the original Halloween? Do you remember how the atmosphere alone gave you chills? How the movie was so frightening because the killer was always lurking in the background? Remember the scene where Annie is out in the laundry room and the blury image of Michael is standing behind her? You don't know if he is going to get her or if she is going to live long enough to answer the phone. Or what about the time when P.J. Soles thought Paul was the one standing in the door way with the ghost sheet over his head? We all knew that it was Myers, but she didn't. And that is what made it scary. Films like Halloween are once or twice in a decade kind of films. There is a certain brilliance to them that no one knows how to capture anymore. Even Carpenter himself has never been able to duplicate that fear that we felt back in 1978. But now we have H2O. And as good as it is, it is just not anywhere near the original. And I guess we can't ask the film to be that good, but at least to try to come close would be nice. And to be fair, it does in some spots. But only some.

The other problem with today's horror films is that simply, it is not 1978 or 1980 anymore. It's almost like the look of film has improved over the years. Back then the film stock looked grainy and even a tad bit hazy. And that added to the fear, the feel and the enjoyment. Now scary films are just not as dark or as unknown. The soundtrack is filled with hip and cool top 40 artists, the film tries to appeal to today's young people and in the process it alienates those of us that made films like Halloween and Friday famous.

Having said that, H2O is still good. It pays homage to the original Halloween and even to Psycho, two of the trend setters in the genre. Jamie Lee Curtis returns and does a good job of being the traumatized survivor 20 years later. There are some decent scares, in particular the kitchen scene with the garbage shoot. That is old style horror at its best. But as much as the first half of the movie works, it crumbles under its own weight at the climax. And I can honestly say this is Steve Miner's fault.

Miner did the same thing to the last installment of Friday the 13th. He made a great beginning and then abandoned all that we held dear, took all of his skills and made the first fifteen mintues great and then reverted back to what made the last three Friday's garbage. H2O is good for the first half and then it gets Hollywood in the final few minutes. And that can only be attributed to the fact that Miner forgets how to direct a film for 90 minutes. How hard is it to study a films roots and then just copy them. How hard would it have been to have the shadowy figure of Michael always lurking in the background? Or to have him hiding behind a tree or a desk or anywhere and then appear before the camera just like the first. As much as this film was alright, perhaps even good, it was a cheat. It teased us with memories of how it felt to be frightened. And then it pretended like it was a joke and they made the film just like every piece of garbage that is in the horror genre today. There are some very good ones of course, but there are still more bad horror films that good.

So I am torn. Yes this was good, but it could have been so much better.

6.5/10

[TheMovieman]

How do you capture the feel of the original Halloween? Do you remember how the atmosphere alone gave you chills? How the movie was so frightening because the killer was always lurking in the background? Remember the scene where Annie is out in the laundry room and the blury image of Michael is standing behind her? You don't know if he is going to get her or if she is going to live long enough to answer the phone. Or what about the time when P.J. Soles thought Paul was the one standing in the door way with the ghost sheet over his head? We all knew that it was Myers, but she didn't. And that is what made it scary. Films like Halloween are once or twice in a decade kind of films. There is a certain brilliance to them that no one knows how to capture anymore. Even Carpenter himself has never been able to duplicate that fear that we felt back in 1978. But now we have H2O. And as good as it is, it is just not anywhere near the original. And I guess we can't ask the film to be that good, but at least to try to come close would be nice. And to be fair, it does in some spots. But only some.

The other problem with today's horror films is that simply, it is not 1978 or 1980 anymore. It's almost like the look of film has improved over the years. Back then the film stock looked grainy and even a tad bit hazy. And that added to the fear, the feel and the enjoyment. Now scary films are just not as dark or as unknown. The soundtrack is filled with hip and cool top 40 artists, the film tries to appeal to today's young people and in the process it alienates those of us that made films like Halloween and Friday famous.

Having said that, H2O is still good. It pays homage to the original Halloween and even to Psycho, two of the trend setters in the genre. Jamie Lee Curtis returns and does a good job of being the traumatized survivor 20 years later. There are some decent scares, in particular the kitchen scene with the garbage shoot. That is old style horror at its best. But as much as the first half of the movie works, it crumbles under its own weight at the climax. And I can honestly say this is Steve Miner's fault.

Miner did the same thing to the last installment of Friday the 13th. He made a great beginning and then abandoned all that we held dear, took all of his skills and made the first fifteen mintues great and then reverted back to what made the last three Friday's garbage. H2O is good for the first half and then it gets Hollywood in the final few minutes. And that can only be attributed to the fact that Miner forgets how to direct a film for 90 minutes. How hard is it to study a films roots and then just copy them. How hard would it have been to have the shadowy figure of Michael always lurking in the background? Or to have him hiding behind a tree or a desk or anywhere and then appear before the camera just like the first. As much as this film was alright, perhaps even good, it was a cheat. It teased us with memories of how it felt to be frightened. And then it pretended like it was a joke and they made the film just like every piece of garbage that is in the horror genre today. There are some very good ones of course, but there are still more bad horror films that good.

So I am torn. Yes this was good, but it could have been so much better.

6.5/10

I generally agree with all of that. I gave it a 7/10 when I first saw it and it's been there since.

[75Live]

Yes this movie is a mixed bag for me too. There are times I really like it, then other parts just make me wonder what the heck just happened.

I do enjoy the ending as they finally closed the circle on the whole storyline and had Laurie finally get past her demons, figuratively and literally.

B

[Letsuseournoggin]

How do you capture the feel of the original Halloween? Do you remember how the atmosphere alone gave you chills? How the movie was so frightening because the killer was always lurking in the background? Remember the scene where Annie is out in the laundry room and the blury image of Michael is standing behind her? You don't know if he is going to get her or if she is going to live long enough to answer the phone. Or what about the time when P.J. Soles thought Paul was the one standing in the door way with the ghost sheet over his head? We all knew that it was Myers, but she didn't. And that is what made it scary. Films like Halloween are once or twice in a decade kind of films. There is a certain brilliance to them that no one knows how to capture anymore. Even Carpenter himself has never been able to duplicate that fear that we felt back in 1978. But now we have H2O. And as good as it is, it is just not anywhere near the original. And I guess we can't ask the film to be that good, but at least to try to come close would be nice. And to be fair, it does in some spots. But only some.

The other problem with today's horror films is that simply, it is not 1978 or 1980 anymore. It's almost like the look of film has improved over the years. Back then the film stock looked grainy and even a tad bit hazy. And that added to the fear, the feel and the enjoyment. Now scary films are just not as dark or as unknown. The soundtrack is filled with hip and cool top 40 artists, the film tries to appeal to today's young people and in the process it alienates those of us that made films like Halloween and Friday famous.

Having said that, H2O is still good. It pays homage to the original Halloween and even to Psycho, two of the trend setters in the genre. Jamie Lee Curtis returns and does a good job of being the traumatized survivor 20 years later. There are some decent scares, in particular the kitchen scene with the garbage shoot. That is old style horror at its best. But as much as the first half of the movie works, it crumbles under its own weight at the climax. And I can honestly say this is Steve Miner's fault.

Miner did the same thing to the last installment of Friday the 13th. He made a great beginning and then abandoned all that we held dear, took all of his skills and made the first fifteen mintues great and then reverted back to what made the last three Friday's garbage. H2O is good for the first half and then it gets Hollywood in the final few minutes. And that can only be attributed to the fact that Miner forgets how to direct a film for 90 minutes. How hard is it to study a films roots and then just copy them. How hard would it have been to have the shadowy figure of Michael always lurking in the background? Or to have him hiding behind a tree or a desk or anywhere and then appear before the camera just like the first. As much as this film was alright, perhaps even good, it was a cheat. It teased us with memories of how it felt to be frightened. And then it pretended like it was a joke and they made the film just like every piece of garbage that is in the horror genre today. There are some very good ones of course, but there are still more bad horror films that good.

So I am torn. Yes this was good, but it could have been so much better.

6.5/10

Agreed on all points, but I must give it a very high score.. a 9 simply because of the nostalgia factor of watching this as a kid right after I discovered the original and being blown away. This was when Halloween and Michael were the pinnacle of my movie knowledge as a young kid (13) and watching this added to the mystery of myers. I loved it so much.

When I take a step back though.. it's really a 7 for me.

[CaptainJackSparrow]

I really enjoyed this film.5/5

[The Stingray]

Surprisingly good sequel. In fact, its inarguably the best Halloween sequel, imo.

[K1stpierre]

It was okay for me. Nowhere near the original but not bad either like some of the other ones. Overall give it a 7.0/10.

[ddddeeee]

JLC is great, the rest is rubbish. This movie has no atmosphere, it's lit like a soap opera.

[The Stingray]

Nowhere near as good as the first time I saw it, but still an enjoyable and solid effort.

 

B-

[ShouldIBeHere]

It is certainly no masterpiece... but there is something about it that makes me watch it every time I accidently zap into it on TV.

 

B-

[ddddeeee]

Even the worst of the Halloween movies have atmosphere in spades. This is just rubbish.