What's more natural to follow Halloween 4 with Halloween 5? In my world it's not. I was actually more thinking about Halloween: Resurrection than this movie while watching it, which is not a good sign. This seemed to have been shot quite close to part 4, but instead of having Dwight H. Little doing the directing duties then instead hired arty farty guy Dominique Othenin-Girard (probably because he directed the semi-good After Darkness in 1985). This is not a good idea. When it comes to Halloween there's not much room to experiment with the visual style, it takes away a lot of the mood John Carpenter cemented in the first movie.
This takes place a short time after the events in part 4. Everyone (except Dr Loomis) believes Michael Myers is dead, but he's not - of course. Instead he's been taken care of by a recluse, yeah, just like in Bride of Frankentein. That doesn't end well and now he's back on track to find Jamie and once and for all silence the rage inside of him. But there's someone watch, a man in black - what the hell do he want? I guess even Michael wonder...
The story is okay, I've seen worse. But it's also all over the place and it have a hard time finding a good spot to just sit down and let the tension work. Dr Loomis is also all over the scenery, screaming, churning out stupid lines and behaving like the madman he is. Could have been good, but even Donald Pleasence seems to realize how stupid his character is written here and kinda gives up. You can see how tired he is in some scenes. But he does the best he can, considering a monkey wrote the dialogue.
Another thing I fucking hate (or dislike, hate is ugly) with Halloween 5 is how the director tries to do something odd with the cinematography. There's weird angles, wide lenses, handheld camera where it just doesn't work. I understand him, it's fun to do something different - but a movie likeH Halloween 5 don't need a new style, it needs a new script. Surprisingly enought - from my side - I like the idea they're introducing with the man in black, and the mythology they started.
Pity it just took them six years to deliver the next part and use this idea even more.
Like all slasher franchises they must jump the shark sooner or later to deliver something new. I guess Halloween 5 is this series shark-jumper, but it's not crazy enough. They should have sent him out in space or something... seriously.
H5 had a hard time convincing me. I glanced at my iPhone more than on then TV and from time to time checked how much it was left of the movie. That's bad. On the other hand, it have a couple of fun and violent kills, Michael Myers is always cool, the actors are okay.
But it's hardly a undiscovered masterpiece.
"Little doing the directing duties then instead hired arty farty guy Dominique Othenin-Girard (probably because he directed the semi-good After Darkness in 1985). This is not a good idea. When it comes to Halloween there's not much room to experiment with the visual style,"
Never heard about this guy before....he seems to have made some genre sequels.
"Another thing I fucking hate (or dislike, hate is ugly) with Halloween 5 is how the director tries to do something odd with the cinematography. There's weird angles, wide lenses, handheld camera where it just doesn't work. I understand him, it's fun to do something different - but a movie likeH Halloween 5 don't need a new style,"
Maybe he thought he could find new depths in the material by changing the visual style of the film...?
"Like all slasher franchises they must jump the shark sooner or later to deliver something new. I guess Halloween 5 is this series shark-jumper, but it's not crazy enough. They should have sent him out in space or something... seriously."
They might do that....who knows.....I don´t think I´ve seen any slashers in space.....crazy people, creature features etc but no slashers.
"But it's hardly a undiscovered masterpiece."
Wll, I´m glad you reviewed it....one day I might see it.
Good review and thanks.
Posted by: Megatron | May 09, 2013 at 15:15