Halloween 4 : Le Retour de Michael Myers

Lets cut to the chase here. If you watch a film with the title Halloween 4, you know its not going to be Citizen Kane and as the critics have remarked how the sequel was responsible for the decline of the horror/slasher movies in the mid eighties then H4 is surely guilty as charged. However H4 is not the worst film in the series.The acting is mediocre and the script is littered with some horrendous dialogue(Check out Dr Loomis`s description of Michael Myers as "Evil on two legs") but hey, lighten up, this isn`t Shakespeare. H4 to an extent delivers the goods. Its short for starters, were not waiting an hour for the action to begin, its straight into it after a classy opening credits sequence. The characters are stock horror movie characters and thus we can relate to them. The gore is kept to a minimum (is that a good thing?) and there are a few minor shocks and twists along the way. The late great Donald Pleasance is at his eye bulging best and the film treats us to some dark humour involving some vigilante Rednecks out to nail Michael Myers but for me the major plus of this film is the John Carpenter penned music that was so well used in the first film. Surely this is one of the great movie theme tunes in history. In a nutshell H4 offers us nothing new but you pay your money and you get what you expect, a standard run of the mill low budget horror flick. hey I quite enjoyed it but don`t you think that Myers bloke is putting a bit of weight on.

After serial killer Michael Myers wakes up during a routine transfer to a different hospital, he goes running back to Haddonfield and his former doctor, Dr. Loomis, tries to make it there before Michael can begin yet another bloodbath and murder his niece, Jamie.

Having a young child as the lead victim in a slasher movie is a brave choice. Some will find it tacky and offensive right from the start or, even worse, the child actor might not be seasoned enough to be effective in the role and could just come across as annoying, but young Danielle Harris is so wonderful and winning in the role that you really get invested in her character and want her to make it out alive. Most of the other characters aren't developed enough for you to give a hoot about them, but the filmmakers do handle the suspense sequences well.

So, it transpires that Michael Myers survived being blown up on Halloween night 1978, and ten years later HE wakes from a decade of comatose to kill again.

OK, the premise is laughable but the decision to resurrect deranged serial killer Michael Myers is vindicated through a fine movie with several memorable moments and a shocking finale.

Donald Pleasence is on fine form as Myer's increasingly crazed doctor, Sam Loomis, who also survived being blown up in Halloween II. Loomis now walks with the aid of a stick and has burns to his face and hands but is otherwise fine. Blimey! He's almost as indestructible as Myers himself!

Halloween 4 racks up the jumps and gore but loses none of the thrills and excitement form the original movies. Ellie Cornell and Danielle Harris are excellent support for Pleasence in one of the best in the Halloween franchise.

Many seem to forget that the original Halloween was a great film despite its ridiculous premise, not because of it. Its sole purpose was to scare the audience and, as horror critic Kim Newman aptly put it, "its only message is "boo!". A feminist statement, commentary on teen sexual awakening, or political allegory, were not even notions during its development (Carpenter has expressed this sentiment repeatedly). In my opinion- and I am sure I am not alone on this- the beloved series has morphed into something virtually unrecognizable over the last few decades, largely due to the changing priorities of the studios and the expectations of the newer generation of filmgoers; Michael must be bigger and badder than ever and must kill off a character every ten minutes in the most gruesome ways imaginable. Easter eggs, cameos, and callbacks are a must. And Jamie Lee Curtis must kick a lot of butt. There's nothing wrong with that per se, but if that's what you're looking for, then Halloween 4 will be a snoozefest for you.

This third sequel to Carpenter's game-changer was fashioned more as a tribute to the original than a mere straight-up continuation. Director Dwight H. Little and company took the project as seriously as possible, treating the property with the utmost while not underestimating the audience's standards and expectations. Halloween 4 is not Carpenter- nor does it try to be. It invokes the original's mood and the spirit, if not necessarily the style. Little and writer Alan B. McElroy had a fairly straightforward blueprint to follow, but are clever in how they reappropriate certain beats and iconic shots from the original without merely carbon copying them: for example, take the moment when Sheriff Meeker and Deputy Logan are chatting about securing the windows as Meeker lights the lamp. If you blink, you will miss the outline of the Shape standing in the background behind a wall-an effect similar to when his white mask protrudes out of the darkness behind Deputy Logan by the stairwell. These sporadic, yet deceptively simple "now you see it, now you don't" motifs are genuinely creepy because they don't call attention to themselves; they also serve as a nice counterbalance to the film's more sensational, exaggerated moments that make up the final act. However, Little never strays too far from the simple formula that worked in the original, taking a cue from Carpenter in the way he prioritizes atmosphere and suspense over blood and guts.

Written in a scant eleven days, McElroy's script is surprisingly smart and well constructed (despite dialogue that is occasionally bland and over-expository). Particularly noteworthy is how he avoids "idiot plot" syndrome- a term Roger Ebert coined, in which the stupidity of the characters' actions makes it easier to kill them off and/or prevents the story from being resolved too soon. The characters in "Return" make smart and sensible decisions, for the most part. You will not find two horny middle-aged adults 'skinny-dipping' in a Jacuzzi in a desolate hospital after hearing reports of a murder spree taking place in the nearby vicinity. This time, our protagonists barricade themselves inside an unassuming location with firearms on hand and two very no-nonsense deputies at the helm, with an army of state troopers en route.

"Return" probably marks the official moment in the franchise where it is clear that we are no longer dealing with a flesh and blood psychopath, but something more omnipresent, spectral-like, and formidable ("You're talking about him as if he were a human being. That part of him died years ago," Loomis laments). By solidifying this version of the Boogeyman, the film lessens viewers' incredulity as his ability to be in several places seemingly at once becomes apparent. As with the first two, and unlike several of the series' subsequent entries, Halloween 4's presentation of evil incarnate is not meant to be taken literally.

The film ends with a final image that could serve as a prognostication of what the horror genre, for better or worse, would become in just a few short years to follow- reinforcing the underlying theme of Carpenter's original: that evil, of course, never dies. And the destruction of innocence is indeed one of the most tragic forms of evil.

Again, Halloween 4 is not Carpenter, but it's the last pure Halloween film in the franchise- on par with the 1981 sequel. Thankfully, even though he was motivated by dollar signs (has there ever been a producer who wasn't?), at least Moustapha Akkad didn't take the easy way out and pile on a lot of sex and gore to ensure higher box office returns. And I can't think of any other film that stretches a meager 3-million dollar budget as far as this film does (IMDB states its budget is 5 million, but I was corrected by the director himself).

On a final note: This film was made to be seen on the big screen. If you get a chance, catch it on its 35mm presentation. It's far better in almost every respect than its digital format and will help you overlook the 1:85 aspect ratio, continuity blunders, and those shoulder pads.

. . . considering Halloween 4 came some eight years after the previous Myers-inclusive Halloween, considering Carpenter had even less influence, considering the plot took a slightly different direction, considering most other franchises really suck before they even get to 3 sequels.

The problem I have with most horror sequels is the fact it switches over to new characters every film, and none of the characters really get much sympathy. I dunno if I ever cared about anyone in Friday the 13th. But in the Halloweens (1,2,4,and 5), they've always taken the time to get to know the main characters first and stick with them for at least one sequel. Also in Halloween, we had a staple character besides Myers - Donald Pleasence - who returned to battle Myers every time until his untimely death.

I really liked the Jamie Lloyd character (I mean, getting decent actors in horror is difficult enough, but getting a good child actor in horror? Look at Child's Play! We struck gold with Danielle), her storyline, and the rest of the new characters for Michael to stalk. Oh yes, and of course, Donald Pleasence.

Alan Howarth parts with Carpenter, and takes the score solo, playing some fun twists to the main Halloween and the stalking theme, giving Jamie a theme appropriately derivative of Laurie's theme and intermingling all the themes in various places for an original sound with music that's been with us for 2 movies now.

Hopefully the viewer won't remember the end of Halloween 2 well enough to recall Laurie shooting Michael's eyes out, and him stumbling around slicing blindly as blood ran down his mask--wait, this is horror, everyone's accustomed to inconsistency with horror. Nevermind. Besides, compared to the plot holes of Curse of Michael Myers and then H20 neglecting Halloween 4 & 5, who cares about that minor detail.

Despite the new look, new characters, new tweaks, Halloween 4 can't escape the fact that it is a sequel slasher and so despite everything that's new (that works) . . . it's all the same. That's where my problem with the film lay, and that's why I can't rank this up there with some of my favorite horror films of all time. It's a good Halloween sequel, but there are better, more original films, within this series and especially in other series. Oh well.