The History of Halloween: Why Michael Myers Will Never Die

Out of all the slasher villains to ever grace us with their presence across multiple movies, Michael Myers has the most justification for sticking around. The basis of this argument is not on quality but if it was, I'm sure he'd win that too. No, what we're talking about here is far more sinister. Since his first appearance back in 1978, this butcher knife wielding maniac has represented the evil lurking in society we refuse to confront. We cannot run from it. We cannot hide from it. For children, he waits in cupboards and under beds. For adults, he stalks minds, infiltrates televisions and can be seen looking straight back at you through your neighbour's eyes. There was a reason John Carpenter let his psychopathic antagonist live in the originals spine chilling ending. Johnny boy came to the conclusion Michael Myers was the 'bogeyman', all our fears personified and fully realised, thus he could never die. 44 years and 12 movies later the bogeyman has become a box office giant and supposedly takes his final breath in Halloween Ends. But is this really the end or will he be back?

In the last issue, I mentioned how successful Halloween was financially in the aftermath, therefore this time I'll start this a little earlier. Back in 1968, Carpenter enrols at the university of Southern California. During his time there he makes another of his horror shorts, which he'd been doing since he was a nipper and first got his hands on an 8mm. An 8 minute belter, titled Captain Voyeur that was actually rediscovered in USC archives in 2011. If you want to check this out it's available on Youtube for free and I strongly suggest you do. What you will notice is that even with limited resources, Carpenter demonstrates he's got the fucking tools and has had the Hitchcockian ability for suspense from day one.

Being the true auteur that he is, JC was capable of directing, editing, writing and scoring. Consequently, this got him some additional work as the co writer, film editor and composer of The Resurrection of Bronco Billy. This earned him some credibility and attention as it went to win an academy award for Best Live Action Short. Assume that early success in being involved in such a project went to his head because he then drops out of film school to make his first feature with Dan O'Bannon.

For those who don't know and probably should know, Dan O'Bannon was the screenwriter of Alien. It would be lazy to simply call it ' Jaws in space'. There were plenty of movies that would follow marketing themselves as that and I'm sure had it been originally bought by Roger Corman (as was intended) that is how the film would have turned out (sorry Roger, my king). Alien is remembered for two reasons. Firstly, being one of cinemas greatest art direction achievements by incorporating H R Geiger's designs. This was O'Bannon's idea and the very reason it was deemed too high budget for Roger Corman. Also, it had a director who studied Art at university in Ridley Scott and most likely because of that was willing to sacrifice pacing and use the sets to tell the story visually. So much of the history of the Xenomorph is shown and implied rather than clumsily told through dull exposition, causing the films discussions on creationism and evolution to reward on multiple viewings the closer you look.

Ok, so the other reason the film has cemented its place in history is due to it being one of the first films to really consider class structures in space. It poses the question of how would blue collar manual workers operate on board ships coasting across the galaxy. Whilst the Jaws comparison is unfair because it devalues the movie, I will take that unlike other 'Jaws in space' movies, this one carries across Jaws's themes such as being a subtle critique of capitalism rather than just being another monster movie in space. Whereas, Star Trek was cluelessly unaware of its own form of space imperialism and colonialism, Alien hit the issues head on. Somehow, I'm still a huge Star Trek fan, despite its message of space being the "final frontier" and that people attempting to "boldly go where no man has gone before" hitting like the US hasn't learnt a single lesson from the massacring of the Native Americans and are still pushing that Manifest Destiny bullshit. Luckily, Star Trek is so adorably ignorant and juvenile it's hard to hate.

Anyway, Alien distinguished itself from the herd by drawing a line between the motives of big businesses and workers. Star Trek hides behind pride and duty to country but Alien accepts the truth that really it is just exploitation. The latter even has hierarchies on the ship with my boys Brett and Parker teaming up and constantly moaning to their superiors Ripley and Dallas. Making this essentially Kevin Smith's Clerks in space. While I'm on the subject do Ripley and Dallas casually fuck in Alien? Also why is casually fucking in space such uncommon territory? Too against bourgeois values that Halloween was incorrectly positioned as protecting? Surely that should be everything in a movie with a limited number of humans living in a compact space billions and billions of miles away from Earth's citizens. Claire Denis's High Life from 2018 remains the authority on the subject. Can we get more erotic thrillers in space please?

Quite the detour there, my apologies, Alien is too good not to get side tracked by. My reason for mentioning is because Dan O'Bannon's collaboration with John Carpenter, Dark Star, back in 1974 is viewed as a trial run for examining capitalism in space. Nowhere near as successful though because it gets lost in hippieish nonsense and overly long preposterous set pieces. Some are genuinely interesting like when it turns 2001: A Space Odyssey in to a stoner comedy and an astronaut has to crack out Descartes's Cartesian Doubt on a new self aware bomb to stop from exploding itself in compliance with its orders. As funny as that sounds, some of this irks me with its blatant marijuana indulgence. Usually, I approved of drug influenced filmmaking but this isn't the kind I particularly like.

That's just me though, Dark Star has gone down as a renowned counter culture work of art. Double bill it with Tobe Hooper's debut Eggshells. Insufferable as the pair can be at times, they are classics of the hippie movement in film. It is crazy to think that even before the two directors moved on to making their notorious slashers their work was so connected. Maybe not so shocking when you think all they did was just continue with these themes and filter them through horror. Carpenter having the better career of the two as he more moved towards the left.

Unfortunate as it is that two insanely talented individuals like Carpenter and O'Bannon fell out massively and did not work together again, I'm in the unpopular camp of thinking it is for the best. Not like it was Spielberg and Hooper on Poltergeist, which turned out well. Think of it like Vince Clarke leaving Depeche Mode to form Yazoo. Might have been heart breaking for those dirty rotten synth loving nuts at the time but ultimately it led to bangers like 'Situation' and 'Don't Go' from the poppier oriented Yazoo and even though it may have taken a bit longer Martin Gore finally mastered his song writing and formed the darker true Depeche Mode sound with Black Celebration. In this scenario, I'd go with John Carpenter being Vince Clarke and Dan O'Bannon being Depeche Mode. That can be fought over but the reality is that although they may have a few similarities in substance and beliefs their style and approach differed too greatly. Fundamentally, that was always the problem for me on Dark Star, too much of a clash but I can fully understand those who are supporters.

Another great tragedy that turned out for the best was the dying of the western. Peckinpah's The Wild Bunch being seen as the violent US swansong to the genre in 1968. Since Carpenter had wanted to make westerns from the minute he picked up a camera, embracing their decline and realising that they were no longer popular must have really hurt. Being the genius that he is, he didn't cave in but chose to channel his love for the western through horror and sci fi. If you ask me, this always results in the most amazing work creatively. This is how we progress and go in to the new. Exactly, what Carpenter did with Assault on Precinct 13, which is basically a mixture of The Alamo and Night of the Living Dead. In Carpenter's hands the modern last stand movie becomes a battle between cops and zombies. Yes, the criminals go that way with bloody rituals, creepy slow movement and lack of dialogue.

Forgetting a shoddy opening scene, the majority of Assault on Precinct 13 proves to be a pretty professional and a step away from his student film origins of Dark Star. In 1976, let it be known that was when Carpenter first flexed his muscles on the synthesiser giving us his earliest iconic and ground breaking score. Those initial 'Dun D D Duns' still get my cinematic cock hard. Doesn't matter whether it's your first or last time hearing it, that shit will make you stand to attention as a new era of cool is ushered in. Electro enthusiasts familiar with I F's Invaders Smoking Grass need to fucking realise on that very same titled Fucking Consumer is a dancefloor version of Carpenter's theme. Alright DJ's, that banger is called Assault on Radical Radio, now go out and God damn use it cause I want to bust some moves to the Carpenter and I ain't talking that adult contemporary baroque shit, you get me fellas?

On a more humorous note (not that the last paragraph was particularly serious) Assault on Precinct 13 gave us a recurring problem of Carpenter's output emanating from the low budgets, I refer to the time flaws. In Assault, a father and a criminal chase each other around town for potentially a good few hours in high speed pursuit. Some of these scenes take place in daylight and others at night, begging the question of how this went unnoticed by the locals. Look, I know cops are pulling out and abandoning ship but surely a civilian would have called it in to a different station or been re directed? They must really believe in 'Omerta' in South Central Los Angeles. I'll buy it, if anything it adds to that Predator 2 look at the place through a horror lens.

In Halloween, something similar happens with Michael Myers not being faxed the rulebook of shadowing vehicles by staying a few cars back. To be clear, my knowledge of this does not come from excessive stalking but one too many spy movies. As for Michael Myers, he would never make it into the CIA but maybe they would overlook this on the account of his inability to die. A pretty useful tool come to think of it. Surprised actually that the CIA have never been interesting in a man like Michael. I'm not messing about, telling fibs or nothing but in Jason X, they hire David Cronenberg to fully study Jason Vorhees body and healing powers for use as a weapon.

Back to the scene in question with Halloween, the only person dumber than Michael though is Laurie and her mate who don’t even notice they're being tailed by the same car right behind them for hours with the change of sky colour. However, I can somewhat understand it though cause you can really lose yourself driving along with Blue Oyster Cult's 'Don't Fear the Reaper' blaring on the speakers. No care for those around you. Straight up vibing

When asked for the coolest and most badass film of all time, Assault on precinct 13 wins this no contest. The action keeps on coming and the synths hit hard. Presenting the precinct as being closed down is a touch of genius as it allows it to be a modern version of that small town western where criminals can outnumber the cops, a situation less likely in today's times when back is always nearby. Also, what's up with the title? Swear it's not even called Precinct 13 in the movie if you notice closely it's called something else. Oh well, who cares?

Even has the buddy cop formula with Austin Stoker and Darwin Joston teaming up. Once again it has that western feel in the way it tackles the law. As the film progresses, the cop and audience are invited to revise their thoughts on the outlaw and in the process come to respect him. Another film which blurs the lines of law man and law breaker, showcasing Carpenter's modern awareness of societal issues. He always does manage to weave his political messages in to the films without slowing down the action, making him arguably cinemas most economic director. So much of his political content becomes overlooked in the fun of it. The Thing had its anti cold war analogy in that the crisis could have been averted in the opening scene had the US and foreign camp communicated, Escape from New York was a post Watergate thriller in disguise and They Live could have only come from the mind of a man sick of Reagan's Economic Recovery Tax Act and the funding cut to anti poverty programmes.

Halloween then is something of an anomaly but only because it is misunderstood. Critics saw it as a championing of conservative puritan values in that the killer attacks promiscuous teenagers. As though Michael Myer's is sent to do God's bidding and promote celibacy and consummation as opposed to fornication. That old chestnut of 'You have sex in a horror movie you die' that Scream took the piss out of comes from Halloween. Odd though because it is against what Carpenter's career was all about and he denied on many occasions that was what he was going for. Considering Carpenter's political leanings, I'd say Halloween should be regarded as an unconscious critique of society's straight laced attitude and dedication to punishing innocent teens only wanting to explore their bodies, pleasure and outdated taboos.

Keeping up the Tobe Hooper comparison, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre and Poltergeist both challenged traditional family and conservative values. In TCM, in a kind of sitcom satirising style it presents America's weirdest family. Poltergeist might have been tightly controlled by Spielberg but Hooper sneaks in one scene that would never feature in a Spielberg movie. That scene of the Mum and Dad smoking joints in bed and the father stoned out his mind and baffled reading a Reagan biography could well be the best moment in the film.

No point in believing the foolish critics that write about Halloween being a conservative movie, these same morons thought Assault on precinct 13 was a bad movie when it came out. Yes, as hard as it is to believe, Assault was released to terrible reviews from the US critics. It wasn't until British critics picked up on it that it began to be respected as it should have. Amongst the originally divided reviews was the notoriety of the scene where the kid shot when collecting an ice cream. Always found it hilarious to be honest. Time has not changed me. I will close off Assault by saying RIP Austin Stoker who recently died (so raise your next beer to that man) and the remake is not great but absolutely fine (Jean Francois Richet is too good a director to do too bad a job).

Assault brought acclaim but did not serve as the film to launch the GOAT. Hiring Jamie Lee Curtis proved to be the final piece of the puzzle for Halloween in 1978. This may have been her film debut but this young actress already had a buzz about her name. It is no secret she is the daughter of Janet Leigh, the star of Psycho. Curtis embodied the ghosts of her mother and built her own legacy in the process becoming the modern Scream Queen. And truthfully it is a title that no one has claimed from her since. I thought Florence Pugh was going to become the next one or at least the Crying Queen with that already iconic constantly weeping face in Midsommer but her careers gone utterly wank working in the MCU and with a fraudster like Olivia Wilde. Get back to horror bird! We love you over here.

Naturally, her presence in Halloween invited Hitchcock comparisons and with Carpenter's direction it was fully earned. Genuinely, some of the places he puts the camera in that movie is insane for his lack of experience. The close up of the hand smashing the window pre Terminator. The imposing POV shot inside the cupboard. The two shot with Jamie Lee in the foreground and Michael in the background rising from the floor like WWE legend The Undertaker. Chills down the spine.

As with Hellraiser, the original is undoubtedly the best. Easy to see why when it is the only one to be directed by John Carpenter. There is something about that man. You take your seat. You dip in to your personally selected cinematic scran. You take a sip of your beverage of choice. The lights go down. On the screen, it reads 'Directed by John Carpenter' and that first synthesiser note hits you. It's enough to send a man into hysteria with the rush of giddie excitement. Everyone has their view of what cinema is but in the words of Bong Joon Ho, "That to me is cinema".

Nostalgically, Halloween is a horror classic for the way it captures the experience of how you probably first saw it and were exposed to the genre. It encapsulates that naughty feeling of watching something slightly inappropriate and too old for you. The parents are out of town and the cool babysitter has arrived. Exactly the reason I be getting these cravings for a pizza and a coke. Not even a beer, a fucking coke.

Unfortunately, Halloween's sequel from 1981 sees him relegated to the side lines with a writing and score credit. Relegated being the wrong word, more so that he wanted no part to do with it and thought the story was done but if they were making it anyway he may as well get his pay check and push it in the right direction. Rick Rosenthal took over this one and in all fairness carved a respectable and solid slasher. Strong kills and a raw style as though a Friday the 13th sequel. Mainly remembered as the one set in the hospital with Laurie unconscious for half the movie so Michael can take out the stupid hospital staff. It is incredible that these people were doctors. Efficient and gnarly follow up but does little to advance the story. Expansion is the opposite of what this is going for though, instead opting for confinement with the location. The question on this film's lips appears to be how can we trap this story for a 90 minute window to deliver the goods?

I believe it was this one which first revealed that Michael and Laurie were related. This has always been a contentious issue amongst the fans because it sacrifices the unexplainable psychic nature of their relationship. Becomes too obvious and ruins that eternal mysterious question of why does Michael Myers keep hunting this one woman. David Gordon Green must be against the sister connection because in his recent trilogy, this element is wiped entirely.

For something so potentially pointless as Halloween 2, the hospital location has been referred back to in a lot of the newer ones like Rob Zombie's Halloween 2 (2009) and Halloween Kills (2021). Don't give me that Zombie's is a remake so had include it somehow business. That film is nothing like it and still chose to keep a few scenes in the hospital. Above all, my own fascination with Halloween 2 (1981) lies in how dreamy it feels. As it keeps so strictly to one location it smells of death. To me that hospital is purgatory in way, as we never really leave it, Laurie sleeping for a great deal of the picture only adding to this. Everything is written as though avoiding progression of story and offering the series a 90 minute post life. A continuation of action over development. Purgatory.

When you take in to account the beatings these two titans took in the first film, I don't think it's too much of a stretch to make. Even if you can't buy the characters being in purgatory, in a surreal and meta sense that's where the series feels like it is because of its inability to progress story. It is back, not exactly alive and will disappear again in 90 minutes. Halloween in a dream state.

Ha ha ha, now we get to Halloween 3: Season of the Witch . I've been alive long enough to know how hated this film once was. Tommy Lee Wallace's 1982 contribution was once deemed one of the worst movies of all time. Fast forward to 2022 and that's all forgotten. In this day and age it is regarded as completely fine with some outsiders viewing it as the best. I'll go with the stance it may have the best script of the series. Carpenter's idea for Halloween 3 was that every year they could create a new monster and that would ensure variety and stop the series resorting to the same movie every time. What an idea that would have been! An entire universe could have been created. Imagine it, Carpenter's version of a Universal monsters cinematic universe. But oh no, you losers out there had to rip in to this fantastic movie and so we never got that. Such is the curse of the series that any time they try to break away from formula, everyone kicks off and doesn't appreciate it for about 20 years, so they resort to the same old shit time and time again.

Coming clean, I have no idea how anyone could hate Halloween 3. In terms of pure style, it could well be Carpenter's finest work on the synthesisers and Tom Atkins is on fire as the badass investigating the murder. It takes that Beverly Hills Cop 3 Disney satire and blends it with The Wicker Man. Becomes this early '80s Reagan/Thatcher era seasonal sacrificial ritual as a corporate entities plot to secretly control the world. A very tongue in cheek critique of consumerism and capitalism. Has to be one of the funniest commentaries on the event of Halloween and its meaningless excuse to mass market and mass produce goods for the most vulnerable: the children.

If it wasn't for Darcy the Mail Girl's continual wind ups and pushing Joe Bob Briggs to the edge of his sanity with her #Showhalloween3 campaign aiming to have it screened on The Last Drive in, Halloween 3 would still not be as liked as it is now. Scary to think of the influence those two are having right now on horror in the internet era. Soon as they screen a movie, it grows massively in popularity and in some cases is critically re evaluated with its score increasing on Letterboxd. It's getting to the point where if you miss a week you don't even need to ask what was shown you can just tell because some previously reasonably obscure horror you've been trying to get hold for months is suddenly readily available on multiple streaming services and overnight has turned in to a classic.

Not to even exaggerate but there should be whole books dedicated to these two. After all, we're in the streaming age and these two have fully embraced that. If Jesse V. Johnson and Scott Adkins are to be lauded for taking advantage of actions switch from 90s straight to video to finding a home in streaming, then Darcy and Joe Bob deserve the same for horror. The pair found a way to revive the profession of the host. A role in which one curates a series of films and discusses them to an audience. A tradition going back all the way to Vampira in the '50s. That was all going to disappear. You have to remember that Joe Bob had been dormant for years in the early days of the internet. Fella was even writing science books under his real name. Game over. Drive ins got killed off massively, so then television became the hosts saviour but when numbers dropped due to on demand and the internet these guys were fucked again.

Luckily, Joe Bob's protegee Darcy was a lot younger and able to handle all the social media side because in reality that man couldn't have handled the switch alone. Not just the new technology but the politics of the new generation who might not have got his satire. Afterwards, though the guest slots and close relationship with Shudder, other classic hosts such as Elvira and Svengali have managed to make their triumphant return. You really can't underestimate the work Darcy has done for horror. My demands are simple: #Showhalloween3 on The Last Drive in. Or whatever she wants for that matter. She's earned it.

Halloween 4: The Return of Michael Myers, which has been screened on The Last Drive in, is not just our slasher icon coming home. No, this is the new and improved Michael Myers. Wondering what that means exactly? Well for some reason he morphs in to Tom Cruise on this one. People seem to forget this but running alongside horror sequels in the '80s was the golden age of action movies and all those sequels. The two are genuinely more linked than you'd expect. Before I became such a horror advocate, I was hooked on good old American action. The likes of Paul Verhoeven's Total Recall and Robocop were personal favourites. if you go back and watch them, tons of horror in there. Have you seen that part in Robocop when they repeatedly blast away at the cop? Love that me. ACAB and all that, certainly one of the most insane and transgressive things to ever make it in to such a popular movie.

Those films were horror invading action, Halloween 4 is action invading horror. It can only be described as the result of hiring a director like Dwight H. Little, most known for Marked for Death (Starring Steven Seagal) and Murder at 1600 (starring Wesley Snipes). Therefore, we get such nonsense as Michael Myers cooly driving away from explosions and finding himself on top of trucks. Also Loomis is presented as some James Bond type. No more reading books for him, class is over, he's hunting down Michael down with a gun. Forget Laurie, this is where the series becomes the Loomis show. As a Donald Pleasance stan, I thoroughly approve of the move. Myers and Loomis come devoted to each other in an even gayer way then Riggs and Murtaugh. You heard me, it's buddy cop time!

By Halloween 5: Revenge of Michael Myers in 1989, Loomis is even more bat shit crazy than his counterpart. He will stop at nothing to get his man. Watch as he screams in the face of children about dead bodies, violently throws things and even use them as a bait. My man has well and truly lost it. Halloween 3's new monster rejected and they'd accidentally created another. What's that saying about the only one more insane than the patient is therapist? Fair play Donald P for somehow taking attention away from the event headliner. Apparently he was never not drunk on set during these two movies. More respect to him if so.

Oh no, it's 1995 and that means only one thing, time for the one I hate most, Halloween 6: The Curse of Michael Myers. That fucking cunt Chapdog at it again. You may have remembered him from the last issue with the Hellraiser sequels. Joe Chappelle, infamous ruiner of my horror sequels. If I ever run in to this lousy hack, I'm going to demonstrate my invincible Toad style on him. Immensely strong and immune to nearly any weapon. Try defending against that you incompetent scoundrel. That'll teach you, you God Damn ratbag!

As you may have gathered, I do not think too highly of the boring mess that is part 6. about the only thing anyone remembers of this crock of shite is fresh faced young Paul Rudd before he came famous. He revives the character of Tommy Doyle and has some abilities as a computer hacker if I recall correctly. Imagine my shock, another 90s/early 2000s sequel attempting (and failing) to incorporate the internet. They all took their shot and they all missed the target. Much to the dismay of Captain Price.

Finally in 1998, they bring in an actually decent director with Steve Miner (Friday the 13th Part 2 & 3, House, Lake Placid and Warlock). A fucking pro. Hence why Halloween H20: 20 Years Later is an absolute banger. First off, Jamie Lee Curtis is back baby! And this features some of her best battles with her brother/lover/enemy depending on which you swing to. Curtis is hard here but not the hardest in the year. Not yet, that would come in Halloween (2018). However, you do start to get the impression that she knows the drill by this point. I mean you'd have to, wouldn't you? That big hunk of a man has been chasing you for 20 years. This ain't rookie season no more and this ain't this bitch's first rodeo. Fucking Michael Myers up is her bread and butter. And it's not like Mike takes it easy on her here. The bastards dodging knives like he's Neo in The Matrix. This film reeks of a Kevin Williamson post scream agenda and its indeed a sleek new package with ladies man Josh Hartnett at the forefront.

2002s Halloween: Resurrection is largely viewed as a real low point for the series but naturally... I fucking love it! Definitely the heaviest of the lot, I'm not pretending it's not. Infamously, turns the Myers House in to a Big Brother style game show with contestants tasked with surviving the night. A real what were they thinking moment. Not even Rick Rosenthal back in the director's chair could save this. Resurrection regularly occupies the bottom of series rankings lists but I must confess, I don't believe any movie which features Busta Rhymes bustin' a door down and giving the cheeky one liner, "Trick 'r Treat motherfucker!" And then proceeding to beat the living shit out of Michael Myers and electrocute his ball sack can be all that bad. That is the statement I'm going out with.

Not everyone shares this belief and that is why Resurrection single handedly destroyed the franchise for a good 5 years going against what the title suggests. A new era begins though in 2007 with metalhead Rob Zombie stepping in. Around the same time, Eli Roth was getting offers to take over Texas Chainsaw sequels. However, Tarantino warned him off getting lost in the studio system and to keep telling his own stories. It seems their contemporary Rob was unable to do the same. I wonder if he regrets this at all? Perhaps, at one moment in time that may have been the case but retrospective reviews of his films may soon or even have already changed his stance. Makes me happy that cause the guy did a wonderful job. That's the thing with this series, you can either play it safe, take a mild beating from the critics and fans but have it pass quickly. Or you can throw shit to the walls, see what sticks, take a ridiculous amount of abuse and waits for 20 years to be deemed great.

Rob Zombie's remake I have a lot of affection for mainly due to timing. When this was released in 2007, I must have been 10 or 11 years old and I can distinctly recall being truly horrified and appalled by it. It was the first time I'd been exposed to a movie a real snuff aesthetic. 100% this felt like something I should have not been watching at that age and that was part of the intrigue.

That's a feeling I've been chasing time and time again and one I've rarely re found. So I owe a lot to Mr Zombie for potentially being the one to get me on that pursuit of on the edge filmmaking, that really hits a nerve. Trust me this film is fucking gnarly. A measure for all studio horrors to reach. Compare it to any of them coming out today, this severely lacks that dull studio polish. An inspiration illustrating that you can work within the system if you're brave enough to maintain that edge and don't cave in to toning down the shock.

Everyone firmly agrees that Zombie's addition of the rugged and warn out mask was fantastic. Especially, after 4 and 5 became whiter and sillier losing that warped Captain Kirk look. Zombie's portrayed Michael as a tired survivor, refusing to give up his pursuit. Moreover, it comes this humorous comment on how tiresome the series had become and how long it had been going. It gives the mask greater power in its refusal to die and go away for good. Somehow it acknowledges all the previous films when its meant to be ignoring them as part of the rebooted package. Becomes very magical in that you have to accept the others do exist and Michael is immune to time and reality. The mask is a relic and like the spaceship in Event Horizon, who knows where it's been?

The contentious aspect of Zombie's remake lies in the expansion of Michael's childhood and the fact he gives evil a new name. There are many under the belief that the first act is overly long and clunky with the scenes shared between young Michael and Dr Loomis (now played by the sensational Malcolm McDowell). A move unforgivable by some slasher stans with it spoiling the pacing. This then leads in to another debated issue, was Zombie right to change the meaning of Michael Myers? Originally, Michael Myers represented an unseen evil always lurking that was his true power! Believing that side had been done to death, Zombie decided to put his own take on what he thought evil really was. Anyone who's seen at least one Rob Zombie movie knows his avocation of choice is Manson and serial killer folklore. Obvious to anyone who's seen 5 minutes of his repertoire. As a result, that's what Michael represents to him. Loomis then becomes like the media with even less morals than Michael, trying to capitalise on the situation for fame and succumbing to his dangerous obsession with the dark side of American history.

Due to that personal spin, the 2007 remake is one of my favourites of the series. A rare auteur vision and one that is bold enough to run with something. Whatever it sacrifices in pace, it more than makes up for in depth and character development. Michael's mother (played by none other than Rob's wife) killing herself watching 8mm footage of young Michael has got to be the most powerful and moving image out of all the Halloween movies. Often, Rob Zombie's films get laughed at and some extent its warranted, I just take them as guilty pleasures. However, it's The Devil's Rejects and Halloween that make Rob Zombie a strong contender for best US horror director of the 2000s. Understand that is not me saying he's a skilled director, he's actually a very clumsy director and that is his greatest strength.

I'm aware that may seem confusing and contradictory but allow me to explain. The reason his handling of America's dark history of serial killers is so irresistible and intriguing is because unlike other directors he lacks discipline on the subject matter. Where other directors have their own limits and boundaries, Zombie does not. He will go to the uncomfortable spots and whilst he's uncontrollably losing himself in the utter filth, he will accidentally find something genuinely profound to say, that others could not.

One should imagine him as the kind of guy who watched Taxi Driver once too often and became consumed by the idea that hero and villain can be too easy to pick. In Rob's mind if the audience can choose and label too quickly it's a sign of lazy filmmaking. Unfortunately he's not the graceful filmmaker Scorsese is but in his dodgy willingness to make you sympathetic towards his villains, every now and then he stumbles on to something great and more human than most directors. Halloween being a delightful example that really opens you up to the horrible homelife that created Michael Myers. A real study of nature versus nurture. Zombie wants to ask, could America have done more to help the young Michael? Did America create the monster?

It's well documented that carpenter and Zombie beefed for years over the changes made. On the one hand, I can admire Carpenter's point that Michael is stronger when being presented as the essence of evil over a particular view of evil. On the other hand, I'm of the opinion the first film said all there was to say about that. Every director who comes in should have their say on what they think evil is. That's what I'd try to do just make it mirror the times and try to engage with whatever people consider evil to be at that moment. Halloween becoming this investigation of evil over time. That would allow each to be massively different. What would basically happen is you'd have a similar concept to Halloween 3 with a new monster every film but it would be the same monster each time. You could keep Michael Myers each time but the perspective would alter. Same but different. Wouldn't that be cool?

This is why Zombie's remake is the best since the original for me because he was the only one who walked in and used the existing character and themes to say something personal to him. The only one of the bunch you can take out and go that's this directors film rather than just a Halloween movie. Auteur behaviour that. Give the silly metal man his credit where it's due.

Ok, so I know what you're thinking. Since I like the 2007 remake, I must be in the camp who thinks the follow up is this misunderstood masterpiece? I am not and nor have I ever been a fan of Halloween 2 (2009). Although, I can handle and defend Zombie's first ones deviations from the slasher movie, this one proves too much. Strays too far and for the benefit of what? Everything Halloween 2 says, Halloween 2007 said in a much tighter package. Yeah, I know it's odd that I can praise one for breaking from the mould and not the other. As I said, this ones too much and with too little benefit.

The sequel turns in to another Rob Zombie visual feast with sloppy writing. He's always been better at showing rather than telling. His attention to style the commendable part.

So like House of 1000 Corpses you tend to like it more on repeated watches once you forget the weaker writing and acknowledge the way it nails everything through style. On first watches you're too distracted by the messy plot. I remain convinced Tarantino ghost wrote some of The Devils Rejects. The writing on that one is too god for Rob's standard, I'm afraid. They were both in the Miramax family at the same time (pre Weinstein scandal of course) and Tarantino evidently knows the subject matter covering it in Natural Born Killers and Once Upon a Time in Hollywood. It's the way the set pieces work too, they have the Tarantino flavour. If my theory is true, they should just admit it and collaborate more often.

I feel no animosity towards Halloween 2 (2009) and would love to love it for how weird and beautiful it can be. Always up for hearing why people like it so much. Respect that Zombie went for something different but so little lands. He's got these Blade Runner like motifs with this white horse but what does it all mean? Where's he going with that? What tends to happen is that I'll read what people have said about it and think yeah but he did that in a much less boring way in the last film. Most of the bits I do enjoy in this entry are the slasher parts in the hospital and strip club, when he sticks to what he should be doing. This is not a take I like admitting to because I really want Zombie coming in and doing something wild and ambitious as he did here. That's what I'd prefer but still I don't like the movie.

Does have its moments though making it irritating that I have to score this near the bottom with Curse of Michael Myers. The whole concept, Michael in the off season, which is basically what this is, is hilarious. That's the kind of limitation every writer has on a seasonal exploitation film like this. Zombie's technique is more to explore Mike on his days off leading up to the next Halloween. I was convinced David Gordon Green's solution to the problem was going to be to actually make a trilogy set on the same night has that ever been done before? No idea why he abandoned this idea, I was intrigued how the final film would work time wise but he abandons this in the most hilarious manner. Maybe what we need is a Pulp Fiction style non chronological Halloween trilogy over one night.

Unfortunately, Zombie does very little with Michael's rest days or lieu days and it mainly amounts to Tyler Mane skulking around the countryside. Do have to mention Tyler Mane's performance as Michael in the Zombie flicks as being the only one to rival Nick Castle's. Based on the original Mane is better, assume this is due to him being very athletic even with his size, being a wrestler and all. His movements are amazing. Doesn't get enough credit. Both him, Derek Mears and Kane Hodder have managed to convey such emotion behind a mask, something most decent actors would struggle with. Their work is comparable with Boris Karloff or Bela Lugosi, yet they don't get spoken about in the same vein.

Castle's take in the Gordon Green ones is even better than his one in the original. He stands unflinching and unmoving, responding to nothing it's so cold. Rarely in film do you see such an aged psychopath. When he's not wearing the mask, I approve of their lack of focus on the face, these scenes only illuminating his body more. An emotionless giant of a man, who reveals none of what he's thinking, reconfirming why the audience has been so hooked on this man's brain activity all these years.

Whereas, it was Zombie's camera man in his remake who seemed scared of what he filmed, this time it's the lighting guy. On the former it was all these erratic camera movements refusing to film anything for too long. This time the lighting guy seems to want out. I love how they shoot the scenes of Scout as Laure in that dingy bunker type place hiding out with her PTSD. Makes me think Zombie and his blood guy will attack a selected location, almost creating a murder scene. Then he just gets the poor rest of the crew to film this. These other dudes just want to do their 9 to 5 and go home to their families and here's Rob just subjecting them to the twisted corners of his mind. Love it.

David Gordon Green's entrance to the Halloween films came at just the right time for him and where his career was at.

I briefly mentioned in issue #3 that this guy was once the heir to Terrence Malick. Deservedly earned that title too with George Washington and Undertow. Yet to see All the Real Girls and Snow Angels but these are meant to be pretty solid in his original run. In 2008, he starts hanging round Danny McBride too much and you know what that means? Fucking doobies that's what. All day every day. Worked for them the first time with stoner comedy Pineapple Express. A film I now hate and not because it's bad. This would be because I had a bad experience last time I watched it, ok. Went seeing Aphex Twin down in Manchester one night back on 20/09/19 at The Warehouse Project. Remember the exact date because it's on YouTube, where I make an appearance several times looking rather mangled. I'd headed down alone because I bought tickets early thinking it doesn't matter if none of the fellas end up booking too cause Richard D. James doesn't do shows every week.

As always, the strategy when going at it alone is to get even more intoxicated. Might not even be strategy, could be cause you're talking to people less, so more sipping. Either way, you tend to end up absurdly drunk. Once the Twin wrapped up, Nina Kraviz rocked on up and I realised average DJ, mainly just great on the eyes, so I decided to scoot on out of there and wait for the first train. Missing reel for this segment. I suddenly wake up at Manchester Picadilly with no memory of getting there. Routine check of my pockets. Everything I came with: missing. What a fantastic effort. Some people just can't handle the Twin I guess. Went in to pure self hatred mode thinking, "you fucking amateur. This is why you come with people so that if you doze off you can get woken up you liability". I was convinced I'd been robbed (I hadn't, someone would later tag me in a post which featured all my things in Warehouse Projects Lost Property). You may be wondering where Pineapple Express comes in this story. In sheer frustration at believing I'd allowed myself to get robbed I became determined to stay awake and decided an easy film I'd seen many times would do the trick. Pineapple Express is that cool and popular film always readily available on the streaming. Fighting sleep and a wave of self hatred, I made my way through this movie. It is no longer funny to me. It is just pain.

After somehow carving a stoner classic, it goes to D Double G's head and so my man starts thinking he's Snoop Do Double G and ups his doobie count. That leads to his eventual downfall with Your Highness, which could well go down as the textbook definition of a good director totally losing the plot. He somewhat picks it back up with The Sitter, which is not good but it does feature Method Man, who is the coolest motherfucker to walk the earth. Thank fuck DGG realised at this point, it was time to put the spliff down and get back to work as being Malick's heir. Fully rate Prince Avalanche, probably need to rewatch Joe but don't think it was as good. Can't say I've seen Manglehorn or Our Brand is Crisis, so no comments there.

Stronger I refuse to watch. Look at that fucking poster and title. Honks of Oscar bait. Reeks of the shit. You know the drill, 'play a cripple, win an Oscar'. Disgusting. Hate those kinds of lazy physical performances. They're so obvious. The equivalent of getting down on your knees and begging for an Oscar. Not on my fucking watch. Odd one that Jake Gyllenhaal. Had that unstoppable run of form between Source Code and Nightcrawler. You knew he was going to be good before all that with Donnie Darko, Brokeback Mountain and his best performance to date, Zodiac. These days he's taken his foot off the gas. I don't mind him having a good time in something like Ambulance every now and then but he's taking increasingly less challenging roles lately. Needs to get back to his brand of playing unhinged freaks and not that quirky Marvelised unhinged freak.

Right that catches us up with DGG coming in to Halloween. He'd fucked up his stoner films and his more serious efforts had been found lacking. Halloween offered the opportunity to smartly combine his two different styles. A stonery arsty horror, it was his one shot at getting his career back on track and for the most part he pulled it off, getting some of the best reviews of any film with Halloween in its name.

Typically, Halloween films do not get good reviews on release. Critics will pretend the first was unanimously liked across the board, it wasn't. Any of the more respected ones have earned that over time. DGG's first one has got to be the warmest reception, any of them got on release. He may not have been brave or overly ambitious but most of us were left thinking we're on the right path for an opener. Sequels will hopefully be better but the foundations were there to build on.

Often empty but continuously economic is how I'd describe Halloween (2018). As a slasher it works perfectly fine. Some will say the generational grief is superficial, not sure I agree, that side really holds up on revisits. Obviously, there's Karen's trauma and view of the world which has been shaped by protection bordering on abuse. What really hits hard for me is Laurie's PTSD. They turn her in to a Sarah Connor badass figure but the most revealing scene is when she invades the family dinner. You go from laughing at Laurie as she begins downing the nearest glass of wine to really feeling bad for the woman in seconds. Visually some extremely strong depictions of grief, there's such dread it freaks me out. As though, this is not just Laurie reflecting on her troubled relationship with Michael but Jamie Lee Curtis reflecting on her troubled relationship with Laurie Strode. An inescapable haunting role that has been her whole life. Similar actually to Zombie's mask contribution but here the role itself becomes a relic connected to the full series despite being a reboot. By far Jamie Lee Curtis's best work as an actor that scene.

All those ideas are expressed visually without the need for dialogue aiding the economy. An aspect the critics always miss. That's how this film keeps the strong pacing. Show not tell.

Likewise with the manner the predator/prey theme is hammered home. Mirroring shots from the original and swapping them round such as Laurie standing outside the school, falling off a building and disappearing in the next shot. Of all the films, this one is the best for the Laurie/Michael relationship. Bizarrely, they got it right here and in the two follows up laughably wrong to the point of parody.

Honestly, Jamie Curtis plays 3 different characters across the trilogy. In the first film she's a disturbed woman pretending to be in control. Then for the second she removes the desolation and so the 'hard' 'badass' remains and looks pathetic and unbelievable. She forgets the first worked because the badass was a front or a character created on top of her character to mask the pain and create the illusion of control. In Halloween Kills, she buys in too much to the Sarah Connor character and you never see the weaknesses. It's bullshit. You lose so much of what made her so interesting in the first for fucking pantomime. Out of nowhere in the third she begins accidentally parodying sound nans who encourage grandkids to make the most out of life and all that nonsense as though she never had any traumas and fears of the big wide world to begin with.

This is strangely not a take supported by all Halloween fans but I adore Carpenter's reworked score for the 2018 film. I'm here for it. It sure does have a rougher industrial edge. You don't even want to know how many times I've listened to 'Michael Kills Again'. That's my jam! When that sleazy fucking exploitive journalist starts crawling under the cubicles is some mean and nasty business. Got to give it to Green, his trilogy has been adequately gnarly. Masterfully, he decides after the cubicle slaughter, this is the time for Michael to be reunited with his mask. Perfect. That's cinema! When my boy lays eyes on that mask of his, literal tingles down the spine. Maybe even some, I believe you call it, emotion.

After the slick and efficient Halloween (2018), all the critics turn on Mr Gordon Green. He is no longer their darling. Many would describe Halloween Kills as a return to the shallow sequels that stagnated the series.

Won't lie that got me a little excited and probably more than I should have because I happen to really like those 'shitty sequels'. So it wasn't the diss those guys thought it was. Not to this Halloween junkie anyway. Even if that was to be the case, before watching I assumed that although lacking in substance, it would still deliver as a solid slasher. DGG has showed us there's a few things in his repertoire that could never make his Halloween films dull or not come through on some basic level. In the first two of this trilogy, a real guilty pleasure of mine is those repeated shots going from toe to head. Our boy DGG, has a real habit of shooting Michael this way and then Carpenter's score begins blasting. Oh god these shots are so wickedly menacing they get me giddie every time on a level equivalent to the ascending texts that open Star Wars films. Juvenile I know but man that shit gets me every time. Don't care how good or bad the film is just happy to see that. Every time.

Alright so this is not something I've really seen anyone comment on but I don't think Halloween Kills is the hollow experience unworthy of your attention the critics have made it out to be. Note though that this is not necessarily me declaring it as good. It's a total mess but it is interesting and not because of anything intentional for that matter such as the pseudo intellectual commentary on mob justice. My intrigue in Halloween Kills lies in the fact it, I want to say achieves but more accurately accidentally achieves something I've never seen in any of the countless sequels to 80s slashers. Halloween Kills presents the experience of watching a series really eat itself right before your very eyes. Honestly cannot name another sequel in any series to do it in such bonkers fashion. By this what I mean is that you have this clearly intelligent director who's well aware of all the different avenues the other Halloween films have gone down and what could be considered a fresh experience. He has this brilliant idea of Haddonfield finding its voice and speaking up for itself. Therefore, we get the survivors thrown together like the Losers Club in IT

Tommy Doyle returns and everyone gets their chance to finally speak. Whereas, the 2018 film was about a family's grief, this culminates in a town's grief. DGG nobly attempts to address all these characters who have been ignored all these years and tie up far too many loose ends. He poses the serious and rather real question of what if a town had to deal with all these horrors repeatedly?

The gargantuan task proves to difficult and the scope too large even for a highly talented filmmaker like DGG. That's what grabs me about it, the failure. What he's attempted to do is mess with film logic and real logic and the results are just nuts. It would be the equivalent of a Godzilla movie trying to acknowledge the damage and devastation done to their cities every few years. The rebuilding process is just usually ignored isn't it. You could say the same about superhero movies with their world ending third acts. They're in a situation where they couldn't possibly explain it. We're too far lost in the cartoon world and suspension of disbelief. That's why they have no impact anymore because lives don't means shit. It's a world in which half the population can disappear at the click of a finger but at the same time return at the click of a finger. Stakes are gone.

In Halloween Kills, we end up with one of the wildest experiments in franchise filmmaking as it tries to escape cartoon world and return to some sort of real world with genuine human responses. Normally, with sequels a common technique is to sweep certain questions under the carpet that are too hard to handle in order to sustain the series. Some things just can't be done and with each other passing film comes even harder and we as an audience accept that to some degree as part of the movie logic. It's that familiar battle of we need an excuse for the film to return and so we need to accept some fundamental parts that don't justify its existence. It turns out the question of how has Michael affected Haddonfield is too real a question to answer and far too late but DGG goes in to it so head on that it becomes surreal. He's gone digging about where he shouldn't have in a series dirty secrets and Halloween Kills is the result of that.

Ultimately, it's what happens when a filmmaker comes up against the troubled mythology across a series and tries to get things back on track and make sense out of conflicted, misremembered and constantly changing legend. I fully believe that Halloween Kills could have only come from a smart filmmaker. Other filmmakers would avoid challenging legacy and detract attention from plot holes. That's where the dumb can find quick success in not rocking the entire foundations. They can be the safer pair of hands for a studio because they won't ask too many questions and even better let the audience ask too many questions. These sequels are always eating away at themselves in the way they have to adapt to survive. The job of the nuts and bolts safe pair of hands is to ensure that happens in the background so that it's only revealed a few films later and some other sucker takes the blame for that as the series collapses under film logic and real logic.

Halloween Kills is an even better failure than most failures because most of other sequels die when the questions become too apparent. Alternatively, Kills goes out tripping itself up trying to answer the questions. It's a different kind of death, a hero's death. One in which it takes out the garbage and becomes the garbage simultaneously. Recycling its own shit trapped in an endless loop (think The Human Centipede chains eating except circular). The delightful thing is you see this process occur on screen rather than just in your mind. Hence why the films history eats itself like never before.

To sum up the difference between this remake and Kills, I have always said that DGG's first is not exactly armed to the teeth, it has just one plan. One simple idea and it nails that beautifully. On the other hand, Halloween Kills is not exactly armed to the teeth. It has just one plan. One simple idea and it fails that beautifully. Genuinely, I struggle to decide which I prefer, the sturdy first or the shambolic second. Obviously, in the traditional sense it's got to be the first but I can't say I've ever seen anything like the second.

First and foremost, Tommy Doyle vs Michael Myers is pure box office. Every time Tommy D takes to the streets with that bat in his hands, I'm ready for a showdown. Name a more iconic duo than Tommy and old Huckleberry. This death match gets utterly ridiculous. Instead of representing abused vs abuser it descends in to a dumb borderline Kaiju fight. Can't say it doesn't entertain me though. Once more DGG's attempts to humanise Haddonfield only turns the townsfolk in to aliens from another planet as they continuously chant, "Evil dies tonight".

My appreciation again lies in its unfamiliarity and surreal results. Eventually, Halloween Kills morphs in to a dumbass trashterpiece of Frits Lang's M. Has DGG morphed in to Kevin Smith in his midnight movie era influenced heavily by narcotics? It all reminds me of Red State's climax when the sirens start blaring, we're threatened with the apocalypse and enter uncharted territory. The weed reaches its peak. These guys become conductors once their films transcend good and bad in that they can only be described as 'operatic'.

To round off Halloween Kills, there is one thing I cannot go on without mentioning. I have seen the Myers house turned in to some pretty strange things in my day. Namely a big brother house organised by Busta Rhymes but even still nothing could have prepared me for Big John and Little John. Either you know who these two gentlemen are or you do not. All I will say is that they are the two chiefs that I have loved the most from all the Halloween movies. Begs the question, when are we getting their prequel spin off sitcom?

Right, so where the fucking hell did Halloween Ends come from? The first two felt connected as part of a trilogy and then this third comes off resembling a reboot. DGG covers everything in the book of what not to do for a finale. Reminds me of the end of Twin Peaks Remember that night when Lynch spent the majority of the last episode refusing to tie it all up as the shows leads drive around fucking relentlessly and then leaves you with more questions than it started with on that insane cliffhanger?

Comparison doesn't quite work because what was so funny is how much of the penultimate episode went about solving the puzzles leaving you with some hope of finally figuring out just what the fuck Twin Peaks is really about. Kills answered many questions but left with you with a gigantic problem of how do you kill Michael Myers?

For a good year we pondered the question. Was DGG actually going to kill the unkillable? He left you thinking, "sounds impossible but maybe he's found a way to do it". Turns out he did not have an answer leading to the most unsatisfactory conclusion and yet somehow I still loved it. Godfather fans will recall Coppola returning to his Part 3 and titling it The Godfather, Coda: The Death of Michael Corleone. A cut so brilliant it made me re evaluate the entire movie. There's so much good in it! The corruption of Catholicism and the church makes for a mighty story. Everything is a business in Coppola's eyes and no institution stays ethical.

When they make it to Sicily it's beautiful! Turns in to Richard Linklater's Before Midnight with this couple late on in their relationship trying to rekindle whilst talking bullshit and walking around gorgeous locations. Kate desiring to see the man before the monster and separate him from the generational troubles handed down to him by his country. A lot of that makes The Godfather trilogy feminist once you start delving deep in to the true meaning "this Sicilian thing" and the effect it has on the wives. I'm still waiting on someone like Sofia Coppola to do a mafia movie from the full perspective of the women in the families. On rewatches, it's their little interactions between each other that interest me. They have a kind of comradarie in their shared experiences.

In part 2, Connie even helps Kate against Michael's wishes to some extent. What goes on between these women when the men are in the offices? The Godfather movies merely suggest it but there's room for a movie there. Back to Part 3 specifically though, is Michael's confession the most powerful and hard hitting scene in cinema? I think so. Appeals to the Paul Schrader fan in me.

I mentioned that equally divided trilogy closer though because many argued over whether the title was right. Was it really a coda? I wonder what these very same people make of Halloween Ends if it was called The Halloween Coda, The Death of Michael Myers. Nope, instead it's simply called Halloween Ends which even before seeing the movie doesn't feel appropriate either and nothing more than a marketing strategy. One used countless times before and will be used countless times again. Most of these slasher villains can't be killed because of one obvious reason. The fucking money in it. They're protected by the profits but with Michael it's something deeper with that.

So how does DGG avoid the question of how to kill Michael Myers for the majority of the movie? Out of nowhere, he decides to do a remake of Christine. No warning, just goes in to it. Yes, the fucking head the ball forgets what John Carpenter movie he's supposed to be re imagining. Myers takes a real back seat in this one as though following on from concepts delved in to in The Season of the Witch and The Curse of Michael Myers. DGG going that route. Did the critics really get to his head on the first film in his trilogy when they called it too simple? Somehow his third film could be even more ambitious than the second and fails just as gracefully.

Whether you will like or loathe Halloween Ends depends solely on your feelings towards new comer Corey Cunningham. Even saying his name gives me the giggles. He has rattled some of the most ardent Halloween fans. going back to Twin Peaks, it's like Dale Cooper and Dougie Jones. All of a sudden, this imposter appears and you just have to roll with it. You see, me, I've caught Coreymania and I don’t think I'm the only one. Corey fever is sweeping the nation baby! He's an absolute loser but I love him. Those scenes of him going to gaffs with Michael and killing people together are adorable. Proper bring your son to work day vibes.

Another bizarre thing about Halloween Ends is that so much of it is this beautiful hangout rom com. Swirling synthesisers as Corey and his new girlfriend Allyson ride in to the night on their motorbike and rendezvous on rooftops romantically discussing leaving this town for good. Can I make a third Twin Peaks comparison? Am I allowed to do that? Is this Laura and that geek James Hurley in Fire Walk With Me?

Probably not. Anyway, I am so down bad for Allyson in this movie like never before in the trilogy. Somehow she's even more appealing now her ex is dead and if weirdos like Corey Cunningham can sliver in the DMs maybe anyone can. The goal has never been so open. Allyson take me to your Dead Kennedy's parties, I want to dance to 'Halloween'! There's even a bit where they ride about on the motorbike at night to Boy Harsher's 'Burn it Down'. Wasn't I saying only in the last issue, we need more Boy Harsher in horror?! Later Michael goes on a killing spree to The Cramps 'I Was a Teenage Werewolf'. A scene which I adore for two reasons. Firstly, it proved DGG can stray from the slasher and get weird but then when he needs to snap right back in to slasher mode, he's got the tools and can do it like THAT. More importantly, because Darcy the Mail Girl has a cameo in this scene. In the words of Pearl/Maxine, she's a "fuckin' star!"

Characters wise, what on earth is going on with Laurie in Halloween Ends? Who has she become? I get Michael's become weak with age. Absolutely pathetic swine spends his life in an asylum, breaks out and can't last five minutes. Fucking fraud. Throughout this trilogy, they've touched on the that psychic connection between the two characters but I don't know what Laurie is meant to be here. Is she weaker or stronger than ever? Doesn't even seem plausible. Spends her life in fear, hiding and training. Then that paranoia just disappears? No visible scars? Halloween Ends becomes this 80s rom com of girl living with a relative one summer trying to reconnect with the world after a family tragedy. Normally, at their aunties and uncles but in this case granny Laurie. Allyson seems more affected by the tragedies they've succumbed to. Laurie dangerously pushes her in to getting over pain and invites her to explore the world. A far cry from the woman who turned her house in a giant trap and dedicated her life to fighting. Watch as they attempt to function like a regular family making meals together. Totally unbelievable but watchably surreal.

And the solution to all their problems is to shove Michael in a giant meat grinder? Why did no one else think of that? Plus in the end it looks like old age really killed Michael. The myths of the bogeyman are bullshit. Who knew that if you just wait it out, he'll die eventually. Behave. Have to say, the ceremonial drive with Michael Myes body on the roof of the car blew my fucking head off. Eerily shot similar to the OJ Simpson Broncho chase with the eyes of the nation on this one event. Only a dude like DGG would attempt such a thing. That's why I praise the stupidity. If nothing else its creative stupidity.

Fuck, just remembered, I shit you not, during the entire movie Laurie is writing her memoirs. Another laughably bad decision. What is this Nan tales? Agony Aunt? Scouse Ma? Thankfully, they choose to end it on a slightly better image. Laurie and Sheriff Hawkins in one of their romantic moments. Sorry those always get to me. When they chat about that Bloody Ben Traimer in Halloween Kills. Amuses me that we've never seen this guy in action. He's been with us since 1978 as Laurie's off screen crush but we've never laid eyes on him. Destined to be in the next surely. Oh wait, just googled this fucker, he was in Halloween 2 (181). That's finished me. Will have to revisit that one. Need to see this beast in the flesh. The real haunting figure of the series.

Halloween Ends finishes in the best/worst manner. None of it is remotely believable in being the end of Michael Myers. We're talking minimal satisfaction and convincement in his demise. But none of that matters though because Laurie and Sheriff Hawkins are happy. That's what we really come to see! Then they throw up the title card, 'Halloween Ends' and drop the unofficial theme song, 'Don't Fear the Reaper'. Yeah something ended alright but I'm not quite sure bloody what. I'd had me 2 bottles of wine over the course of the movie in Rambo reviewing mode. Maybe I was too drunk to care about how bad a finale wrap up closer it all was because I came out flying and singing, "Don't fear the reaper la la la la!". No kidding I was like that viral video of the fight in the takeaway, all the critics and Halloween fans scrapping each other and I was just like the dude eating the kebab. On Cloud 9, I felt like a man dancing on the ashes of a burning fire without a care in the world. You could tell me it was a mess by all means but you couldn't tell me I didn't enjoy it.

DGG did everything he shouldn't have and still I think I loved it. Was all too humorous and entertaining to hate sorry. Worked more as a 80s romance or melodrama than a slasher. Should have titled it 'Two Girls Find Love in Haddonfield'. Genuinely, this has more in common with George Washington, Undertow and Prince Avalanche than being a sequel to Halloween. In that sense, it's nearly incredible in almost being the only one since Zombie's remake to have a director come in and make it their movie with their own recognisable style. Will the future be kind to Halloween Ends?

Kinder maybe. No doubt someone else will come in for a trilogy and opinion will change and people will start saying David Gordon Green saved Halloween like they're now doing with Rob Zombie's. I don't know. It's happened before and it'll happen again. Not that I think it’s a misunderstood masterpiece or any of the sequels are for that matter. I can't even say whether my love for Halloween Ends is purely an ironic love or not. I'm just a dude who had a good time at the movies. Who's to say whether it's good or bad. For me these DGG misses are much better than most director's hits.

As for that burning question of whether Michael will be back? Of course he will. They put the son of a bitch in a meat grinder but he'll pop back up like "Call an ambulance...but not for me!". Unless we find a way to confront the evil in our society and wipe it out for good, then Michael Myers will appear forevermore and haunt our screens for decades to come. He'll be back. He'll be back lads. Don't fear the reaper la la la la la!