In the world of slasher sequels, Halloween 4: The Return of Michael Myers is still pretty highly regarded. It doesn’t come close to the original but that’s not surprising especially after the previous sequels in the franchise. Part II was apparently made to up the gore and body count that the first was sorely not lacking. The all-around awful part III was apparently created to kill the Halloween name altogether. Fortunately, it did not succeed because then Danielle Harris would not be who she is today (for better or worse) and we would be denied arguably the best sequel in this quite uneven franchise.
After the success of the first two films, it’s obvious that Jamie Lee Curtis would be pretty hard to get back into the genre saddle again. Since writer Alan B. McElroy realized the importance of family from the first two (we haven’t yet reached Resurrection at least), the story was shifted from Laurie to Laurie’s daughter Jamie (Harris). While one of the cardinal rules of horror films states that a kid cannot die, McElroy and director Dwight Little get their merit badge in trying their best as poor 7-year-old Jamie is in danger from almost her first frame. Fortunately, there are plenty of more disposable characters to off as Michael miraculously awakes from a decade-long coma to stalk the young child. As this is a proper Halloween film, Dr. Loomis (Donald Pleasence) is back on the case as he hunts Michael in his marginal screentime.
The biggest reason that this film works while others in the series fail is that it does not have a seemingly deep hatred for the first. I’d imagine that most directors do not wish to work on a film solely to pay respect to a previous entry but when the alternative contains contempt for just about everything that made it great (see parts 5 and 7 for more), this is not a bad direction. Starting from the opening scene where a team of Myers-fodder is attempting to transfer him from one nuthouse to another, this installment is filled with little callbacks to the original that seem to escape the rest: Rachel (Ellie Cornell) mentions to Jamie that Laurie used to babysit her, Rachel’s friend is named Lindsey who could very well be the pig-tailed brunette from the first, etc. It even one-ups the original in that this portrayal of Haddonfield actually feels like a midwestern town in the throes of fall as opposed to Southern California with some colored leaves strewn here and there.
Most of all, this film jettisons the cardboard cutouts from the second and replaces them with real characters. The dynamic between Jamie and Rachel as foster sisters starts rather frosty but ends with Rachel risking life and limb for Jamie. The love angle between Rachel and Brady is a bit trite but it is not front and center, existing only as a moderate time filler. Hell, I’d wager the drunken rednecks are more richly developed characters compared to just about anyone in part 2. And even though this is taking place a decade later, most of the characters are not stupid enough to have to be brought up to speed about Myers and his reign of terror many moons ago. In fact, even though the security guard is saddled with some clunky exposition at the start, I appreciate that the filmmakers knew that all we’d need is a quick twenty seconds or so to explain how we got where we are. It doesn’t quite explain how Loomis escaped the fiery inferno with minor scarring and a limp, but whatever.
While it did have a few questionable moments of common sense (a trained deputy does not notice a stowaway in his backseat?) and horror movie sense (don’t go near the guy who has spent 80 minutes trying to kill you!), there is nothing here that is so dumb or out of place that distracts from the story. Even having watched this movie countless times, there are many sequences that still make me jump or put me on edge and that is one of the highest praises I can levy at a horror film. The shots are worthwhile and the chase scenes are still thrilling and you can’t help but think what the entire Halloween franchise would have been if this level of commitment was present throughout.
Comments
Post a Comment