A classic that time hasn't been kind to

Rating: Null/10 (28 August 2003)

I first saw HALLOWEEN when it was rereleased a couple of years after its original 1978 release. I was too young to see it in 1978 but I remembered the effective ad campaign which was spooky and made a big impression on me, and is the reason why I saw the film when it was rereleased. I thought the movie was extremely suspenseful and filled with great atmosphere. The audience reaction was and still one of the best I've ever experienced. Flash forward 20 years and even though I still consider HALLOWEEN to be a classic, time hasn't been kind to it and the film has, imo, lost a lot of its former glory. 20 years ago, I would have given HALLOWEEN a solid 10. Today, I would give a an 8, edging towards the 7.5 mark. There are several factors that have made me reevaluate HALLOWEEN.
First and foremost, the endless number of stupid sequels. What was so great about HALLOWEEN was the mystery surrounding Michael. Who was he? A boogeyman or just a psycho serial killer? There was an aura of creepiness about him that gave the film an extra punch. When I saw the film for the first time, what made it so startling was the randomness of Michael's killing spree. He just happens to follow Laurie and her friends because she was at the wrong place and at the wrong time. That's it. But then the sequels were made, and everything that was so great in the original film was flushed down the toilet in an instant. They've turned the whole thing into a silly soap opera of sorts, with Michael being Laurie's brother, etc. Why, oh, why? But even worse, after 20 years or so after the original film, they're still churning out sequels. Like James Bond, STAR TREK, STAR WARS, FRIDAY THE 13TH, Freddy Kruger or even Godzilla series, the HALLOWEEN series is a tired series of movies that should have stopped decades ago. HALLOWEEN RESURRECTION?!?! HALLOWEEN H2O?!?! How about HALLOWEEN RIP! The terrible sequels have done more to diminish the greatness of HALLOWEEN than anything else.
Second factor: John Carpenter, filmmaker. After I saw HALLOWEEN, I went to see every John Carpenter movie, that is, until I figured out how limited Carpenter was as a filmmaker. I've stopped seeing his films at the movies after THEY LIVE and only rented his other recent films. Carpenter is not a good filmmaker. I know this is blasphemy in the ears of "fan boys" but after making movies for 30 years, Carpenter hasn't evolved one bit as a filmmaker. In fact, his earlier films show more intelligence and originality than the really stupid films he's been doing for the past 15 years, like VILLAGE OF THE DAMNED, or PRINCE OF DARKNESS or ESCAPE FROM L.A., which is one of the worst films I've ever seen. Looking back at HALLOWEEN, I have to say that its greatness was due more to happenstance than genius.

Third factor, HALLOWEEN is not as original as I thought it was. The music, which is a big part of HALLOWEEN, is excellent and memorable. I thought then that it was original, that is, until I saw Dario Argento's DEEP RED. Though both scores are different, it's quite obvious Carpenter was "inspired" by the Goblin score. Then there's the whole "slasher" concept. Well, there were other slashers made before HALLOWEEN, like, hmmm, TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE or BLACK CHRISTMAS. So the whole slasher concept didn't start with HALLOWEEN.
The fourth and final factor is the film itself. When I watched it recently, I have to admit that the film was quite boring and not very well structured. The beginning is great and the ending is suspenseful but the whole middle part is pretty dull. Nothing happens for almost an entire hour. Before, I would have said that it was all about atmosphere and creating characters and such, but now, knowing more about movies and having formed an opinion on what's makes a film good or bad, I have to say that a lot of the middle part of HALLOWEEN feels like filler or padding, such as the many fun but useless scenes with the kids watching old movies on TV. Structurally, Carpenter could have made the story more tight. When Michael starts killing, before you know it, the movie ends. There are more dull moments than suspenseful ones in HALLOWEEN. And the couple of lapses of logic or plot-holes in the story-line are more apparent to me now than they were 20 years ago. And the film is very tame. Edit out the nude scenes and a couple of violent moments, and HALLOWEEN would be a PG-13 or even a PG-rated movie. I'm not a gorehound. For me, showing gore or violence is not important but after watching decades worth of action movies like the over-the-top TOTAL RECALL, which are 1000 times more violent than the 1978 Carpenter flick, the lack of violence in HALLOWEEN actually hinders it. There's almost no edge to it.
Like I've said before, I consider HALLOWEEN to be a classic of 1970s independent filmmaking but the greatness it used to have in my mind has slowly, with time, diminished and now I consider HALLOWEEN to be just another slasher that's slightly above average. Today, I prefer THE TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE. Now that's a horror movie to reckon with.