Suspect's Reviews

Up (Pete Docter & Bob Peterson)



Is Anyone Really Surprised That This Film Is Good?

After living in his home for most of his life, Carl is suddenly surrounded by skyscrapers and construction. They want to buy his house so they can tear it down and build a retirement home. He will have none of this and decides to use thousands of balloons to literally lift his house 'up' and soar to a place he's been dreaming of going since a kid.

There's a bit more to the plot, but I don't want to divulge that information. Going into the film not knowing about it might have a stronger impact on you. Up, which is yet another fascinating film from the geniuses at Pixar is vibrant with colour, full of laughs, tugs on the heart strings and is an adventure for both kids and adults. I never thought a film that had to really old characters in the lead roles would appeal to the young ones, but Up surprised me. In fact, it really surprised me, hearing about the concept I thought that Pixar finally had a dud on their hands. Nope, not this time.

Up is one of my favourite Pixar films, up their with last years Wall-E and The Incredibles. The film is unique and inspiring. I doubt you'll find such quality film making from any other animated film, Pixar has set the bar time and time again. Up, while not visually stunning or powerful as last years Wall-E takes a different route and uses vibrant colours to draw attention to itself. The characters are cartoonish and the story itself could never be based on any reality and for a film about an old guy in a house with balloons, it's mighty adventurous.

Every Pixar film has a message that their cleverly slip into the excitement and Up is no different. We go on this journey with Carl and the young boy scout Russell, Carl at first does not like Russell, nor does he want him around. These two characters are at opposite ends of each other, one old and quite, the other young and talkative. Of course by the end of the flick they bond. Also along for the ride are two side characters, Kevin the colourful native bird of Paradise Falls (they place Carl wants to finally see) and Dug, a dog who can mysteriously talk. Dug is not the only dog who can talk though, the place is full of them, all trained to open doors and fly planes. They all heel to their master Charles Muntz, who has spent his life trying to capture Kevin.

Up is not only funny, fun and exciting, it packs a few emotional scenes too. Some people might want to bring some tissues, while it's not a sob story it is one of the few Pixar films that have moved me. What happens to Carl happens to everyone, so you can relate to him. You are immediately grabbed by him and his story and the film has more emotional punch in ten minutes of dialogue free montage then most dramas or romance films today can say for themselves.

There are a lot of words to describe Up: Delightful, endearing and whimsical are a few, but one I will choose to employ is heart. Along with Wall-E, Up has the most heart out of every other Pixar film I've seen. The film has a PG rating though, only other Pixar film to have this is The Incredibles. The Russell kid is shot at and people die, at times I was thinking would kids be scared of this? I don't think so, nothing horrible ever happens that could traumatize a young one in my opinion.

I did not bother to see this film in 3-D, I've heard it doesn't give enough 'pop' to warrant the additional money on the ticket. Seeing it at a regular theatre will not hinder your viewing at all. All the voice acting is top-notch and perfect casting with Plummer and Asner. See Up in theatres while you can, it is one of the year's best.

__________________
"A laugh can be a very powerful thing. Why, sometimes in life, it's the only weapon we have."

Suspect's Reviews

I saw the trailer of this at the movies and it looked really cute thanks

__________________
Health is the greatest gift, contentment the greatest wealth, faithfulness the best relationship.
Buddha

The Hangover (Todd Phillips)



Funniest Film Of the Year

After a wild bachelor party, 3 friends wake up in a destroyed room and discover that their friend, the groom, is missing. Now they must re-trace their steps from the night that they can't remember in order to get him back to the wedding the next day.

This premise is just an excuse for some wild and random comedic scenarios, such as having a tiger be in your bathroom when you wake up. The joy of watching this film is seeing just how many crazy things come next, all of which the characters have no memory of. What makes The Hangover work so well, is not just those random comedic scenarios, but the cast that blended so well together. Specifically Zach Galifianakis, whom has been the audience favourite.

As the film progresses, the characters find themselves getting into some serious situations due to their antics the night before. I want say what happens, as each one is funny, but should be watched with surprise. It easy to say that this film will not bore you. It does have a particular comedic style though and you can judge yourself if you'll be into it or not from the trailer.

Todd Phillips, of Oldschool fame, has his funniest movie here. Both Road Trip and Oldschool were good, yet were missing something that made me really love it. The Hangover has this something. It's not a teen comedy (road trip) nor is it a star powered film (old school). It uses familiar faces that make you go "I've seen him before" but never do these actors overshadow the film. Had it of been a bigger name cast it wouldn't have worked so well.

The three friends are played by Ed Helms, the uptight dentist, Bradley Cooper, the suave smooth talker, and Zach Galifianakis, the odd brother in law. The groom is played by Justin Bartha, the National Treasure sidekick. It's easy to say the Galifianakis steals the show. It's obvious he will garner more roles from this, I just hope he doesn't get pigeon-holed into this style. He reminds me of Chi McBride and I want him to branch out before it's too late (Michael Cera). Helms and Cooper also hold up nicely, I'm familiar with Helms from The Office and Daily Show fame and Cooper from previous films has always been likable. Bartha isn't in the film that much, since most of it is them looking for the guy.

The Hangover also doesn't suffer from the one thing that seems to kill so many comedies. Over exposed trailer. Yes we've all seen the Mike Tyson bit, but the film has so many random bits of comedy that you will enjoy yourself throughout the running time. If the film does fault, it's with the character of Mr. Chow. I like Ken Jeong, but here he plays the character way over the top and it becomes distracting. Heather Graham makes an appearance as well and as she does with almost every role she takes on, you see her boobies. Well, one boob.

The film is funny, I was entertained, and I expect to see good things from Galifianakis. It's vulgar and obscene and don't expect to see much heart near the end or a good message, like Apatow films do. While it does have that one scene in which one character stands up for himself, it doesn't try to throw any real messages out the audience.

Make sure you stay for the first bit of the credits, as the laughs don't stop.

Thanks for the great review Sussy I may wait for this to come on DVD I saw the trailer and it doesn't look like my sort of comedy

Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen (Michael Bay)



Bigger, Louder, But Not Better

So the film goes like this. Sam decides to put on his old shirt from the first film and when he takes it out, a piece of the cube falls out. He picks it up and it imprints a bunch of alien text into his brain. Yeah, this is where the so called story starts. Anyways, bad robots are after this information, good robots must protect him, people run in slow motion, Megan Fox looks hot, someone wants to destroy the sun, they require help from robots so old they use walking canes and then Boom. Something explodes. This is Transformers in a nutshell. The film is so confused on what it's intentions are that it has to literally have one character ask the plot of the film from another. This scene happens in the movie.

A sequel to Transformers has to be bigger and louder, or else what would the point be right? Michael Bay seems to be an advocate of "We Can Fix It In Post" or "We'll Throw Some CGI At It". This is never a good sign and this film is a prime example. For starters, the film is too long. It has unnecessary scenes that do nothing for the film. Seeing Sam's mother on drugs for comedic relief is not funny, it's rather eye rolling. This is screen time that could have been giving to develop a bit more of a story, or hell been axed all together and shave of 20 minutes of failed comedy.

You simply cannot rely on Giant Robots Fighting as a draw for the audience. You need to give them substance, something this film lacks. For one, the main villain from the first one, good old Megatron, takes orders from some dude on a random planet. This guy is the "Fallen" and he returns to earth to destroy the sun, blah, blah, blah he has very little screen time. We don't feel the threat. Speaking of very little screen time, let's look at the main stars of this piece. No, not LaBeouf or Fox, the Autobots. The main reason this movie will make money is because of them and they get shafted hard here. Aside from Prime, every other Autobot is basically background filler. With one key scene in the beginning, then nothing else. Why alienate the fan base that warranted a sequel in the first place. Oh wait, I forgot, they do focus on some Transformers. They are called the twins, speak jive, can't read and one has a gold tooth.

The entire film feels like Bay is just trying to out due himself. I can picture him on the set thinking how to make things seem bigger and more hectic, without giving a damn about the script. A script that is full of pages that read character jumps from explosion here, character runs from explosion there, character screams. But hey, what did I expect from a Bay flick right? Well, he did do The Rock and the first Transformers was really good. The final battle scene in that flick had more going for it, here I couldn't give a damn.

Speaking of no giving a damn, the human characters. Megan Fox, sure she is hot, but can she act? Not if we are going on this performance. Her orange skin was distracting in the first flick, this time it's her big Jolie lips. Labeouf? His role consists of the aforementioned running and screaming. Argh, so much running and screaming that you don't know what is going on or who is who. The robots, now I consider myself to have basic knowledge of the Transformers universe. but I couldn't tell what was what unless they were specifically mentioned, like Starscream or Soundwave. I finally figured if I see a robot, it has to be an evil one because that's all they seemed to be focusing on. Where was Barricade? The cop car that mysteriously disappears from the first film before the climactic battle. I thought they would bring him back here and mention that, but nothing. Instead we get a 5 second cameo from Scorponok, the one who tunnels underground, before he gets lights out. There is a new character, who basically plays the role Anthony Anderson played in the first one, a tech geek. His only purpose is to re-introduce Turturro.

I wanted more from this film, and not in the sense of bigger and louder. It's nice and all, but is that honestly all you think we want? We all know going into a Bay film we will get this, has he given up on giving us anything more? Has it been dumbed down to us guessing just how many explosions he will use in his films now? Too many, for this one. Giant robots fighting each other is cool, but we've seen it once. Is the only thing you're going to offer us is the same thing in a different setting? Change the city to a forest and some pyramids and it's all good?

In defense of the flick, the special effects are top notch, they are epic. They look great up on the big screen and that's where you should see this flick, if you have any interest at all. The big screen and loud sound was made for this flick. The fight sequences are interesting, even if the last one drags on too long. The idea behind the this film is good, the whole history and origins of the Transformers, but instead of diving deeper into that, they elected for more boom boom.

Too many characters (did we really need a robot chick who looked like she belonged in Terminator 3), too many robots (and the ones we actually care about are left for background filter), and an overblown and overly long film. This film could have been 20 minutes shorter. Transformers feels hollow inside. The first film had heart, this one is just dread. I give credit where credit is due and the film is great to see in the theatre, I wasn't really bored, but nor was I really interested.

It will please the target audience of teenage boys who want to see things blow up or Megan Fox run in slow motion. But for everyone else, it's just another summer blockbuster that is louder then the original.

On a side note: The mention of Obama and Swine flu felt out of place and will just date the film in the years to come.

G-Force (Hoyt Yeatman)



Family Friendly Adventure, Just Lacks Laughs


G-Force is a specially trained team of guinea pigs, a mole and a fly. They must foil the plans of Saber, a millionaire, who wants to take over the world with these home appliances that ultimately transform into Megatron. Or something along those lines.

I watched this one because it was available in 3-D. My first Disney Digital 3-d film. From the aspect, the kids will enjoy the things that pop out at you. This film has a few of those moments, water, debris and glass. Although it just didn't do it for me. The 3-D in this film didn't enhance the film or astonish me. Thus, it ultimately feels like a gimmick and will until a certain film that is planned to be released in the near future apparently plans to change that. I'm not saying it wasn't well done, I just expected more.

The film is mixed animation and live action. The animation is obviously the rodents and insects, while the cast is formed of Hangover star Zach Galifianakis, Will Arnett and Bill Nighy. Galifianakis is really timid here and Nighy does his whole British thing, while Arnett plays the G-Rated version of an A-hole. Nothing memorable, and the kids won't care about these people. They want to see the funny guinea pigs do funny things. Yet, in the theatre I was in, which was full of kids, had hardly any laughs. That's not to say they won't enjoy themselves, because the film is entertaining. It's just not that great a comedy.

The voice acting is great, Sam Rockwell plays Darwin, the lead commando. Tracy Morgan is Blaster, if anyone has seen him on 30 Rock, it's the same here. Penelope Cruz is the female character, who toys with the boys on which one she likes. Nicolas Cage plays Speckles, the mole who is a tech whiz. In this film if you did not know it was Cage playing this character, you would never know it was him. The voice is so different that is makes you scratch your head, well done on all parts.

The child favourite without a doubt is Hurley, the guinea pig that our team meets in a pet shop. He has a bad case of flatulence and is the 'dumb' friendly character. He gets the most laughs, which like I said, wasn't many. Finally Steve Buscemi has a small role as a hamster and he plays it exactly as you would picture Buscemi to play it. The voice work from everyone was top notch, but if I were to hand it to anyone, it wold be cage for his transformation to the unknown.

The animation is well done, the final action sequence does feel like it comes straight out of transformers, but it looks neat. The interaction between human and creature is still noticeably fake, even after all these years they can't seem to perfect this. Since this is a Bruckheimer film, you know there has to be non-stop action. This involves car chases left right and centre, covert-operations and battles with giant creatures. The film is fuel injected to the bone with this. There are moments here and there to slow everything down, yet they are extremely short and don't seem to do much to create conflict for the characters. When the guinea pigs are told they aren't special, they get doubt themselves, this lasts all but one scene because in the next they get a pep talk and are back to the chase sequences.

The plot is one that we've all seen before. Unlikely heroes stopping someone from world domination. So don't expect anything new in the story department. The reveal at the end is lame and predictable, the whole bad guy plan is extremely far fetched and doesn't make sense. Although if you're expecting this film to make sense I guess you're in the wrong theatre. These are talking guinea pigs after all.

The film is entertaining and the kids will most likely enjoy it. It does seem like a typical Hollywood kid flick and it is exactly that. There's no life lessons learned and by the end of the film your kid will want a new pet.

Fabulous reviews you've got going on there, Sus. So Up is really the **** then, eh. I'm giving it a go. I think I have to be in a certain mood to watch this film.

The Hurt Locker (Kathryn Bigelow)



Intense and Gripping Drama

The Hurt Locker has a lot going against it. One, it's a modern day war film and if the record shows, these films don't do well at this point in time. Two, it has a no name cast, full of those guys from that movie. Three, how entertaining can a movie be about a guy who disarms bombs. The Hurt Locker is a film that will surprise you on every level.

Jeremy Renner is the bomb expert, who doesn't like to play by the rules. If course, there is always one of them right? Instead of following orders, he likes to play games, take off his communication device and disrobe of his bomb safety gear. Why? Well, if he is going to die, he wants to die comfortable. His team consists of two men, Anthony Mackie, a by the book soldier who doesn't get along with Renner and Brian Geraghty, a young blood who is afraid of dying. They all seem to get on each others nerves, but to survive they must pull together and act as a team.

The film is intense and gritty. Shot hand held for a lot of the scenes, it puts you right beside the bomb. You feel the sweat and hear the ticking. The scenes themselves are done without music, relying more on the drama at hand told straight. Nothing to help build the emotion and this film doesn't need it. There is impending doom music, which to me sounded a bit like The Joker theme from The Dark Knight, but once we get to the disarming stage, it's just us and the bomb.

At first the film feels like it's going to be repetitive. We disarm a bomb, then we are back at base and chit chat, then we go back out there another day to disarm another bomb. Just when it feels like it becomes predictable, they pull the rug from under our feet. We are given scene of emotional depth and action round-up. Don't think for a second all the intense scenes involve bombs.

I've enjoyed Renner is everything he's done and it's nice to see him front and centre here. He plays the 'wild man' part perfectly. Mackie plays the straight man yearning for more. Both these guys have played men in uniform before. Renner with both Swat and 28 weeks later, Mackie in Eagle Eye. There are a few small roles filled out by Ralph Fiennes, David Morse and Guy Pearce. Lost fans can see Evangeline Lilly, as Renner's wife. She is given next to nothing in this film and is merely there for more backstory to Renner.

I really enjoyed this flick, Bigelow has a hit here. My only complaint is the run time. It's a bit long. There are scenes here and there that could be a lot shorter and seem almost totally out of place, along with some sub-plots that don't always work out. On a whole, this film works and is one of the best of this year.

A Perfect Getaway (David Twohy)





A Predictable, Yet Entertaining Thriller


A couple on their honeymoon go to Hawaii and meet up with another couple along the way. They discover that there is another couple killing people on the island and they suspect each other, among others. Who is the real killer?

This film suffers from the same fate Hide and Seek had, the trailer gives away the ending. Maybe not bluntly, but if you know how these films work, you know how the film will end. Going into this film, I had a pretty good idea, from the trailer, how this one was going to end. I ended up being right, but I still enjoyed the film and what it had to offer. Knowing the ending makes it a bit more interesting because you can look at things from different angles, as opposed to someone who may have no clue at all. Despite the predictable ending this film has, it has more to offer.

The cast consists of funny man Steve Zahn, who has been stepping out of his usual comedic roles and taking on more things these days, and Milla Jovovich as the honeymoon couple. He is a screen writer, she is just happy to be on her honeymoon. We don't get much else from her, besides one scene in which she has a conversation about her past. Zahn does a good job playing the nerdy role. I said in another review he couldn't carry a film (Strange Wilderness) yet here is seems like the type of person who can. Only time will tell, I hope he takes on more than just comedic roles though.

Timothy Olyphant and Kiele Sanchez (Nikki from Lost) are the second couple. He is some kind of ex-marine type guy, who is a man's man, boar killing and all. She comes off as a free spirited chick, who is able to match her significant other. There is a third couple, who pop in and out of the film as the scary duo. They serve their purpose and leave, nothing more to really say about them.

The director, David Twohy tries his hand at something other than sci/f. His resume includes an underrated flick The Arrival and Vin Diesel vehicles Pitch Black & The Chronicles of Riddick. Glad to see him trying his hand at new stuff and it works. The film is entertaining and thrilling, two key things needed in this type of flick. It has it's by the numbers moments, every film like this does, but in sea of films like these, this one isn't bad.

I wish they film did play up the, which couple are the killers, a little more. It could have been a good mystery, but again, if you pay attention enough, you'll guess who's who early on. The film throws clues as to who the killers are left right and centre. Some people might not like how the film tries to fool it's audience and near the end it does shift it's focus, which seemed odd, yet needed. Can I recommend A Perfect Getaway? Sure, for the people who might be interested that is. If you know this type of film is not for you, keep on walking. If you're a little bit interested, give it a look.

Thanks Sussy

District 9 (Neill Blomkamp)



"Balls To The Walls"

District 9 has been getting a lot of hype and praise to equal that hype. Not many films can do this. I decided that I would try my best to go into this film not knowing much about it. I've seen the teaser and a couple TV spots and knew the basic premise. What I did not know was what a balls to the wall film this is.

Neill Blomkamp has mixed great sci/fi with themes and issues plaguing our society. A blend that works so well in this film that it plays out in two different styles. The first half of the film is told through a documentary style footage, with people talking directly to the camera explaining the backstory of the mothership and basically setting up the rest of the film. Half way through the film Blomkamp switches the style to a more conventional style of filmmaking, yet it isn't a jarring switch. The two styles bleed into each other and both feel the same.

The film is set in South Africa, the aliens are sequestered into these slums and blocked off away from humans. This segregation is reminiscent of our own history and it works well here, making the film more believable than a film like Independence Day. While watching this film I got a sense of Cloverfield and some Slumdog Millionaire. I wouldn't say it's a mix of the two, but I just got the feeling from it. I saw Cloverfield because this is a sci/fi that we haven't seen before. It's not based on anything and the creators have free range to do what they want. This was apparent in all the awesome weaponry they had. Cloverfield was new, fresh and a monster that we had no idea what it could do. I had no idea what this film was about to do, which was blow me away.

The second half, which is the more conventional filmmaking style, is action-packed and bloody violent. I had no idea what I was in for, but once I saw that the lead got his hands on the weapon technology, I had a huge smile on my face. What he did with it, made me smile even more. There were plenty of "Holy Sh*t" moments on my end. The most fun I've had at the movies this year, even more than the other sci/fi entertainer Star Trek.

The film is gritty, dirty and everything that it needs to be to sell this idea. The special effects look marvelous, especially when placed on such a desolate and depressing backdrop. The slums are dirty and turn into a warzone. A warzone that goes on for a long time and you never get tired of. You end up wanting more, craving more.

For a film with no star names attached and a lead who hasn't acted in anything before, I was surprised in the depth and emotion that these characters had and what Sharlto Copley had to offer. He's between a rock and a hard place. His character transformation from beginning to end is real and saddening. It's not easy to get me to care for CGI creatures, George Lucas failed, Peter Jackson succeeds, again. The alien creatures look great and I was surprised at how well I was able to connect to the Christopher character.

The film is original, fresh and unexpected. I was never bored and had no idea what was going to happen next. In all this action and drama, is there any room for some sweet romantic moments? The answer is yes and it ends on a beautiful note.

Go see this one in theatres.

Never heard of District 9 until today, just read two reviews of it, both highly recommending it. Think I'll avoid reading anymore about it and go see it. Or, more likely, wait for the dvd.

Inglourious Basterds (Quentin Tarantino)



"These Basterds Are Worth Seeing"

Once Upon A Time....In Nazi Occupied France opens the film in the first chapter (a signature Tarantino style) of this WWII film in which Jewish American soldiers, who've deemed themselves "The Basterds", ambush and scalp Nazi's. Their story intertwines with another in which a Jewish girl survives an attack on her family and lives among the Germans as a French theatre owner. The theatre in which numerous high ranking German officials will be at, a theatre that "The Basterds" will be at.

Tarantino is a favourite director of mine, not the top, but he's up there. Many people complain he simply rips off older, better films. I say nay. He is inspired by them because he loves cinema so much. Any interview with the guy will prove his vast film knowledge, a knowledge that he has used in his film-making, giving us some of the best films of the 90's. He doesn't have many films under his belt, but the ones their are all highly praised and one even earned him an Oscar. He is able to mix different genres well and is competent in each one. His last 3 films were a throwback to grindhouse features, a two part revenge story that mixes the spaghetti western and the Asian martial arts and finally a novel adaptation. Yet his praise is mostly in his writing, which is why he has an Oscar in the first place.

Inglorious Basterds is yet another film from Tarantino in which he mixes violence with characters who seem too cool for school. Brad Pitt plays Aldo Raine, the leader of the Basterds and one who can speak almost fluent Italian. He has a scar around his neck, yet it is never answered as to why, and he seems to be having too good a time here, killing Nazi's. He enlists 8 men to be apart of his squad of Basterds, along with his 2nd in command (I'm assuming) Donny Donowitz, played by Eli Roth. Who for once does not annoy me. His best scene involves the most brutal part of the film, reminiscent of Pesci's scene in Casino. Two more men join the Basterds, one is Til Schweiger, who is famous for killing 13 Nazi's in cruel and inhuman ways. The second is Michael Fassbender, a Scottish soldier posing as a German to initiate Operation Kino. A secret mission that will involve explosions and death. Seems like a lot of "Basterds" to keep track of, and it was. Tarantino loses half of them half way through. Missing scenes from trailers would indicate there was more story for each of them, but for the film as it stands now, it's incomplete. These characters are forgettable faces, this film needed more time with it's title characters.

In a Tarantino flick you can guarantee a couple things and getting good performances from his actors is definitely one of them. Brad Pitt is hilarious as Aldo and Roth is menacing as Donowitz. The short scenes with the Basterds are good, good enough to want more and feel disappointed when you don't get it. Krueger, from National Treasure fame, plays a famous actress working for the English, posing as a German. She has a thick accent and pulls off her scenes quite well. I didn't find her annoying at all, and even though Mélanie Laurent does a decent job as the Jewish girl posing as a French woman, her subplot with a German Private is boring and almost forgettable. It's not till the ending of this sub plot does it become remotely interesting, but it seems too late. The stand out is without a doubt is Christoph Waltz, playing a German who is nicknamed "The Jew Hunter". He plays the guy with enough kindness to make him creepy and enough crazy to make him fearful.

This film tells two different stories that meet up at the end. Each one has their own fair share of subplots, that seem to distract from more time with the Basterds. There are numerous scenes that are quite shocking and will leave you with a big smile, or a disgusted look of disdain. The violence here is more gritty and real, thus it feels more involving. Kill Bill has limbs flying and gallons of blood, but it was too over the top and comical to be taken seriously. Here it has that gritty feel to it that it just makes you wince when it happens.

Not Tarantino's best work, but then again will he ever top Pulp Fiction? Instead it's a welcome addition to his resume of films that I can say I enjoy. The length of this one is a little long and it may drag in some places, but the overall feel at the end is enjoyment. He takes his characters and lets them takeover the story, which is why the historical facts in this film are more interesting than others. There are countless war films that are plagued with people already knowing the outcome. Valkyrie is an example of a film that the audience knew how it was going to end. This one throws it all out the window.

A tighter running time and more time spent with the people who want to see would have made this film even more fun for me, but I'll take what I can get.

Thanks for the reviews

Halloween II (Rob Zombie)




A cookie-cutter slasher film that tries to be artistic


The film picks up right where the last one left us. Laurie is walking down the street covered in blood with a gun still in her hand. She is hospitalized, along with her friend Annie. Michael survive the gunshot to the head and comes back to reunite with his sister. Killing everyone in his way.

Not much of a plot, not much of a film. This sequel punishes those who had any interest in the first and almost immediately kills this re-invented series. The remake of the original is not bad and Zombie did a decent job of bringing Michael Myers to the new century of horror, but with the sequel he seems to have steered too far into House of 1,000 corpses territory.

Why is Michael so terrifying? Because he never had a reason to kill. He just did it. In the words of Dr. Loomis, he was pure evil. Freddy had the revenge thing, Jason has the mommy issues, Michael was just evil. Zombie, on the other hand, seems to have missed this point and deemed it necessary to have Michel do things because of visions he has of his mother and a white horse. Enough with the mommy issues, leave that crap for Jason. Michael got his background story given to us in the remake. He is a sick and disturbing boy, now we see that he has a method behind his madness?

The film's script consists of dream sequence, wake up and scream obscenities. Then we cut to Michael making a trip to Mount Doom, killing people along the way. Repeat this for about an hour. Then have a lame, not thrilling, not scary pathetic excuse for a climax at the end, that takes place in a shed. A shed in which Myers stands still while our main character battles herself and imaginary people. This is the same main character whom people seem to have liked in the first film, here she becomes an annoying crying little emo baby. The film brings back a few character whom we thought were dead from the first film, only to see them die here. Waste? I think so. Purpose? Nothing what so ever. Dr. Loomis has a separate story alongside Myers and Strode. One that makes him look like a total douche bag and seems to have been thrown in to make the film run longer and seem more fleshed out. The problem is that it's paper thin and out of character.

Myers is no longer scary, and neither is this series. The film is laughable and the predictable by the numbers set up and execution will make you fall asleep. After years and years of slasher films, you would think they would want the deaths to be unique and the very least creative. Seeing this horror legends slice and dice is what the fans of the original series want. Halloween II has none of this. All Myers does is stab people multiple times. Grunting while doing so, which also ruins the myth of this character. He is suppose to be this silent killer. With the exception of a face stomp, none of these kills are memorable.

Zombie here seems to have gone backwards in his film-making skills. The whole thing feels like a first time music video director takes a shot at a horror film. The sloppy editing and hand held camera make it almost impossible to see. The darkness of the film doesn't help either. I respect Zombie, more than Eli Roth, for trying to put a new stamp on the horror genre, but this is a horrible mess. Being a member of the Splat Pack, you can expect this film to be excessive in its violence. It is, but it's never really too much, specifically with how filsm are done these days.

This is probably one of the weakest slasher films to have come out in a while. Prom Night is the only thing I can think of that is lower on the scale. Things are left unexplained for god knows what reason. Apparently Myers and Strode share a psychic link to each other? Halloween was an interesting take from a fan of the horror genre on a classic. Halloween II is the same fan's dream, only in his own little weird world. A giant misstep, and this series is already done.

Skip it.

You nailed it, but I'm gonna do my own review in a second. I need to vent and express myself. It's not a good movie, yet, I liked some things....

Worst mask ever. How is that supposed to be Michael Myers?! It looks more like Leatherface.

Not me. I appear to be the only one who loves those Hostel movies.

I guess it's a nod to Halloween 5 - which I love - where Michael has a psychic bond with his niece, Jamie.

I really like the original series for what it is... seems the newer ones with Zombie at the helm are trying to be something they're not.

I've only seen the original, the one with Paul Rudd, followed by H20 and Resurrection.

Bought it for $2 I paid tooooo much for it

Getting it for free is paying too much for it.