Fright Night (2011)

And, to the vault of unnecessary remakes, we add Fright Night, the 2011 reboot of the 1985 vampire film of the same name.The original is a camp, silly, funny, frightfest, scored with silly, plodding 80s beats, and starring a vampire who dresses like he's been pilfering from Jared Leto's stage wardrobe. The remake stars Colin Farrell. 


I don't mean to be a traitor to my country. Farrell is a very fine actor, and he showed real range in In Bruges and Intermission. But when I think of Colin Farrell, I don't think scary, I don't think vampire. I think skanger, or wise-cracking Irishman, possibly a Hollywood leading man, at a stretch (dreamy bad boy anyone? I don't get the appeal to be honest). The fact that I was forced to see this in 3D, a format which I have yet to be properly impressed by (Toy Story 3 came close, but was perfect without it) did not bode well with me, nor did the constant complaints from the dude who is forced week upon week to watch bad horror with me, hereafter referred to as Randall, since we have been compared to Dante and Randall from the universe of Kevin Smith movies. He also happens, like Randall, to hate everyone, and everything seems stupid to him. And he is terribly, stomach-achingly funny. Anyway, the point is, he was not excited, and the glasses were hurting his eyes before the film even began. 

"Can we fuck now?"     "Hush, he's doing something totally normal for a human being"

The film starts promisingly enough, with a fairly scary vampire attack. A kid hides under a bed, a bloodied body is dragged around, there's a blood-curdling scream  and a rockin' tune launches us off to the desert suburbs of Las Vegas, where people work nights and sleep during the day...or something. It's an interesting setting for a vampire film, although not quite as interesting as that of Frostbite, a fantastic Swedish outing set in an isolated town which gets a month of solid darkness per year. We meet Charlie Brewster, but not as we know him. This poor man's Elijah Wood reminds me a lot of the kids from Superbad, if one of them had decided the others weren't worth his time and that he ought to go hunt for pussy before it's too late. 

And to that end, Mc Lovin turns up, only this time he's paranoid and swears a lot more. It turns out he's "Evil" Ed, which is an odd casting choice, but since Christopher Mintz-Plasse is a fairly gifted actor, I wasn't annoyed at his presence. Moreover, I was delighted to see Imogen Poots - Brit actress and star of the excellent Chatroom turn up as Brewster's hot, popular chick girlfriend. Other than those three, the other teens on the sidelines are irritating as hell. One of them speaks with a permanent stoner tongue, which is absolutely infuriating. Luckily, he only has a few lines. Speaking of which, the clunky dialogue doesn't help. It's so bad it's like it was stolen from the "Understanding Teen Lingo" handbook for out-of-touch adults. The teens themselves look pained even delivering their lines. 

For those who don't know the story, it's very simple. A handsome, mysterious man moves in next door to Brewster, and then kids start disappearing. Ed tries to warn him, but he ignores him because he's an asshole and only wants to get laid. Then Ed disappears and somehow that makes Charlie give a shit again, and he starts stalking his neighbour to the point of madness, till the neighbour flips the shit and comes after him with a vengeance. The plot to the original film was perfect, so why the makers of this reboot felt the need to update it for modern audiences by making Charlie into an arsehole, who abandons his friends for a chick, is beyond me. It makes it near-impossible for us to care whether he lives or dies.

He's not mourning her passing, despite what it looks like

As for Farrell; he's definitely a handsome, charming man, but a bloodthirsty vampire he is not. Even when he's chowing down, it's so easy to just roll one's eyes and imagine him making fun of Brendan Gleeson. It's not that he isn't a good actor, because he is. And it's not that he hasn't got the ability to be scary, because as the scumbag, Le Hiff, in Intermission, he was totally believable, as a heartless arsehole who punched a girl in the face, just to rob the till. But, as a vampire, he doesn't quite get there.

It doesn't help that Stuart Townsend, a fellow countryman, played a far superior, sexier and scarier vampire in Queen Of The Damned. I spent most of that film lusting after him, but when he fed, I believed it, and it was scary (I still wanted him, but that's part of my perversion, as opposed to his acting). Farrell does a good job of being an asshole, but he's not a believable vampire. He's got some funny lines, and he is suitably suave and attractive, but the show is stolen from him by the excellent David Tennant, who is criminally underused here, as Peter Vincent. 

Much like Roddy Mc Dowall in the original, Tennant steals every scene he's in, playing a deliciously wretched, modern version of Peter Vincent, who stars in his own vampire-themed Vegas show, complete with wig, leather pants (have mercy!) and fake tattoos. Some critics have claimed the role would've been better suited to Russell Brand, or even that Tennant is playing him somewhat, but I completely disagree. Tennant brings a sexiness and a mischief to the role that Brand could only dream of, although he is a talented actor and comic, I must admit. Tennant chews the scenery as usual, and does go a little Doctor Who towards the end, but mostly he just struts around, clad in leather, drinking constantly and swearing like a sailor - all cynicism and with eyes that have seen too much. He gets all of the best lines and provides a running commentary for the audience, complete with "Holy shit!" moments and with laugh-out-loud disbelief at whatever is happening to him at the time. He is an absolute joy to behold and, although it is Charlie who eventually defeats Vampire Colin Farrell (spoiler!), sadly it is David Tennant I remembered most fondly. 

He goes a little Doctor Who for a moment, but it's rather enjoyable

It must be said that there's not a lot to like here. David Tennant is without a doubt the best part of the film, and he's not in it nearly enough. Christopher Mintz-Plasse is funny and competent, but is done away with far too early. Colin Farrell does not convince as anything more than a suave ladies man. And the teenagers, besides Imogen Poots, plod through their lines with not nearly enough self-referential humour (the best line coming from Mintz-Plasse, "I'm so fucking mad that you think I read Twilight"). Where the kids in the original Fright Night were freaked out but determined to fight back, those in the remake are all slack-jawed disbelief, laced with over-the-top paranoia. Whenever I watch a horror movie, I try to imagine how my mates and I would react, were we to end up in the same situation. We certainly wouldn't have acted like the kids in this. However, going to Peter Vincent is a great idea.

How dare you waste the time of firemen with your Satanic burning of crosses!? 

As pointed out by Randall before the film even began, the 3D really doesn't make sense here. Vampire films, by their very nature, are dark. 3D, by its very nature, makes everything darker, so why use it in a vampire film? The unfortunate result of this is that much of Fright Night is too dark and murky for the viewer to decipher what the hell is going on, or who's onscreen. I took off my glasses several times, just to check if it was Colin Farrell I was looking at. If the story were good enough, or funny, or properly scary, the 3D would add another element to it. And, although there are moments when the effects are used properly, e.g. when a vampire explodes in the sun and the blood and guts fly towards the audience, for the most part it's all just a bit murky and bland. 

As for being genuinely scary, there are some moments of dread and tension. However, for the most part, this a fairly family-friendly affair, which only earned its 15A certificate due to swearing and sexual references (I'm guessing).  A scene in an all-white corridor, where Colin Farrell has his victims imprisoned, is fairly creepy. But I spent most of the running time waiting for the big battle to come at the end, and even that fell slightly flat. The sight of newborn vampires crawling out of the soil should've been scary, but it was just strange. Furthermore, Colin Farrell's admission that he killed Peter Vincent's parents made me and Randall roll our eyes so far back into our heads, I worried they'd never return to the other side. 

It's difficult to make a horror comedy, because both elements have to be right. And, to echo the sentiment of the fantastic Mark Kermode, Fright Night just isn't scary or funny enough to be vert memorable. It's enjoyable but bland, funny but boring, creepy but not scary. Overall, a poor effort to redo a film that did not need to be remade. There was one great element to it, with which I will leave you.

 

Fright Night (1985)

I'm a sucker for cheesy 80s movies. I'm a sucker for cheesy 80s anything. If I had've been a teenager in the 80s, I would've been an awesome little Goth kid, like Winona Ryder's character in Beetlejuice. And, when it comes to classic 80s horror movies, you can't go wrong with the hammy, cheesy, totally great Fright Night. This weekend was my first time seeing it, and I only did so because the remake has just come out, and I wanted to form some sort of comparison prior to viewing it. 

I'm a total vampire nerd, but let's face it, vampires have been royally fucked with over the past few years, and not in a good way. In fact, the only decent vampire movies, which present the creatures as properly scary, of recent times, are 30 Days Of Night and the superb, Let The Right One In. Unfortunately, because of the pure tripe that is the Twilight series, vampires have become a bit cuddly and romantic (the hilariously cutting Vampire Money by My Chemical Romance says it perfectly). Everybody seems to have forgotten that they are bloodthirsty creatures of the night, who drink blood and dispose of carcasses like we would chicken bones. So it was interesting to see how my favourite creatures of the night were dealt with twenty years ago, before the Twilight generation stole them and made them sparkle.

Sparkle sparkle

Fright Night tells the story of cute, nerdy, everykid, Charlie Brewster (what an American name!). He lives in a typical suburban neighbourhood, with his mother, and has a cute girlfriend who wears dungarees pretty much constantly. Everything is going well for him in school and everywhere else, even despite the fact his best bud, who has major ADD, "Evil" Ed, keeps spouting nonsense non-stop. But then everything changes, when a suave, sophisticated, mysterious gentleman moves in next door and, all of a sudden, strange things start happening.


The whole vampire angle has been totally overdone at this stage, so it's interesting to see how it was handled back in the 80s. Jerry, the vampire (better vampire name than Emmett?), is handsome and charming in his human form, but transforms into a toothy, hideous, creature of the night in his vampire form, which is refreshing to see after all of the "sexy" vampires I've been rolling my eyes at lately (not Stuart Townsend as Lestat, he's exempt). I wasn't particularly afraid of him, but he was still an effective villain. The house he lives in is wonderfully gothic, and the way in which he lures women into his evil clutches is admirably skilled. One scene, in a nightclub, where he seduces Charlie's girlfriend, is very well played, and involves lots of cringy, lingering looks and vampire bum-grabbing.

He makes this face for most of the film, oddly enough

Of course, the best thing about this film is, without a doubt, the superb Roddy Mc Dowall, as vampire hunter and star of TV's "Fright Night", Peter Vincent. Although he dismisses Charlie's claims at first, when he does come around and turn up for the final battle in the end, it's difficult to not cheer him on. A truly gifted actor, with a stunning voice and presence, he steals centre stage from Charlie, or even Jerry, and is a delight to behold. When he snipes that nobody cares about vampires anymore because "All they want is madmen running around in ski masks, hacking up virgins", I wanted to worship at his feet - never were truer words spoken in a horror movie. 


The "Evil" Ed character is also fantastic. The best bud with all the answers, who of course nobody believes, he remains crazy-eyed and loud for the duration of the film. His cackle and taunts of "You think you're so cool, Brewster!" are hilarious, and I was really rooting for him to survive, even after he'd been turned. As for Jerry, he is so suave and fancy that he never really comes across as threatening, but there's something shining behind his eyes that lets the viewer know that not everything is as it seems, which is just as scary as in-your-face madness.

He is the MAN

Tension is ratched up with news reports of murders and missing persons, a blood-curdling scream followed by the lights shutting off, etc. It's simple, but effective. The effects are fairly impressive for the time, and the final struggle is not as predictable as I'd thought. All of the characters are likeable and easy to root for, while the situation, although it never feels dire, is just frightening enough to create a real sense of impending doom.

Fright Night has real charm in its silliness, and it's no surprise that it spawned sequels and a TV series (and, this year, a proper Hollywood remake). It hadn't occurred to me before, but the age-old tale of mysterious goings-on next door will always resonate, no matter how technologically advanced we are, or how safe we feel, shacked up in our rooms with the curtains closed and garlic hanging above our heads.

Friday The 13th (2009)

Before we begin, a word about that tagline - "Welcome to Crystal Lake" - how shit is that!? If you've seen the original, it's kind of scary, but if not, it makes zero sense, not to mention the fact that Crystal Lake, if nothing else is known about it besides the name, sounds so nice and picturesque. Sadly, the tagline isn't the worst thing about this clunky, confused, quite dreadful remake. I've mentioned before how Jason has failed to scare me in the past, and sadly that has not changed after viewing Michael Bay's trashy redo of the 80s classic (my opinion of which was probably made worse by the fact that I saw the original just last week). 

First off, this incredibly disjointed picture begins in the strangest of ways - with two prologues. The first looks like it was shot in the back lot of some shitty non-studio behind a KFC, and presents a poor imitation of the final struggle between Mrs. Voorhees, and the final girl, from the end of the original Friday the 13th - only with more rain, bad acting and no tension whatsoever. Oh, and this time around, kiddy Jason is watching from the bushes (I thought he lived in the lake!?). This whole episode, although interspersed with flashing titles ("Produced by Michael Bay" - aaaaaaah!! Oh god, make it stop!!!), does nothing to build tension or fear. It's simply boring and totally unnecessary. Anybody who has seen the original already knows what the deal is, while anybody who hasn't is just watching a Michael Bay movie to see tits and guts. After all, his other horror remakes, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre and A Nightmare On Elm Street were both grossly superficial affairs, filled with unconvincing gore and unfathomably sexy teens. And neither of them were scary. I shuddered to think what he could do to Jason, whom I didn't really care about to begin with, when he had almost wrecked the incredible Freddy and Leatherface.

This moment is over so quickly, it doesn't even register

The second, longer prologue, details the demise of six college kids, who are on a search for weed near, you've guessed it, Camp Crystal Lake. They find it (apparently it belongs to Jason - huh?), but they all die soon afterwards. The deaths, all of which are at the hands of someone in a mummy mask, are quick, brutal and somewhat amusing (one girl is burned alive in her sleeping bag, which is suspended above a fire). A decrepit house is discovered, wherein it appears Jason himself may reside. There's a bloody bathtub, a dismembered head, all of the usual crap. And then another chase scene, somebody's caught in a beartrap, somebody screams - and then the title comes up, red and bloody and totally unexpected. Had the movie not already started!? It's very confusing. This prologue, while slightly better than the one before it, still serves very little purpose. There's some bullshit with a locket, which my faithful cohort mused would probably end up saving someone's life, but more on that later. There's one spectacular moment, when Jason is standing next to the campfire, and for one precious second I forgot what I was watching and started thinking about the music video for Psychosocial.

Anyway, then the story, if one could even call it that, really begins, with a whole new crowd of pretty, vapid teenagers. One of them is particuarly angry and mean, so I spent most of the film's loooong running time (108 mins to be exact) vying for his inevitable death. And there's Jared Padelecki, of Supernatural fame (surely he's too good for such a piece of shit?). He did the House Of Wax remake a few years back, which I actually rather liked, so I suppose he's in good company. Anyway, Jared is looking for his sister, who was one of the original group from the prologue (keep up, now). He hassles various redneck locals with flyers, along with the new group of teens, who aren't too impressed when he holds them up in a queue (who cares about your possibly dead sister, we want beer!). He's warned by one particularly crazy-eyed old lady that his sister is dead, because when people disappear around this area, they don't come back. She also warns him to leave HIM alone (guess who she means, har de har). 

 Seriously, is that his real head or...?

It's at this point that the film descends into pure cliche, with little in the way of plot or character development to move things along. Even the kills are dull; Jason stabs this dude in the head, then he sharpens his machete, then he walks around a bit, and dismembers somebody else and oh god when will it end!? The BOREDOM. I got so bored watching this movie that I began to notice stupid shit, like how big Jason's head is, how confusing it is to have the characters running back and forth from the same places, even with the sign emblazoned with the words "Camp Crystal Lake" above them (how far away are they, when they must drive one minute, but can walk the next!?), and how amazing one of the chick's tits are. It really is that slow-moving. In fact, there are big sections of it with no blood or tits at all. And then what are we left with? Something produced by Michael Bay? Now that's scary.

The problem with this reboot is that it does nothing new whatsoever with the story. Friday the 13th, and Jason himself, have been flogged to death at this stage, so updating the story for a modern audience was always going to be something of a challenge. But this really makes it seem like nobody involved with the film even tried. There's a pathetic sequence, after Jason disposes of some greasy redneck, when he discovers a hockey mask and swaps his mummy one for it. It's so cliched, it almost brought a tear to my eye. Aside from that, Michael Bay's cum-covered teenage boy fingerprints are all over this project - from the lingering body shots, to the clunky dialogue, to the tits and blood and beer pong. Clearly none of these teens have ever seen a horror movie. Forget the smart, savvy, quick-witted group of Scre4m, this lot are dumb as fuck. One makes fun of Jason, another thinks a wok will ward off any threats, one girl freaks out and cries on the floor, a couple refuse to stop having sex despite their friends screaming that they're all in danger, one guy grabs a gun but wastes lots of bullets shooting at nothing, and so forth. 

Hurry up guys...I can feel my career disintegrating around me...

Although Jason still fails to truly scare me, he kills quickly and effectively in this. His aim (he kills one person with a bow and arrow, and throws an axe several feet to dispose of another) is excellent, especially for somebody who has lived alone in an abandoned camp for most of his life. And he's an absolute tank, too, although not as much so as Rob Zombie's Michael Myers (swoon). After it becomes clear that he has kept Jared Padelecki's sister captive for an unspecified amount of time (possibly a month or so, she looks very clean either way) the film takes a turn towards the dark, Texas Chainsaw end of things. There is a system of underground tunnels, very sophisticated, especially since they seemingly were constructed by Jason, in which several creepy things occur - machete sharpening, bodies being carried about, lots of crying. I feared needless torture scenes, of which there were mercifully none. In fact, the only times true tension is built throughout this film is when Jared's sis is legging it through the impressive tunnels, in which she has been held prisoner, trying to make her escape. But, of course, nothing of note really happens. 

Other than that, the film passes by without incident. None of the characters, besides Jared Padelecki (I'm really not sure if his character had a name...Jim?), are in any way likeable, but because the kills, and Jason himself, are so mind-numbingly boring and run of the mill, it's difficult to even revel in their deaths. The score, which belongs in an action movie, doesn't help, while the weird bluey-green colour present throughout, despite what time of day or night it is, makes it almost impossible to follow what's happening on screen. 

 

This is a teaser for what she gets up to later (I'm not complaining)

The real problem here is that slasher movies have been so degraded over the years that, for example, the original scares in Friday the 13th, which were so effective in 1980, are seen to be boring and outdated by today's standards. Everything must be nastier, bloodies, loudier, dumber. But, as somebody who watched the original just last week, and the remake all of three days ago can attest, the older slashers, despite the clothing of the teens, the lack of technology (nobody can get a signal in a horror movie these days anyway, so wash) and the strange settings, are more effective because there's no bullshit. Michael Myers just kills. There's nothing behind it. And nobody can bargain with him, especially not after robbing his locket.

The characters in horror movies, especially slashers, are usually one-dimensional - that's a given. But when they are so vapid and empty, it's difficult to root either for them or against them. When one feels nothing towards any of the people on screen, what's the point in watching? I wasn't even particularly invested in Jason's character. He's carrying a body around at one point, while Jared and the-one-who-was-almost-the-final-girl freak out as quietly as possible, which in reality would be terrifying, and when he turned on the camp floodlights I should've been shaking, but I was simply reminded of the original, and saddened by how little this revamp was getting to me. Why aren't modern horror movies scary? I have yet to be properly scared by anything new, in years. Rob Zombie's Halloween was fairly atmospheric and creepy, but still not properly scary. 

 This looks scary, but really isn't

I don't mean to sound elitist. I love lots of shit movies. Queen Of The Damned is one of my absolute favourites, and the soundtrack is probably my favourite of all time. It's not a good film, it's incredibly silly, makes practically no sense and is little more than a sexy, gothic, metalhead fantasy. But I love it. There are a lot of great B-movies too, like Megashark vs Giant Octopus. Last year's Piranha 3D was a fantastic, fun film, which contained moments of real, honest, fear and proper gore, not to mention loads of nudity. I don't need my horror films to be clever or pretty, I just need them to be somewhat honest, and, obviously, a little bit scary. If all else fails, some tits and gore will do just fine. But it all has to fit in with the world of the story, and the characters have to be somewhat believable and real. 

For a moment, let's compare it to the other horror remake I saw recently, Rob Zombie's Halloween. Scout Taylor Compton (be still my beating heart) did a very shrill, emo Laurie Strode, but at least I was scared for her when she was being chased about the place. Her friends, not so much, but they were just dumb and annoying enough for me to enjoy their bloody, violent deaths. Friday the 13th lacks any real punch or soul or scare...I screamed a grand total of 9 times, which may seem like a lot, but really isn't, considering it was because of jump scares every single time. Oh, and the girl with the locket does survive (spoiler alert!). Seriously though, don't see this. See the far superior, mildly scary and totally thrilling, All The Boys Love Mandy Lane, which I will soon probably gush over.. 

Next time - Fright Night double post. Hooray!

 

Friday The 13th (1980)

 

So, in keeping with the theme of old-school slashers (most of which have been remade, or updated since their original release), I bring you the thoroughly enjoyable, mildly scary, Friday the 13th, which helped shape the horror genre and also happened to spawn a bazillion sequels. Jason Voorhees is one of the classic horror villains, but I've never been afraid of him. I don't really get the fear factor with Jason at all, especially compared to, say, Michael Myers. I mean, he looks kind of silly with that hockey mask (although the machete is a good weapon), and he ambles after people like any old serial killer. He has no real zest to him, no real appetite for destruction. Yawn. However, I needn't have worried, because he only makes a fleeting appearance in this, the first movie in the long-running series. 

The events of the film take place around the iconic Camp Crystal Lake, an area so secluded and picturesque that one just knows some bad shit is going to go down once the lights are out (or possibly even before - the scariest things happen during the daylight, after all). Surprisingly, It opens with a fairly gruesome murder, from the first-person perspective of the killer (always a welcome addition to a slasher movie). As a first kill, it's fairly bloody - not too much, not too little. And the fact that it happens to unsuspecting, cutesy, horny teens, who are in the midst of a make-out session no less, does not bode well for the the rest of the characters. 

 

 Kind of a mannish pair of hands there...

On that note, I decided to play a little game while watching this, and count how many typical horror movie "bad signs" I noticed throughout the film. You know, the typical horror fare that's become stale and repetitive at this stage, but back in the '80s would've created genuine tension. For example; people having sex, the power going out, someone wandering out in the rain alone, a thunderstorm, the phone lines being dead, the last remaining people splitting up to investigate shit alone, hiding in stupid places with just one escape route - all of which happened within the course of Friday the 13th. That's not to say that it was boring or predictable, just that it played by the rules which, let's face it, were established by this film, and Halloween, and everything that came after (I'm just used to it all at this stage, sadly, but that doesn't mean it's not fun!). 

I guessed who the final girl was immediately, but was wrong (possibly for the first time ever). She was the first one to get a name, and she was so bright-eyed and adorable and unassuming that I just figured she was cliche enough to be it... And then, she died, after a fairly frightening forest chase scene (see above). Besides that unforunate chick, the other teens who are setting up Camp Crystal Lake for its' grand re-opening, after horrific murders years beforehand (the film's opening sequence takes place in 1958), are all attractive, energetic and fairly generic, i.e. perfect horror movie victims. They are warned on several occasions, by creepy Ralph (the town loon), that they are doomed and will not survive if they stay in the camp. But hey, who's going to listen to some crazy old dude, who's shouting in a bizarrely over-the-top Irish twang as he rides off slowly on his bicycle!? Not these kids. They're too busy fucking and drinking and playing Strip Monopoly - oo-er!  Besides, the camp is in a secluded area in the middle of nowhere, miles from the local town, which is filled with loveable, cliched, small town locals - what could possibly go wrong!?

 

 That top is bloody ruined now

The story, as such, is fairly simple. The teens are slaughtered one by one, at a fairly regular pace, by somebody whom we don't get to see until the very end of the film - simply catching glimpses of an arm here, a hand there, a foot there. It's an interesting method, one I haven't experienced in a while, and it did manage to creep me out quite a bit. Usually the killer is seen trailing behind or hiding somewhere, but rarely is just an illusion of he/she given, which just proves that what we imagine is nearly always more frightening than the reality. There are scenes in Friday the 13th that create true terror, despite very little happening - like when one girl is in the shower block and sees the curtain moving, or another ventures out into the rain when she hears a woman's voice screaming for help, only to end up under the floodlights on the archery range. Very little is explicitly done or said, which just makes it all the more tense.

However, the kills, when they are shown, are bloody and inventive. Kevin Bacon, in particular, dies in a fairly gruesome way. But he looks lost and confused up until that point, so it's not really a big deal (plus he'd just got laid, so at least he died happy). Bodies turn up at totally inopportune moments, causing me to jump out of my skin, which hasn't happened during a horror movie in a while - especially not at silly scares like corpses hanging off doors or being thrown through windows. But the tension is ratched up so effectively throughout that it's impossible to ever feel secure (the final girl can't even close the curtains in her cabin, for fuck's sake!). 

 

  She's still somebody's mother!

The killer's reveal at the end is quite odd. Since the movie came out thirty years ago, I have no problem discussing its relevance here. Just in case, like me, you were deprived of slasher movies for most of your life, look away now! Finding out that a middle-aged, fairly normal-looking woman, in a jumper no less, has been the knife-wielding maniac all along is disconcerting enough. When she begins talking to herself as her son (we all know who he is) and going on about horny teens being the reason he's dead, the tone changes significantly, even verging slightly on the ridiculous. But she's still scary. Quite scary, indeed. And I ended up gasping when she said the name "Jason", even though I knew it was coming. So perhaps Mrs. Voorhees should've been in Jason's shoes all along...though that would've been weird...and it would've changed the landscape of modern horror forever.

There are many fakeouts before she is eventually defeated, all of which kept me suitably on edge. Once again, it was impossible to ever feel secure or safe. One scene, in the pantry, is particularly cringe-inducing. The final girl, in fairness to her, manages to put up a bit of a fight, punching and kicking at Mrs. Voorhees with all she's got. The camp setting is just as disorientating for her as it is for the audience, and when the killer turns the power back on, so that it'll be near impossible for her to hide, a real sense of "Oh fuck!" washed over me. What seemed scary in the darkness suddenly seems terrifying in the light.

  No more dancing for you, Bacon

Put simply, when Friday the 13th works, it is very effective. The characters are just thin enough to be disposable, but fleshed out enough for the audience to give a shit about what happens to them. Mrs. Voorhees is just nice and normal enough for the final girl to trust her, before turning completely psychotic and being truly terrifying. The audience doesn't sympathise with her, but it's also difficult to completely hate her because her kid drowned in the lake due to negligent counsellors in that very camp. Still not really a reason to murder innocents, but whatever.

Since this is a slasher, the final girl manages to get away, and for some reason hops in a canoe and wades out into the middle of the lake. What follows is one of those jump scares that only really works if one doesn't know it's coming. I did, but I still freaked out. As far as I'm concerned, the movie should've ended there, on a high. Unfortunately, it rambles on for another five minutes, finally settling on an image of Crystal Lake, so that the audience is left in no doubt that a sequel is on its way. 

 Peekaboo!

Overall, Friday the 13th was great. I was scared, the story moved along at a decent pace, the kills were inventive, the killer was frightening, and I screamed a total of 6 times, which is quite a lot for somebody who watches this kinda shit on a regular basis. I shudder to think what Michael Bay has done to sex it up, but I await his efforts with a shrug.

Scream 4 (2011)

I saw Scream 4, or Scre4m as it is so coolly abbreviated, in the cinema, on the night it came out, directly after work, like an excited schoolkid. I could barely eat my popcorn or ice cream, or drink my gigantic Coke, I was that excited. Excited and unashamed, for I have been a complete Scream nerd for about ten years. I love the franchise so much that I don't even hate Scream 3, like most others do. I love them all equally, but if I had to choose, I'd say Scream 2 is my favourite. Having said that, Scream 4 (I'll call it Screa4m from now onwards for fun) totally blew my mind when I saw it months ago, and I was eager to find out whether or not it was just silly fandom clouding my mind, or whether it genuinely is a worthy addition to the franchise. So I sat down, with a big tub of "Phish Food", wrapped in blankets, my long-suffering cohort rolling his eyes from the safety of his perch far away at the computer screen ("I'm not watching this shit again!") and prepared to fully indulge myself in pure horror awesomeness.

Luckily, Scre4m was just as incredible the second time around. For those of you not in the know, the film takes place ten years after the events of the previous trilogy. Our final girl, Sidney Prescott, has turned her horrific experiences into a best-selling self-help book called Out Of Darkness, borne from her refusal to be a victim. Dewey is now the local sheriff, and is happily married to Gale, who has retired from journalism, and is struggling to write a follow-up to her popular novels about the Woodsboro murders. Sidney arrives in Woodsboro for the final stop on her book tour and who should show up only, you've guessed it, her old pal Ghostface. 

"Eh...line...?"

It's worth saying that the opening to Scre4m is pure genius. A series of fakeout beginnings occur, movies within movies, detailing the latest Stab outings (the fictional movies, within the Scream series, which were made about the Woodsboro murders). You know the drill, beautiful teens roll their eyes and complain that everything in horror is predictable nowadays, Ghostface turns up and stabs a bitch, etc, etc. However, when the film properly gets going, and the first kill is exacted upon someone Ghostface refers to as "the blonde with the big tits", this is when the fun really begins. The tone changes abruptly as the chick is murdered, quite viciously I might add, but not before there's a bit of desperate crawling towards safety, only for her to be pulled back, feet first, by the killer, just to sweeten the deal. It's strange to see such things in a Scream film, as in previous outings, the gore has been kept to a minimum and the kills are usually quite quick. The opening of the fourth movie establishes that, as the poster states, there are new rules for the new decade. However, there are homages to the original movie scattered all about the place. 


For example, the first kill involves a garage door, which is an homage to Rose Mc Gowan's death in Scream, there's a new Randy in the form of Robbie, who streams his high school experience constantly via a webcam attached to his head, the creepy boyfriend is back in the guise of hearthrob and creepy-eyes Trevor and, of course, Sidney's cousin, Jill (played at a slightly too frenetic pace by Emma Roberts) usurps her role for the proceedings. The new batch of kids are pretty, witty, horror movie obsessed and much more aware than those of ten years ago. Their knowledge of horror movies should aid their survival but, in the end, Ghostface is still too smart for them (does that mean he's one of them...ooooh...).

Does he just hang out with them then, or..?

It's worth noting that the new set of teens ripe for the slaughter take to their roles with gusto. Rory Culkin and Erik Knudsen are especially great as the two horror nerds who run the school's cinema club and organise the annual "Stabathon" (I would give anything to attend it if it was real) on the anniversary of the murders. They're nerdy, witty and full of energy, shooting out their lines at warp speed. Everything drips with sarcasm and barely-disguised contempt for those who question their ideals. Hayden Panettiere, who usually annoys the hell out of me and, let's face it, looks about 30 compared to everybody else thanks to her soccer mom hairdo, is hilarious as razor-tongued Kirby, the dream girl of Culkin's Charlie and the ultimate horror nerd/popular girl hybrid. In fact, Kirby is so beloved of the Scream superfans that there is a group on the IMDB forums entitled K.I.N.D, i.e. Kirby Is Not Dead, specifically dedicated to the cause of Kirby being alive and well. As mentioned previously, Emma Roberts is a perfectly fine actress, but she does go slightly over the top with her role (especially towards the end, but more about that later). For the most part, though, she gets it very well. These teens aren't too scream-y either, which was a welcome surprise for someone who's sat through more than her fair share of ear-splitting girlish shrieks with no purpose.

Of course, having said all of that, none of them can really hold a candle to the original three. Neve Campbell and Courtney Cox look fantastic for their age, and they take to their old roles with ease. Cox's Gale Weathers is just as acid-tongued and bad-ass as she was in the original, while Neve Campbell manages to be both fragile and strong at the same time - at one point leaping on Ghostface to stop him escaping. David Arquette is fantastically hammy as Sheriff Dewey, and the fact his real-life marital problems with Cox are reflected in the story of him and Gale make their performances all the more believable. However, what's different this time around is that the fate of the three central characters really does feel like it's in jeopardy for most of the film. It made it genuinely tense the first time around, and just as much so during my second viewing. 

 Those aren't the clothes she died in...

The essence of the Scream franchise is all about fun, silly scares, a reasonable amount of gore, witty dialogue and a villain who is equal parts scary and ridiculous (his cape is really long, how does he not trip more!?). Scre4m updates the formula a bit, along with the gore, and to great effect. One scene in particular, apparently the bloodiest in Scream history, is particularly gruesome, but also strangely poignant to watch, and it is perfectly pitched. The gore is not overdone, but it is enough to make one wince and want it to be over soon. 


There are scares in Scre4m, besides the very-popular and highly-effective cat scares, of which there are plenty, and they are effective overall. I felt a genuine sense of dread throughout, even on my second viewing, the kind which only comes with truly great horror. Certain scenes, such as one in an abandoned carpark, involving Sidney's publicist, are so atmospheric and well-judged, while another sees somebody being stabbed through a postbox, which is both ridiculous and horrible. Therefore, the kills are inventive, bloody and not drawn out, which matches the quick, witty dialogue, and the plodding, atmospheric score. 

 Relax, nerds, they're just faking you out

Although Scre4m references several horror films, including Saw, Halloween and Final Destination, it is at its' most clever when referencing itself. The "Stabathon", in particular, is hilariously meta, especially when a game is mentioned which involves drinking when; somebody can't get a cellphone signal, someone closes the fridge door and there's an innocent character standing behind it, and when somebody screams "Nooooooooo!!!!!!". Really, it does sound like an awful lot of fun. The essence of Scream, and its rather important legacy to modern horror, is quite often most evident in the dialogue of the characters - for example, when they refer to the expected becoming the unexpected, what it means to do a "screamake", and how savvy modern audiences are to everything. These are characters who are self-aware, who know what they're dealing with, and yet, who are ultimately still doomed. It's a scary thought, especially for those of us who pride ourselves on being horror buffs. It's also important to note that nothing about Scre4m is by the book, but at the same time, everything is. It's an interesting setup for a horror film, and one which only really works in the Scream universe (I Know What You Did Last Summer came out the same year as the first film, and didn't do nearly as well).

Elsewhere, the killers (there are always two) reveals are clever and fairly cool. I kind of knew who it would be, or at least who I wanted it to be, the entire time, and when it was revealed I just wanted to cheer. Emma Roberts is a tad shrill in her delivery and explantion, leading to a rather strange monologue, but the reasoning behind her actions is still quite believable. She states matter-of-factly, that "All you need to do to be famous is have fucked-up shit happen to you" and "I don't need friends, I need fans", it's really quite genius. The oversaturated media angle is present throughout the film and is really quite clever indeed, and believable. Of course, all the murders have been taped and uploaded to the internet. Of course that's the best way to get famous, in a world where people do so just by going on Facebook. Elsewhere in the final act, Sidney getting stabbed is a big deal, a huge risk for Wes Craven to take, but a part of me knew she wouldn't be killed. Come to think of it, Gale gets stabbed too...this was quite a risky addition to the franchise overall! 

 This was just a promo shot but man is it effective!

Now, this is the tricky part. As those of us who are obsessed with this franchise are well aware, Craven had two endings for Scre4m. The first ended the film with Jill getting famous, getting away with the murders, and being wheeled into hospital in a blaze of glory. It was a fantastically ballsy ending - one which was sure to split Scream fans in two. However, the ending he decided to go with had a massive fight after that happens, in the process of which Jill is disposed of after trying unsuccessfully to kill Sidney ("Who are you, Michael fucking Myers!?" she screams at one point.)  

The ending didn't bother me too much, although I thought the original one was much braver and more interesting. However, there are two more sequels to come (this is the beginning of a new trilogy) and I wouldn't have liked wasting Scream 5 knowing Jill got away with it and that she may strike again and blah blah blah. So I suppose, all things considered, it's a blessing in disguise. And it doesn't take away from what has undoubtedly been my favourite horror movie of 2011, so far. A welcome return to form for Craven, a fantastic edition to the franchise, a great horror film in its' own right and the beginning to what will hopefully be an incredible new trilogy. As long as, as Sidney states, they don't fuck with the original. 

Halloween (1978)

Just for ease of reference, here is my review, from months ago, of the original, amazing, life-changing Halloween.  

So, as avid readers (by this I mean my long-suffering mates) will know, I am a massive horror movie fan. I'll watch pretty much anything, I don't scare easily and I have a pretty strong stomach - all of which has been built up over many, many years. However, there are still certain movies from which I stay away. Rob Zombie - awesome musician, fellow horror buff and all-round sexy man - has made a few fucked-up movies that I have absolutely zero interest in seeing again (The Devil's Rejects I have blocked out entirely). I saw his remake of John Carpenter's legendary Halloween one night in a bar and didn't sleep for a few nights straight. I couldn't even hear it, but seeing it on screen was enough.

It was the first time I'd been properly scared in ages, which leads me to the subject of this blog post. I am very ashamed to admit that, prior to last Saturday night, I had never seen the original Halloween. However, I am aware of how important it is in horror movie history, since it not only established the killer's first-person perspective and cemented the idea of the "final girl" but it managed to scare audiences without anything much happening at all. Horror, quite often, is more about what one doesn't see than what one does (it's really obvious I'm reading Mark Kermode's book at the moment, isn't it?).

After Rob Zombie's terrifying, updated version, I was petrified of seeing John Carpenter's original. I thought it would be even worse, given that it was the source material, and Rob Zombie couldn't possibly be that fucked up (no no, he is).However, I was pleasantly surprised. On with the review!!

The film opens in 1963, on Halloween night. Kids are trick-or-treating, horny teens are fumbling about on a couch, being watched through the window by the bizarrely high camera. Within the opening five minutes, a teenage girl is slaughtered by what turns out to be her much younger brother (despite the too-high camera), who is wearing a clown costume and brandishing a giant butcher knife and a totally blank, emotionless expression. There isn't much blood, but there are tits (always welcome in horror movies). So we're off to a good start!

We then skip fifteen years into the future, where Laurie Strode (Jamie Lee Curtis) is living on the same street, and has to drop a key (her father works for some sort of real estate company) to the "old Myers place" which, it quickly transpires, is sort of the neighbourhood haunted house, where kids dare each other to go, and in which nobody lives because of the murder and blah blah blah. She then goes about her business with a plucky young boy and her intentionally vapid, slutty friends. Thus, it is quickly established that she will be the final girl, before anything even happens, because Slutty Mc Openlegs isn't gonna be, and this isn't Zombie's version, so it's not like the kid is going to be in the running (and then brutally slaughtered).

Luckily, a lot of things in this film are implied, as opposed to the heavy-handed way in which they are communicated in horror movies nowadays (like, BAD! BAD! THIS THING/PERSON/PLACE IS BAD! BE AFRAID! LIKE THE PEOPLE IN THE FILM! ROOT FOR THIS ONE!). In fact, one of the most interesting aspects of Halloween is how it compares to horror movies nowadays. For most of its' duration, I found myself on edge, but not really sure why, which is odd considering how bloody and disgusting and visceral the violence is in films today. How can nothing happening be scarier than that!?

Anyway, after Michael escapes from the mental hospital in which he has been living for the past fifteen years (of course) and has driven off (yes, driven) in a car marked clearly on the side with the hospital's logo (something which is great later on for spotting him stalking in the background), the story switches back to Laurie, who, in stark contrast to her ditzy friends, answers questions in class, offers to babysit despite it being Halloween night, and generally acts like a boring, virginal, prissy chick who, although slightly dull, can stick up for herself and refuses to follow the crowd (thus, the final girl).

The moments when she spots Michael (who, let's be honest, looks like a member of Slipknot in his mask and stolen overalls, but is still frightening nonetheless) get creepier and more tense as the night darkens. It's rare to see the killer during daylight hours in a horror movie, and it's to Carpenter's credit that Michael appears and disappears at will, despite the fact that the sun is still shining and there's every chance he'll be spotted by a wandering passerby (although, of course, the only person who spots him is Laurie, thus cementing her role as the loon who's been studying too much and needs to relax, and whom nobody believes). The tension is stacked up at an almost unbearable pace. Every moment Michael appeared behind Laurie, trailing her and her friend in his car, or just lurking across the street behind a nearby tree, I jumped, or even, at times, squealed like a girl (not a common occurrence for me).

Once the actual killing begins (and there isn't really much of it, either) it's almost a relief. Is Michael in the car? Yes. Is he hiding in the coat closet while that dude gets a post-coital beer? Yes. Is he going to pretend to be that man, using his glasses and a sheet, so he can see some tits and then murder the dumb blonde girlfriend? Oh yes indeed. Jamie Lee Curtis excels as the terrified babysitter, who has to choose between keeping the kids she's looking after calm, and freaking out that her best friends may be in trouble just across the street. To her credit, she does manage to fight Michael off quite a bit (with a knitting needle and a hanger, no less!), as opposed to the usual running-away-screaming-half-naked schlock to which we're usually subjected. The scene when she's trapped in the wardrobe had me squirming and clasping my hand over my mouth so hard I almost choked myself.

Put simply, I was TERRIFIED, which I haven't been in a very long time.

The beauty of Carpenter's Halloween is that nothing much has to happen for the audience to feel threatened, on edge, and completely terrified. One just has to hear that score (a huge part of the genuis of the film) and see Michael standing behind a bush to know that people are in danger and bad shit is going to go down. Most of the movie consists of Michael just turning up or stalking Laurie, not really doing much besides breathing heavily into his mask (much like Corey Taylor, har de har) while the amazingly creepy score plods alongside him. He isn't even that big, which means that, unlike in Zombie's version (in which the massive Tyler Mane plays Michael), it's somewhat believable that people wouldn't look twice if they say him on the street, because perhaps they would just assume that he was some lad having a laugh, in a mask, for Halloween.

There isn't much blood, and the kills, although vicious, are nothing compared to Zombie's (okay, okay, so subtlety has never really been his thing). So then, why did this film scare the shit out of me? A lot of it has to do with my fear of Michael Myers as a character...there is something so frightening about somebody who just kills for no reason... But a lot of it also has to do with the pace of the film (it's just over an hour and a half long, after all) and the dreaded tension that is built up throughout. It's a potent mix, the intelligence and skill of which has surely been lost on the creators of such torture-porn atrocities as Saw, Hostel, et al. (no, those films are not frightening, despite what you have heard from shrieking guys and girls with zero taste in horror films).

My favourite modern-day horror movie, All The Boys Love Mandy Lane, owes a lot to Halloween. After all, the killer is revealed early on, the kills, while inventive, are quick and reasonably bloodless. Most of the establishing shots are from the first-person perspective of the killer, and he is shown covered in blood, lurking outside the window, which is only noticed by, you've guessed it, the dumb blonde, who, of course, nobody believes. The same can be said of the Scream franchise, which establishes a killer, in a mask, with a big knife, and then goes from there. So many things are simply implied, and let's face it, when the audience has to fill in the blanks in their own heads, it's so much scarier than seeing somebody's eyelids get pulled off while he/she screams her lungs out.

Put simply, Halloween kicks some serious ass. It's scary, it's brave, it got under my skin, and I'll forever be looking over my shoulder at passing cars as I walk down my street towards home. Oh, and the ending truly made me shudder...for several hours...

Halloween 2 (2009)

You may be asking yourself why Michael Myers seems to be in a field, of all places, in the above poster. But trust me, that's not the only question that Rob Zombie's bloody, confused, totally disjointed Halloween 2 remake (shortened to H2 by the man himself) will have you asking yourself. 

But first, a little background. Three years ago, I was living in the beautiful city of Munich, sharing a fairly large apartment with five mental lads, from all around the world. My room was next to the kitchen/living area, and the rest were down an all-white hallway, where the two toilets and two showers were also situated. With all the doors closed, it looked eerily endless. The kitchen had one wall that was all-glass, and it led onto the balcony. One of my flatmates knocked on the window once, in the middle of the night, while I was in the kitchen making toast, and scared the absolute shit out of me. But, what scared me more, enough to make me lock myself in my room all night and refuse to even go down that long, white hallway, to the toilet, was the below trailer. 

After I watched that, I didn't sleep for about two nights straight. I looked behind me constantly and jumped at even the slightest noise. I swore to myself that I would never, ever force myself to sit through the full thing because, if the trailer scared me that much, who knew what the actual movie would do to me!? Now, three years later, I have confronted my fear and lived to tell the tale. And slept afterwards, too, which let's face it is a bad sign when it comes to horror movies. 

  Oh, you...

So! H2 opens up where RZH left off. Well, actually, there's an opening bit with child Myers (played by a new kid, who cannot act and is not scary, especially compared to the one from RZH) and his mother (Sheri Moon Zombie, overacting hugely this time around), during which it is established that not only does Myers hallucinate about his mother and a white horse, but he also has something of an Oedipal complex. I was confused, but held out hope. They must be just luring me into a fall sense of security, I reasoned. 

After all, everything I'd read up to this point claimed that the first fifteen minutes of H2 are the scariest (not a good recommendation, come to think of it). The section to which I'm referring involves Laurie (my new obsession, Scout Taylor Compton) being chased around hospital by Michael Myers, despite the fact that she'd shot him in the face just hours before. She's seriously injured, she slips, it's lashing rain, you know the drill. This bit establishes the new, stab-happy Myers, who stabs each of his victims in this movie at least ten times (a far cry from the Carpenter's Myers). I wondered if his arm got tired and, needless to say, I wasn't scared by this opening. The reveal to it being a dream was lame, and the trailer gave it away anyway.

Basically, it's a year after the whole crazy incident with Myers on Halloween night, and Laurie is now living with her mate Annie (who just barely survived the first movie) and Annie's dad, who luckily enough happens to be the local sheriff. Laurie is not doing well. She's having horrible nightmares, wears no make-up, has dyed her hair blonde, but neglected to wash or brush it, curses like a sailor, gives everybody grief, and dresses like a 90s grunge kid. Strange that she's so messed up, but still found time to dye her hair and get several tattoos (maybe Zombie just appreciated Compton's art and decided not to hide it this time around, who knows, but it was distracting). She still looks hot, though. Even while scowling. 

 Drool...

She's also in therapy, but spends most of her time there shouting and spitting abuse at her therapist ("At $100 an hour, I'd be fucking concerned!" being one of her more memorable outbursts). And she has a job, in some crazy hipster bookshop. Oh look, there are her two annoying friends. I wonder if they'll survive...hmm... 

While all of this is going on, a massive hobo, greatly resembling Michael Myers, is trekking through the fields and green pastures of Illinois. He runs into several local rednecks (seriously Zombie, what the hell) and disposes of them with fierce, sometimes genius, ferocity. At one point, he eats a dog (first time Michael Myers has ever eaten something in a Halloween movie, kids). At another, he visits the strip club where his mother worked. He sees her and her white horse quite a lot throughout the film, and she dispenses some pretty interesting information, such as "Only a river of blood can bring us back together". Laurie sees her too, along with the Myers child. Some of the setpieces for these hallucinations are cool, especially a gorgeously gothic one at a big dining table, but most of the time it's just silly. We already know Michael Myers is a loon, he doesn't have to hallucinate to hammer the point home (subtlety, Mr. Zombie). Tyler Mane is a great screen presence once again, but even he looks slightly confused when he just has to stand there while child Myers and his mother chat amongst themselves.

 He has a bag!?

Elsewhere in Haddonfield, Loomis is now a complete asshole, profitting off the events of the previous year and not caring about the people who were hurt. He's on a book tour, he wears awesome shades and he hurls abuse at his assistant. Although this change of personality makes little sense, the book tour and Loomis's story arc highlight the human sickness that exists, especially in today's society. Everybody wants to know every little detail of a murder rampage, or the inner workings of the mind of a serial killer. Everything is recorded and put online. We're all desensitised to violence and gore just makes us yawn, even in real life. The comparison between a mental horror fan, dying for Loomis to sign his book, and the grieving father who attempts to kill him for profitting off his daughter's death, is an interesting comment on this. Loomis also outs Laurie as Michael's sister, Angel (silly name), which was a total dick move and really unnecessary to the plot. But it facilitated another Laurie freakout. Wahey!

These freakouts happen quite a lot over the course of the film. She freaks and yells at Annie, in particular, who is also psychologically damaged, although she fails to show it whatsoever, and mostly just looks annoyed. After the "big reveal" (which isn't big at all really), Laurie fucks off to her new hipster friends, demands drinks, and the three of them put on AWESOME Rocky Horror costumes (Laurie is Magenta, her friend Columbia, and the really mouthy one is Frank) and head out to a party that is way bigger and more elaborate than their little town could ever hold. I'm a total Rocky Horror nerd, so I loved the outifits, but the fact they couldn't mention the movie by name was slightly jarring. Speaking of jarring, the aforementioned party is loud, annoying, and populated by idiots, right down to a weird non-comedian horror bloke with fake teeth who, according to Rob Zombie's Facebook, now has his own movie. Five minutes of him was enough for me. Also, who threw this party? And what the hell year is it supposed to be? And how did Myers know Laurie was there? 

Great costume, shame about the bloody corpse

The final act of H2 involves much screaming, blood and running. The kills throughout the movie are grisly, slightly over-the-top at times (his arm really must be getting sore by this stage), gory and not quite inventive enough, but otherwise effective. Strangely, the most high-profile death, Annie's, happens offscreen. Or, her attack does, and then she dies in Laurie's arms. I found it strange, but the moment was poignant, so I guess it worked. Then Laurie gets away. Then she gets caught again, and taken to a barn, where the final stakeout, and possibly the lamest climax I've ever witnessed in horror, takes place. Another white horse!? Come on! 

I watched the DVD ending, which in my opinion, pales in comparison to the real, theatrical ending. Michael isn't supposed to talk! Or remove his mask before killing someone! Is Laurie dead? (Probably not, seeing as Halloween 3D  is due pretty soon...not directed by RZ). Virtually nothing happens in this bit, and at one point Myers is just standing there, staring at Laurie. Is he waiting for his cue to stab her or..?

 She baked him a cake, you know

Don't get me wrong, there are things to like about H2. There's a nice juxtaposition between Laurie partying the night away while her friend is choked to death, which shows how easy it is to detach oneself from the real tragedy and hardships of life, Annie's death is fairly poignant, again showing same, the comments on society's addiction to knowing the little details of horrible events is notable, Laurie being totally fucked in the head is believable and, while slightly hysterical, Compton gets it very well, the kills are visceral and at times very clever ("Someone will be impaled on those antlers!" my cohort noted at one point, and he was right) and the body count is high, while Tyler Mane's Michael Myers is still a force with which to be reckoned (at one point, he lifts a car!) and a genuinely frightening screen presence.
 

However, as with RZH Rob Zombie has once again gone way over the top, sacrificing scares for gore - except this time it's even worse. There is no sense of dread. It's confusing, as opposed to scary. The story trudges along with no real linear structure, pretty much every character on screen is horrible and unlikeable so, once again, I found myself rooting for Myers to stab the shit out of them, and the hallucinations are incredibly off-putting. Why wasn't Myers' Oedpial complex established in the first film? Why is he only now starting to see his mother? Why is everything SO LOUD!? 

 

 If only this scene was in the movie

To put into perspective just how annoying this film was, the dude who reluctantly watched it with me gave up halfway through and went to take Panadol. And, for the first time, I didn't beg him to stay and watch with me because I was scared. I just shrugged and made a note "too much stabbing", next to another "white horse again". I usually note how many times I scream during a horror film, a practice I've established since shrieking my way through Carpenter's original Halloween (still the scariest horror movie I've seen). During H2, I screamed a total of four times. However, it was mostly at cat scares, which are the mark of a lazy horror movie.

 Although not completely and utterly shit, H2 doesn't pack any real punches. RZH wasn't perfect, and was by all means an unnecessary remake, but it was, at its basest level, entertaining. The above trailer for H2 is far more frightening, and enjoyable, than the film itself, and that's saying something.