After the success of Halloween 4, the studio quickly wanted capitalize on it. It probably helped that Moustapha Akkad was also wanting more Michael Myers on the screen. Akkad is definitely one of the heroes of this franchise. He kept things going for a while and was pretty consistent in his appreciation for the character and franchise.
So with the franchise train a-rollin, it made complete sense from a business point to make another film. Plus the fanbase was pretty happy with the fourth film. What could go wrong?
First off, let's take a look at the sypnosis. It's one year later after the events of Halloween 4. Michael survives the shootings and on October 31st he returns with a vengeance. Lurking and stalking, Jamie, Rachel, and Rachel's friends, Michael forms a plan to lure Jamie out of the children's hospital where events lead up to the confrontation at the Myers house. Halloween 5 is a dark, thrill ride that will scare the heck out of you!
That sypnosis sets up a lot of misconceptions with the film. Least the way I look at the film, it feels like a misrepresentation of it. Is it more Michael Myers? Check. Dark thrill ride? Did we watch the same movie? Is Halloween 5 a dark thrill ride? Hell no it's not. And will it scare the heck out of you? Again, no it will not.
Halloween 5 had a lot to do. I mean look at the ending of 4. It literally had Jamie dressed in full clown costume and taking a knife or scissors to her adopted mother. That's a big freaking thing to have to deal with. I mean Friday the 13th had to deal with that thing twice - Part 4 and 5's endings with Tommy Jarvis. That franchise ignored those endings and continued on their way.
Going back to Halloween 5, what do they do? They wrote it away. Jamie has been staying at a children's hospital after the events of the last film. Oh and Jamie's a mute now. We do have Rachel returning to visit Jamie. However, she brings her friend Tina to visit. When Tina's introduced, I wanted to punch her. She is a character that I very much dislike. She is a complete chariacture of a character. She's goofy and acts zany to make Jamie smile. But for the most part, she's treated as a bit of a humorous character. There's also the two cops. They have a frickin track that follows them round making zany noises and such. That's not dark. That's not thrilling. It's a bit of humor to lighten the film.
At this point, I will say that the film could be considered to be a parody of a Halloween film. Loomis is completely batshot crazy. He uses Jamie as bait to bring Michael out. What the hell Loomis? Why endanger a child? If this film was a bit more of a satire of a Halloween film, then it makes sense why we have Tina and the Looney tunes cops. That would be bit understandable. Is it good? No. It honestly makes it a bit meh.
The character of Rachel. She is so vastly underused in the film. Quickly, she is basically fridged in order to further the tension for Jamie. Without Rachel, how is Jamie going to protect herself? Well, that's the film you signed up for. It feels like they had a checklist of things that carried over that they were quick to get rid of. I mean yeah, Tina could try to protect Jamie..but she's not exactly competent. The loss of Rachel ultimately hindered this film so much.
Then we have The Man In Black. There was such a mystery as to who it was. Again, if this would have been done today - they would have known the identity all the way back in Halloween 4 and introduced them too. Largely, they just didn't know what to do with Man in Black. It's just a figure that is shown in brief scenes to establish their presence and then save Michael in the end and kidnap Jamie.
That ending is a bit of a dark ending. Because we don't have Jamie getting away. She is grabbed by that Man In Black. So in a sense, Michael wins as he escapes with the Man in Black. That's just crazy.
Overall, Part 5 is a bit of a meh in The Thorn Trilogy. It's definitely a product of a rushed production. If they had more time, they may have done a bit better with the writing. The actors do okay with what they are given, which wasn't much.
Rating: 2 out of 5.
No comments:
Post a Comment