Trick or Trailers: Halloween II (2007)

In 2009, the good times kept rolling with Rob Zombie's sequel to his successful 2007 Halloween reboot. Unhappy Childhood Michael was back and looking to bring the pain again. Everything seemed to be in place for another hit. But it turned out Rob Zombie had other plans. 

In the franchise's cursed tradition of taking one step up, two steps back, Zombie's Halloween II - or H2 - delivered the latest death blow to the series with a sadistic, psychedelic installment that served as a turn off to many who had enjoyed his first Halloween. 

The producers had clearly kept a firm hand on Zombie during the remake but when they gave him the sequel, they let him loose. 

Whether that was wise or just another example of the kind of self-sabotage that has always plagued the franchise, is up to individual viewers to decide. 

Let's take a look at the trailer and see what was supposed to hype us:

 

Watching at this trailer for the first time since the theaters, this looks to me like the clear tail end of that particular era of horror. 

Hardcore suffering was the order of the day back then, a long ugly streak that started in 2003. But by 2009, I think the appetite for that was finally starting to wane. After awhile, enough is enough. 

Zombie's first Halloween was certainly no walk in the park but H2 looked to be an even nastier, more ponderously grim affair. Is that what people wanted? Guess not. I know I wasn't excited for it. 

My main issue with H2 is tied in with why Zombie's first Halloween wasn't for me - I'm not down with the idea of Michael Myers just being a dude who was shaped by a shitty childhood to grow into a psycho. 

If there isn't a supernatural component to Halloween, I don't care. 

Jason as just some backwoods psycho who's just hard to kill? Sure. I arguably prefer that version to Zombie Jason. But Michael? Always gotta be supernatural. It doesn't have to go into Druids and Cult of Thorn territory. You can even keep the Samhain shit. But he has to be a true boogeyman. 

The promise that in this second Zombie Halloween entry "the secret behind (Michael's) madness will finally be revealed" was not enough to compel many audiences to check this out. For a guy who had the opportunity to break free of all the shit that had hindered the other sequels, Zombie sure was happy to repeat those previous mistakes. 

Making Michael and Laurie siblings? Check. Try to explain Michael's motivations? Check. Stylistic choices aside, there was not much thinking outside the box in Zombie's entries. And in the end, after just two movies, the franchise was once again looking for a re-do. 

This sequel definitely has a fanbase, though. Maybe one that's separate even from Zombie's first Halloween. There's something about the trashy trippiness of H2 that really works for some people. 

Knowing how so many like it is almost enough to make me want to give it another try but nah. I'm cool that others found something to love about it. Not every movie, not even every Halloween movie, has to be for me. 

On the upside, everyone can agree this did have a cool horse in it. 

That's something, right? 

Halloween II (2009)

After having some time to mull over Rob Zombie's Halloween II, in which the masked Michael Myers sports a look that my wife describes as being like a baked potato, I'm still of the mind that it was terrible. Which, in itself, isn't such a big deal. I mean, sitting through lousy movies is par for the course for any dedicated horror fan. But in regards to Halloween II, I can't help feeling annoyed with Rob Zombie. I mean, I believe the guy could make much better films if he wasn't so apparently in love with his own shit. On the one hand, you can't fault someone for being pleased with their own work but on the other hand, from reading his comments in interviews - in which he frequently describes his movies as "awesome" - I think a healthier regard for his own shortcomings wouldn't hurt.

Directing from someone else's script might be a good step - or at least to work with a co-writer who could shape his ideas, spot for obvious gaffes, and work on consistent characterizations. Take Zombie's handling of Annie (Danielle Harris) in Halloween II, for instance. Here's a character that survived an attack by a homicidal behemoth - a homicidal behemoth who is believed to be dead but technically is still at large. Given this, does her father take preventive action and move out of town? No, he and Annie stay put. Ok, that's fine. Dumb, but fine. But to have Sheriff Brackett (Brad Dourif) feel as though Annie might be in some kind of danger again - Michael Myers-type danger - and just send one dipshit cop to watch over her? That's ridiculous. Why wouldn't this character err on the side of caution and send half the force to his house? Or why not go himself? Better yet, why not bring Annie to the station and keep her under real protection? Zombie could still have Michael get to Annie eventually, but just not make it so easy in a way that makes these characters seem foolish and unbelievable.

If nothing else, you would think that as a lawman, Brackett would keep a firearm or two in his house and that he'd make sure that Annie and Laurie knew how to use them in case any kind of attack - either by Michael Myers or from anyone else - were to go down again. Annie is short of five feet - you'd think that Brackett would make damn sure this tiny girl would have a chance to defend herself against a bigger, stronger adversary. If Michael came after Annie alone again, why not have her be ready to fight back and not just whimper, scream, and run? It does a disservice to the character and it defies all logic as well. Zombie has a habit, though, of portraying his villains (or more likely what he sees as his film's heroes) as all-powerful and their victims to be incapable of scoring any kind of win against them and his treatment of Annie is indicative of that.

I suspect that Zombie doesn't want to give any credence to any characters in his films other than to his monsters and anti-social deviants for fear of appearing as though he might have some allegiance to the everyday, normal world. Throughout his filmography, Zombie has seemed almost pathologically afraid of showing any kind of empathy or understanding of everyday life. A lot of what good horror is about, however, is showing the invasion of chaos into order. But as Zombie has no patience for order, when chaos enters his character's universe it's hard to notice or care. Halloween II is the most extreme example of this so far, in that every character is damaged goods - or at least Zombie wants them to look that way. The two residences that we see in the film - Brackett's house and the apartment of Laurie's work buddies - are art-directed to look as inviting as a serial killer's lair (Laurie even has a poster of Charles Manson over her bed).

I know that Zombie wants us to see that Laurie, Annie, and Brackett have been changed by the experience of the last Halloween but if you look at the actual survivors of violent crimes, often times you see people who became stronger by their traumatic experience, not weaker. It's a cliche to say that whatever doesn't kill you makes you stronger but it is often true. There's the famous case of the Central Park Jogger, who was beaten, raped, and left for dead in an 1989 attack. This woman struggled with her recovery - both physically and emotionally - but has gone on to became a motivational speaker for victims of violent crime. In Zombie's case, I think in revisiting his Halloween characters, it was easier for him to take the route of saying "Great, now I have an excuse to make my characters fucked-up! I can do 'fucked-up' in my sleep!" And in doing that, I think Zombie reveals his insecurities and limitations as an artist.

If Zombie were ever to remake The Exorcist, I imagine that he'd make Regan into a tattooed, pierced goth chick before she ever got possessed because otherwise he wouldn't be able to 'relate' to her. Or that he'd begrudgingly make her normal but be happy when he could finally get to the possession because only then would she become 'interesting.' Zombie's films aren't the work of someone exorcising their inner demons, they're the work of someone not wanting to suffer any damage to their street cred - and that to me is the sign of someone who's transparently afraid of showing weakness in front of his crowd. These movies are not the work of an outlaw, but rather the work of someone who doesn't want to get caught shopping at JC Penny. Zombie's brand of bad-ass is a cosmetic affectation more than a deeply felt personal statement and that's why his movies don't have any real bite to them.

It's like a college chick who works at Target with a dyed-black mohawk, eybrow ring and tattoo sleeve. She's making a statement but that statement is "I need everyone to know I'm different. Really different. And edgy, too." And what I'm saying is "That may be true but you'd better off trying to surprise people instead. And by the way, don't put the kitty litter on top of my powered donuts."

Click over to Shock Till You Drop for my Halloween II review.

At Least He's Done With Halloween

After watching Rob Zombie's Halloween II, and reading comments online from people who found it to be 'bad-ass,' I have to wonder if Zombie could rape and kill the entire families of these fans before they'd have to say - begrudgingly! - that maybe everything RZ does isn't above reproach. I mean, I would think that Halloween II would give them ample cause to question the man's genius - and in some cases, hopefully this will come to pass - but in general, I expect that RZ's fanbase will have his back once again.

In the meantime, though, the rest of us have to discuss the fact that Zombie has no idea how to make a movie. Apparently The Devil's Rejects (2005) was a total fluke, because Zombie is one for four so far. I'll even give his first Halloween a half point because it had its moments. But come on, the man's track record is getting more sorry with each movie.

Zombie is clearly shrewd as hell on a business level - how he rallies his fans is genius (he could even give Sarah Palin pointers). But as a filmmaker? He's got a good handle on visuals, yes - even if they're employed to scattershot effect. But the rest of what goes into making a movie - like an understanding of storytelling, for one? Zombie hasn't mastered that skill at all - and really, he doesn't seem motivated to try. He seems to go from scene to scene on pure instinct with no regard for what came before or what's coming after.

And while he describes himself as a horror fan in interviews, he hasn't shown any talent yet for creating tension or suspense. If anything, based on his films to date, he seems to regard horror fans as easily pleased idiots who can't discern quality from shit. And boy, I think he may have called that one!

It's a crime that someone with so much leverage to make genre movies is so incapable making good ones. It's also a crime that someone who is so ingratiating in interviews and so enthusiastic about his work can't translate that personal vibe onto the screen. Zombie is an apparently nice guy who happens to make movies that are - at best - contemptuous of their audience. With all the profanity spoken by his characters, the biggest 'fuck you' of all are the films themselves.