Monday, October 18, 2021

SILVER TONGUED SILVER SCREEN: HALLOWEEN KILLS (2021)

 HALLOWEEN KILLS (2021)

MY HALLOWEEN FANDOM

The Halloween franchise is one very near and dear to my heart. It was my gateway into modern horror cinema. I think it was when I was twelve years old that I first rented HALLOWEEN 4: THE RETURN OF MICHAEL MYERS and began my fascination with modern horror. From there I dove deeper and deeper into the genre. John Carpenter's HALLOWEEN from 1978 became one of my top ten favorite films and I became obsessed with the story of Michael Myers and Dr. Loomis, the Dracula and Van Helsing of this saga. For me, the true Halloween canon are films one through six. The series doesn't get any better than these six films. Everything after those films feels like "What if...?" stories to me. It's been a long time since a new Halloween film felt like it was true canon. But this is just my personal opinion.

Over the years the franchise has been rebooted and retooled again and again. The number of Halloween fans out there is ever-growing and evolving. Each fan has their own preferences and, given the multiple continuities, their own timeline they prefer. Maybe that's the strength of the series. While we fans may vehemently disagree on the best films in the franchise, perhaps we can all agree that Michael Myers is the core of the franchise. As long as Michael is treated well, we'll all be happy. Right?

THE BLUMHOUSE TRILOGY

HALLOWEEN KILLS is the sequel to the 2018 reboot simply titled HALLOWEEN. The twelfth film in the Halloween franchise has come, now tied with the FRIDAY THE 13TH franchise with twelve films each. And once the sequel to Halloween Kills comes, there'll be a new slasher king in town! And Halloween Kills feels like the gauntlet has been thrown in the face of Friday the 13th and Jason Voorhees.

Halloween 2018 was born in the conceit that Michael Myers and Laurie Strode were no longer connected as brother and sister, but rather connected through a random act of violence. In addition to this the filmmakers stated they wanted Michael Myers to be less supernatural and more human. All of the previous films were ignored with the exception of the 1978 original. All of these decisions were met with varied responses from fans. Some fans only enjoy the first film and, for these fans, this all sounded wonderful. Speaking for myself, I felt the filmmakers were shedding too much of the mythos.

Interestingly the filmmakers walk back these statements. And they should. Why bring back Laurie Strode if you're going to remove the whole reason why she's integral to the story? Why reduce Michael Myers to a simple human serial killer when even the original film threw his humanity into question? All of it was head-scratching to say the least.

Like I said, Halloween 2018 didn't exactly do everything it said it was going to do, which I felt was a good thing. It was a mix of homage and fan-service, boarding on too much homage and fan-service. As I stated earlier, Halloween 2018 was just another "What if...?" story for me. Ultimately I thought Michael Myers was done well and that right there was enough for me. Was it perfect? Hell no. Was it a heaping pile of trash like some movies in the series? Hell no. It doesn't come close to touching the original six films, in my opinion. But I do feel it was perhaps the best of the films to have come after the original six.



THE HYPE AND THE DELIVERY

Leading up to Halloween Kills' release, I fell aboard the hype train and became pretty excited. This is a dangerous thing to do with a franchise one holds so near and dear to their hearts. Rarely do such films fulfill your expectations. I know this from experience, in recent memory as well. 

So, how did Halloween Kills live up to my expectations?

Well, the verdict is still out. I'm still processing it all. But, if I had to go with my gut reaction I'd have to say this movie is a mess. There's things I liked and others that I felt missed the mark. Overall, I think there's slightly more to like here. Ultimately it all fell on the shoulders of Michael Myers' portrayal. And while I do have gripes with elements of The Shape's portrayal, I feel the filmmakers did right by their charge.

I'm going to call Halloween Kills a success, if only by the skin of it's teeth.

THE SYNOPSIS

Laurie, her daughter Karen, and granddaughter Alison, are being taken to the hospital while Michael burns in the basement of Laurie's compound. Unbeknownst to them, Michael Myers has survived. After escaping the blazing inferno, Michael carves a bloody swath through Haddonfield. Mob mentality takes over the citizens of Haddonfield as they take the law into their own hands. Determined to kill Michael Myers, it's Haddonfield's last stand. Will it be Michael Myers' head on a pike? Or will the masked killer turn the entire town into a graveyard?

INITIAL IMPRESSIONS

As I stated above, I am largely still processing this movie. And there is a lot to unpack, nuanced feelings to analyze, and plot points to dissect. Just a forewarning, there won't be a definitive opinion on this movie by the end of this post. Subsequent rewatches will be required as well as discussions. My gut reactions are mixed, neither filled with love or hate (as of now).

Like the previous film, there is a metric ton of fan-service and homage here. For some this will be easily too much. For others it will be applauded. For me it dances on the edge of being too much but not quite to the obnoxious point (although some choices feel cringe-worthy). This is in line with Halloween 2018 though.

THE MISSING PIECE

At the core of Halloween there are three elements: an incredible woman, an obsessive hunter of evil, and Michael Myers (evil on two legs). Since Donald Pleasence's passing the films haven't recaptured this triumvirate. Malcolm McDowell's Dr. Loomis was okay in the 2007 Halloween reboot but was written as a douche bag by 2009 sequel, ruining anything positive about the character. And Jamie Lee Curtis has been doing double duty carrying both roles, both the incredible woman and hunter of evil. And, for me, it doesn't quite work. Halloween 2018 lacked a competent male figure a la Dr. Loomis. And Halloween Kills fares no better. A suitable replacement for Donald Pleasence has still yet to be found (although Paul Rudd was the closest one to achieving this in my opinion).

THE 1978 FLASHBACKS AND MICHAEL'S REASON

But Dr. Loomis does make an appearance here. Halloween Kills revisits 1978, in particular what happens immediately after the ending of the original film. This is a source of confliction for me. A part of me wishes that no one touch or tamper with the original film. Leave it be. But, there were moments that I thought worked. I thought Michael Myers looked picture perfect. And the Myers house was brilliantly recreated. But the Donald Pleasence impersonator didn't work for me. It felt just off enough to feel wrong to me whereas Peter Cushing's lookalike in Rogue One felt just close enough to work. I didn't care for the retconned emphasis on the police, though I loved the idea presented during these scenes: Michael staring out the window overlooking Haddonfield. The question presented being: What was Michael really seeing?


This query was one of the more intriguing aspects of the film, one I found most fascinating. To be perfectly transparent, I never liked the idea of giving Michael Myers a backstory a la Rob Zombie's take. Conversely I love the slow reveal of the Curse of Thorn and the Druidic origins. I also love how it is never fully explained, much remaining shrouded in mystery. I think that is why I felt this "Staring out the window" treatise so interesting. It's never fully explained yet piques the curiosity. On the flip side of this is Laurie's "Loomis soliloquy" at the end about transcendence. I felt that speech was out of character coming from her, not to mention sounding utterly ridiculous (yet something tells me that, were it spoken by Donald Pleasence, it would flourish).

LAURIE STRODE AND THE CITIZENS OF HADDONFIELD

I feel that the 2018 version of Laurie Strode is off somehow. She's far too "Sarah Conner" and today's cliché strong female character. Hollywood doesn't know how to do different kinds of strength anymore other than blunt physical force. What happened to Laurie's intelligence and booksmarts? She still maintains her resourcefulness but is far more bullish in her personality, like she would get in a fist fight with anyone at any time. Anyway, I was glad Laurie was sidelined for this movie and didn't shrug off that lethal wound of hers. The film could've easily gone in the direction it was seemingly heading by making Laurie an "invincible action hero" (hell, the trailers kind of led us to think that it was). Other than the speech at the end, I thought Laurie was handled better in this film than the last. Bringing in Officer Hawkins was a nice touch that I thought worked as well.

I'm torn on all of the guest spots, from Tommy Doyle, Officer Brackett, Lindsey Wallace, and Marion Chambers. Retconning Lonnie Elam as an important character seemed a little superfluous, but not in an off-putting way. I liked Lindsey and was glad she survived. They wasted Marion in a overdone bit of fan-service. And Tommy was fine until he went batshit crazy. I prefer Paul Rudd's Tommy, a man taking on the Loomis mantle better than anyone else in the series. The whole "mob mentality" allegory/social commentary was WAY overdone and too on the nose, to the point of parody rather than poignancy (but subtly does seem lost on must online commentators nowadays). And lastly, I didn't need Officer Brackett at all. Repeating his classic line didn't make much sense to me either, feeling jarringly inappropriate even.

The social commentary on mob mentality in today's world felt a little on the nose and beaten to death. I liked seeing how the town was effected as a whole and I felt a lot of it rings true to today's social media/online forums/comments sections. But ultimately it felt like a step too far. Halloween 4 handled the mob justice more cleanly. But then again, maybe that's exactly what this movie was going for, an over-exaggeration befitting today's social media outrage. Personally I prefer a gentler touch with my social commentary in films and television (or none at all). Again, this veers a little too close parody not poignancy.

THE SCORE

John Carpenter, Cody Carpenter, and Daniel Davies' score once again steals the show in my opinion. It is one of the shining aspects of this film and is a soundtrack worth owning. The track Unkillable is one of my favorites. Listening to the soundtrack by itself, I can hear so many elements of Carpenter's work at play here, motifs that recall the soundtracks to Escape From New York and Prince of Darkness as well as other beloved scores. To me this makes the soundtrack all the richer, feeling Carpenter is pulling from his entire repertoire. The Halloween scores have always been a key element in the success or failure of these films, second only to Michael himself, and I feel this particular score is a big positive here. I need this soundtrack added to my collection!

THE SHAPE

And speaking of unkillable, let's talk about the one thing that matters most in these films: Michael Myers. Jamie Lee Curtis is amazing and she is one of my favorite actresses. It's great having her return to the series. But she has not been a consistent element in this series. This series has survived and will continue to endure after she's leaves (for the third time at that). This series isn't about Laurie Strode. It's about Michael Myers. He's the reason people go to these movies. He's the reason why these movies succeed. Obviously there's a combination of elements on top of this, but at the end of the day, this is Michael Myers' show, not Jamie Lee Curtis's or Laurie Strode's.

As such, I'm the most critical of how Michael Myers is portrayed in these films, to the point where my enjoyment of the films can hinge on Michael's portrayal. I've always been of the opinion that there is a difference between Michael Myers and Jason Voorhees, subtle sure, but a definitive difference. Jason, to me, is like the shark in JAWS. Jason is a beast with little to no thinking involved. And he's wonderful as such. But Michael Myers, to me, was always more calculating, cunning, and mysterious. Michael is observant and waits for the right moment to strike.


That said, I feel this movie took Michael's character a little too far at times to where his characterization felt more in line with Jason Voorhees. It didn't go so far as to make me feel I wasn't watching Michael Myers anymore, rather Jason instead, but it came real close. Michael was angry in this movie, the filmmakers dancing close to the Rob Zombie level of violence. But perhaps there's no going back after Rob Zombie's depiction. I guess he would be angry after getting beaten in the last film. 

The one part where I feel they didn't get his character right was near the end when he was led into a trap. The character of Karen tricked him in the previous film, and I can allow that. But getting tricked again by the same character, being drawn into a trap yet again (and a far more obvious trap at that) felt like a disservice to Michael's character. C'mon, he's smarter than that! It didn't stop him though which makes it feel less egregious. Sadly though, that scene culminates in one of the worst filmed set-pieces (in my opinion) in the film. It's shot rather artistically which I felt diminished the impact. I would've rather seen a straight-forward approach, showing Michael's brutality and the fear and chaos spreading through the crowd. Anyway, I liked Michael Myers' depiction in this film overall and, for me, that's the most important element to get right in these films.

THE ENDING 

FULL SPOILER ALERT!

Michael doesn't die in this film. He even gets a few big kills like Tommy Doyle, Sheriff Brackett, Marion Chambers, and Karen. The big reveal at the end is that Michael is seemingly unkillable. One of the announcements for the 2018 film that had me leery was that the writer and director stated that they were removing Michael's supernatural characterization, in effect, making him a normal human. This was a huge source of contention with me, feeling that such a depiction was incongruous with even the original film. 

Well, it seems David Gordon Green and Danny McBride lied to us (unless there's a clever explanation in the next film). This is a lie I'm happy to have. I feel making Michael Myers a normal human is wrong and diminishes his character (although it did make me anxious that he may die, which I NEVER want to see). The reason I go to these movies and watch them over and over is for Michael Myers, just like I watch Frankenstein for The Monster, not Dr. Frankenstein (unless he's played by Peter Cushing that is), Godzilla for Godzilla, and a Nightmare on Elm Street for Freddy.

Karen's death at the very end and Michael standing triumphant left me with a positive feeling as I exited the movie theater. There's a shot just before then of Karen looking up into the Myers house, seeing a glimpse of Michael as a child in his clown costume staring out the window. That quick shot was haunting and subtle and wonderful. Soon thereafter an adult Michael kills Karen and is seen staring out of the same window. I thought that worked wonderfully and was a great way to end the film, canceling out Laurie's cringe "Transcendence" soliloquy and the terribly shot crowd massacre from a moment prior.

While this film stumbles at parts, it soars in others. As a Halloween fan since the early 90's (before Halloween 6 even!) I felt this film committed no cardinal sins and gave Michael an outing the scope of which he'd never had before. And ending it with Michael the victor was perfect. 

THE VERDICT

I started writing this post three days ago. At that time I was still actively processing the film, unsure of my precise feelings towards it. Truthfully, the film is a mixed bag (like most Halloween films). There are some great moments and some dumb moments (as with many Halloween films). Nowadays whenever a classic or beloved property from the past is resurrected by Hollywood or Netflix there's a strong degree of trepidation, and with good reason. In this era  so many classic properties have been rebooted and disastrously mismanaged. And no one is safe, from the highest of the high like Marvel and Star Wars, to niche favorites. To have one where I feel no grave sins were committed against the history of the franchise is now a miracle to me.

Halloween Kills had some missteps but it also had some successes. After letting the film simmer with me for a few days I feel the positives outweigh the negatives (if only just). Reading reactions online this weekend, there are many levying massive grievances upon it. I welcome any civil discourse about the film because I feel this movie generates a lot of discussion. But this is 2021. My hope for civil discourse (online at least) is low. But I'd love to discuss this film further.

I still need to see it again and I will later this week. With me wanting to see this movie a second time in a theater, I feel that's worth noting, especially nowadays where I feel that way about so few anymore. So, I still reserve my right to change my mind upon subsequent viewings. As of right now though, I'm sitting somewhere in this ballpark:

Overall Ranking: 6 out of 10


Before going to see Halloween Kills I watched Halloween 4 and Halloween 5 again. More on those films coming soon. For more of my feelings on the Halloween franchise, check out these other posts. And for more of my horror reviews, check out the posts linked further down!

THE HORROR MOVIE MASTER LIST

Tuesday, September 28, 2021

MARVEL CINEMATIC UNIVERSE: SHANG-CHI AND THE LEGEND OF THE TEN RINGS (2021)

MCU CHAPTER 29




The Marvel Cinematic Universe keeps chugging along like a freight train it seems, with several train cars backed up down the line. After a full year drought, this year is already making up for it by stuffing as much MCU down our throats as possible. The current D+ series airing right now being WHAT IF...? (which I haven't started watching yet... I still haven't made it passed the first episode of the D+ LOKI series) and the latest movie being SHANG-CHI AND THE LEGEND OF THE TEN RINGS. 


In 2019 we saw three entries in the MCU released and only Spider-Man: Far From Home seemed high quality to me. Captain Marvel was fine but nothing spectacular (very obligatory Phase One kinda vibe) and Avengers: Endgame being perhaps my second most disliked film in all of the MCU. Then finally WandaVision came out and showed to me the quality of the D+ MCU... lackluster and nonsensical (just my opinion, feel free to disagree with me. I also haven't watched Loki or What If...?). And two months ago we were finally treated to BLACK WIDOW and... it felt right in line with my feelings towards the current MCU... meh... 


I've really lost my enthusiasm for anything from Marvel Studios right now. Even the trailer for SPIDER-MAN: NO WAY HOME has me feeling half disgruntled and half excited (disgruntled by Doctor Strange seemingly acting like a complete fool contrary to how his character has been depicted in the past, and I don't care for the whole impetus of the plot. Seriously, Talos is in town impersonating Nick Fury. Just have the Skrull impersonate Peter Parker while Spider-Man swings by in front of the news cameras. Problem solved in five minutes). I am more curious and excited for Sony's Marvel projects though, like Morbius and Venom 2. 


All of this is to say that starting in 2019, the films solely from Marvel Studios have begun to slip, and in some cases, very close to the trash heap (once again, in my opinion, feel free to disagree). It is taking a lot of effort from me right now to even make this blog post. But Shang-Chi was... better than the previous Marvel Studios efforts from 2019 through 2021 (so far that is. We'll see how Eternals and Hawkeye fair). But even so... I... just... don't... care anymore. 


The biggest reason why I don't care anymore is that they're not adapting the comics anymore. The MCU has become Marvel in name only. Imagine your favorite book is being adapted into a movie and the movie is nothing at all like the book. That's exactly how I feel. 


THE PLOT 


Shang-Chi's quiet life in San Francisco has been disrupted by the sudden appearance of a group of assassins set on taking his life. He defeats them but not without losing a family heirloom, one that leads him to his sister, the next target on the assassins' list. The true mastermind behind the assassins is revealed, none other than Shang-Chi's father - the mythic Mandarin. The Mandarin is on a quest to find a mystical land where he believes his wife, Shang-Chi's mother, to be held captive. 



INITIAL IMPRESSIONS 


I have been a fan of Shang Chi for a long time (not as long as Hulk, Silver Surfer, or Ghost Rider, but a long time nonetheless). In my mind, he is basically Bruce Lee if he were a super spy/assassin. Shang Chi has no super powers, just raw skill and intense training. Despite no super power, he is the best martial artist and hand to hand fighter in the Marvel Universe. His father was Fu Manchu, warlord of the underworld and master villain. Shang Chi was raised to be the successor to his father's empire, but rebelled, devoting all his efforts to bringing his father to justice. Shang Chi joined forces with MI6 secret agents, going on countless adventures and ultimately defeating his father. He is a pure badass. 
 
Shang Chi was a different kind of Marvel super hero story, unique and completely amazing. The best, for me, was when Shang Chi teamed up with Iron Fist and the Daughters of the Dragon, taking out armies of badguys all by themselves. The stories were of a more mature nature, further differentiating him from most of the mainstream heroes, which I feel only added to the appeal. It was martial arts espionage like no other. Shang Chi, in my opinion, is so utterly cool. But after his main series, which ran over 100 issues, Marvel let him fall into relative obscurity, showing up sparsely here and there. 
 
For those unaware, a film based on Shang Chi has been in development for over a decade. I remember seeing an announcement for a movie titled The Deadly Hands of Shang Chi under Stan Lee’s IMDB page way back in 2008 with rumors of Tony Jaa starring. After Ong Bak and The Protector, I was stoked to see that movie, despite Tony Jaa being the wrong nationality. Now, after seeing films like The Raid and The Villainess, excellent templates for a Shang Chi movie, I had hoped we’d see the Shang Chi movie someday soon... although I had little confidence that Marvel Studios could pull off such a film (it's just not their style). 
 
While I wait for THAT Shang Chi movie to arrive, another movie titled Shang Chi and The Legend of the Ten Rings has come. And it wasn’t half bad, but it could’ve been more. What Shang Chi is, is a perfectly serviceable Marvel Studios film that follows most of the tried and true tropes of every MCU film. And that isn’t what Shang Chi is. He’s not like the rest, which is a strength. This film may be the closest wholly original film in their catalog, bearing little resemblance to the source material. 
 

The rebel son and criminal father element is maintained but not much else. We discover Shang Chi does have super powers (from maternal inheritance) and those powers ultimately enable him to defeat his father. I never felt that he had to struggle to succeed or that being thrown into this plot has affected his life in any significant way, almost as if he was merely on vacation. Shang Chi often has this disgruntled expression, as if he expected this would happen one day, or being pulled back into his father’s world is merely a frustrating minor inconvenience. And these powers he’s just now discovering come to him fairly easily. There’s this air of entitlement to him that feels off putting. He also has no bearing on the movement of the plot, the plot moves along just fine without him too when you take into the account all of the moving parts. Shang Chi, portrayed by actor Simu Liu, is the least compelling element in this plot, and that saddens me. He has very little charm or charisma in his performance, not helping to endear him to the audience. All of this makes me feel that actor Simu Liu was the wrong choice. I really didn't like his performance. 


Shang Chi’s father, the Mandarin (a name which the filmmakers seem to actively avoid using and even mock at one point) is quite the opposite. Portrayed wonderfully by Tony Leung, the Mandarin is depicted as a multifaceted character with real motivation and depth. He was perhaps the most interesting character in the film. Although the use of the Ten Rings was odd and rather blunt for weapons that had a rich history and individual identity in the comics. They’re basically whips or repulsor blasts (like those that Iron Man uses to fly). I found myself wanting more of the Mandarin's backstory and more exploration of the Ten Rings. 

 
 

The movie begins like Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon before becoming Mortal Kombat, before finally becoming a warped version of Neverending Story. Very little of Shang Chi’s source material is present at all. I felt the final act borrowed much from Marvel Comics’ Iron Fist rather than Shang Chi.  

 
 

Now, looking at the context of the film, this is a kids movie meant to sell toys and appeal to the lowest common denominator. The movie needed world threatening stakes, thus the massive battle at the end of the movie. Shang Chi, as a character, needed a grander mythology loaded with spectacle as well as super powers to elevate him to the level of the rest of the MCU heroes. Despite being written well and wonderfully portrayed, Hawkeye is still the butt of many MCU jokes. Introducing another "no powers" super hero probably wouldn't get people excited. Plus this was an origin story, by nature the hero in these stories is more passive (look at Luke in the original Star Wars, most of that plot moves with the other characters while Luke merely tags along for most of it before factoring in key to the defeat of the enemy).  


Taking all of this into account, I understand the choices the filmmakers went with. And, aside from a formulaic structure, I feel this is the most entertaining of Marvel's Phase 4 slate so far. This isn't the Shang Chi movie I had hoped to see, but that doesn't mean I didn't enjoy it. All in all, the movie was fine and I should maybe give it another watch. As of having only seen it once I am luke warm towards it. 


Ultimately my qualms come down to the formulaic plot, bearing little resemblance to the source material, and a lead actor whom I feel may have been the wrong choice for the character. 


Overall Ranking: 6 out of 10 




Whatever Marvel Studios has coming down the pipeline I'm either dreading to see or just don't care anymore. I've just... don't care anymore for the MCU.