Review #90: Halloween H20: 20 Years Later (1998)

This review was originally written in October 2020.

October Movie Review #7- Halloween H20: 20 Years Later

I was (a little bit) excited to watch this movie, because I remember when it came out! It was a big deal, for reasons I didn't quite understand at the time (as I hadn't seen any of the others)- because Jamie Lee Curtis was returning to the franchise, after starring in the first film and having a (lackluster) role in the second. As a kid I had gotten the impression there was a huge gap between this movie and the previous one, but in retrospect it was only three years (which is actually below average for this series).

Overall I actually really liked this one (relatively speaking, anyway)- it has some issues (which I'll get to) but it was pretty fast-paced, I cared about the characters even though most of them got fairly little screen time, and it felt like the people involved had a good time making it. After watching this one, I feel like this is the best example of what I was expecting when getting into this series: Jamie Lee Curtis fighting back against the psycho killer Michael Myers, who is coming after her no matter who stands in his way. I'm not entirely sure where I got that impression, considering basically five of the six previous films are nothing like that whatsoever, but whatever the case this one kept my attention and interest for its entire runtime, and didn't feel overly cheap in its scares or its plotting.

The majority of my complaints aren't really about the movie itself, but the series that led to the movie being this way. I was incredibly confused as to what the continuity was at this point- I assumed this would be a near-full reboot (I knew Laurie Strode was alive, after all) but then near the beginning of the film there were several newspaper clippings that made it seem like all of the previous films were canon- they showed a clipping of Laurie Strode having died, they showed something that seemed to be hinting at the Rune of Thorn- but none of the dialogue mentions Michael's repeated rampages through Haddonfield, and there was no mention of Laurie having abandoned her daughter Jamie, so I feel like they're trying to act like the past three films didn't happen. Which is fine, I guess- I don't envy anyone who had to take over after the mess that was those three films- but part of me feels like if your franchise has gotten this far off the rails, maybe you should start a new franchise instead of just acting like half of them didn't happen. I would hope that maybe the filmmakers would use the previous entries as a lesson not to involve so much canon and so many recurring characters into their slasher franchise- after all, Nightmare on Elm Street and Friday the 13th did just fine with each film following an entirely different set of protagonists, so why keep following the same characters in Halloween?

And on that note, I do feel the need to point out: Laurie survived 20 years by leaving Haddonfield. Just sayin'.

That being said though, I have to ask WTF was going on in the beginning of this film? Michael Myers (presumably) learned Laurie's live status and whereabouts by breaking into the house where Loomis' notes were, but how does that equal a starting point? Did Michael go there under the assumption that Laurie was still alive, and if so, what made him assume that? And how did Loomis know? Was he in contact with Laurie in this new continuity, and if so, why not let us know that? It's a very big leap to assume that Myers just so happened to go in search of Loomis' notes and just so happened to (very quickly, I might add) find the notes that pointed him directly at Laurie. But then again, I don't know if this film would have been better suited with more exposition- I just wish they had done something better. In Halloween 4 he overheard some orderlies talk about his remaining relative- even if that part was very stupid, it left much less up to the imagination of the viewers.

I very much liked Laurie's portrayal in this film. I think it contrasts a lot with her portrayal in the 2018 movie- I'll have a LOT to say when we get there, don't you worry- and this one felt very believable: She's mostly moved on with her life, but she always has the lingering specter looking at her in the reflection, especially when October comes around. The only thing I really had issue with was how she insisted on making a big theatrical show of her final confrontation with Myers (at the end, in the van)- stealing a cop's gun and taking the coroner's van is one thing, I had no problem with that, but if all you want is to make sure this maniac is dead, why not just... you know... shoot him in the head while he's lying there? Even after he's gotten back up and you've flung him out through the windshield, there were SO MANY PARTS of her "plan" of driving the car off the road that could have gone wrong. You have a gun- just pull it out, shoot him in the head, shoot him a few more times, cut his head off if you have to. Don't make it more complicated than it needs to be. I know it's probably not easy to kill someone but what she ended up doing was far more visceral than if she just put a few bullets through the bodybag.

Anyway, I feel like I'm grading on a curve but I liked this about as much as I liked the original. Let's hope the next one is as good, right? 

...Right?

Overall Rating: 7/10 Dumbwaiter Deaths

My Favorite Bit of IMDB Trivia: Apparently, there was originally a scene where the characters were watching So I Married An Axe Murderer, starring... Michael Myers. But they changed it to Scream 2 in post-production. Lame!