Halloween Re-interpreted for a new generation

I was quite skeptical when I agreed to see the re-intrepretation of Halloween: I didn't believe that it could be done as good as the original. Rob Zombie did try as best he could---the storyline in regards to how Michael became the psychopathic killer was quite simply, an up to date psychological profile experiment (I.E., young Michael's mental problems become evident after the school finds dead animals in the young boys' backpack/locker); Zombie also shows the other problems young Michael had to deal with: school yard bullies, a sister who shirked responsibility as well as bullied her little brother, & a foul-mouthed stand in father figure that was just a waste of human flesh that mentally tortured the young boy. Zombie made this pretty realistic, even if some of it was a bit too foul mouthed; so, as far as the storyline, I gave this movie a B+.

However...once the movie relied on more acting than story, it was a bit lacking. Though Sheri Moon did a good job as Michael's Mom---and the Doug Faerch played an excellent Michael Myers at 10 (the fascination with masks was especially terrific), the rest of the cast just didn't bring the acting abities necessary to pull off Zombie's vision. Macolm McDowell's Dr. Loomis is less forceful with his assertions that there is a psychopathic killer loose in Haddonfield; and, although I don't want to continuosly compare this version to the classic Halloween---Donald Pleasance was a much better Dr. Loomis. Ditto with the actress who played Laurie Strode: Scout Taylor Compton's Laurie Strode does not even compare to Jamie Lee Curtis' portrayal of 30 years ago. So, the acting got a c+...some of it was pretty in tune while some of it just didn't "click".

Direction suffered as well; although the storyline was believable, some of the scenes in this re-intrepretation just seemed too contrived, too forced. I believe that the job of the director is to make sure the whole film meshes well---storyline, scenes, action. Of the entire hour and forty nine minutes watching this film---and, one that is supposedly suspense/horror (it's supposed to scare the BLEEP BLEEP out of those viewing it), I counted only twice where I honestly "jumped". Not to sound protagonistic, but, the original Halloween made me "jump" and SCREAM quite profusely the one and only time I viewed it. I didn't utter one scream during this whole time...nor did the viewing audience...and the two times I did jump were at least a half an hour apart. Rob Zombie does have it in himself to direct a great movie....however, he should attempt it with a new story---not a re-intrepretation of a classic. So, directorial I gave a mediocre C rating.

The visuals in the movie were good as far as the horror genre---although I expected to see a gory blood filled movie due to Rob Zombie writing the screenplay and directing, I was very surprised when it wasn't as horrible as I had envisioned it. There was a bit more gore than the original, but, I attribute that to the fact that today's "gore machine" is more brutal (I.E., the SAW movies). Yet, Zombie did show restraint where others might not have---so I believe visuals earned a solid B.

My overall grade for this movie is a B-: the storyline was believable and very plausible, the acting was so-so, the directing okay, the visuals great for the genre. Rob Zombie has shown that he has talent in the field, but, as stated before, I believe he should try writing an original screenplay instead of re-intrepreting a classic. It wasn't a waste of my time or money, but, it could have been bit more suspenseful, a bit more scarier. After all, I did grow up with the original Halloween...which I have only watched once because it left me with the heebie jeebies the one time I did see it. So, Rob Zombie---perfect your craft. You've got talent; let's see more of it next time around?