Director: Rob Zombie
Cast: Malcolm McDowell, Tyler Mane, Sheri Moon Zombie, Brad Dourif, Danielle Harris, Scout Taylor-Compton
Screenplay: Rob Zombie
105 mins. Rated R for strong brutal bloody violence throughout, terror, disturbing graphic images, language, and some crude sexual content and nudity.

When director Rob Zombie (House of 1000 Corpses) unleashed his vision of Michael Myers with the Halloween remake, it was a controversial film to be sure. Not just for its status as a remake of a classic film (why so many are “offended” by remakes is beyond me), but for his decision to examine the backstory of its iconic killer and also feature some of the most graphic and shocking sequences of violence in any Halloween film. All the same Halloween 2007 was a profitable film, and Zombie was finally convinced to return to the franchise for what marks one of the most insane departures in the franchise, and that includes the time we anthologized a sequel featuring Stonehenge and killer masks.

Two years after the events of the previous film, Michael Myers (Tyler Man, Deadpool & Wolverine) is still out, walking the earth, having shockingly survived the gunshot to the face he suffered at the hands of Laurie Strode (Scout Taylor-Compton, 13 Going on 30) at the end of the night he came home. Laurie and Annie (Danielle Harris, Once Upon a Time in Hollywood), both survivors, are living with Annie’s father, Sheriff Brackett (Brad Dourif, The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers), both dealing with their trauma in different ways. When Laurie learns a cruel secret about her past, she spirals into a final Halloween confrontation with the Shape.

Halloween II has consistently received hate from its viewers, and I can understand why. It seems that every few years, the Halloween franchise has to make a bonkers installment to atone for the previous several “traditional” sequels, and this would be the next one, following Halloween III: Season of the Witch and paving the way for Halloween Ends. I’ve always found Zombie’s follow-up to be an excellent flipside of the coin that is Zombie’s Halloween. While occasionally featuring some pretty grating dialogue (though less than its predecessor), it completes a story (a rarity for horror) and takes a non-traditional path as a slasher sequel. So often in films like this, the surviving final girl is offed early on, or pushed to the side for a more blank canvas character, or her trauma is just ignored, but Halloween II decides to continue following Laurie through her anger and grief. It makes this version of Laurie distinct enough to stand on her own. The evolution of her trauma feels more lived in, while other interpretations of the survivor character usually just show her flipping a switch and becoming “normal” once the killer’s been dispatched.

There are a lot of tiny differences to this Halloween film that elevate it above some of the lesser sequels. This is a take on Michael Myers, particularly with the white horse motif that features throughout, that I find to be far more interesting than the examination of Michael in the previous film. It’s a psychological character study for all characters, including Michael, which only works because this isn’t Carpenter’s Shape. Carpenter’s film works because of Michael’s mystery, while Zombie’s works because he’s trying to understand Myers. Halloween II feature a lot more Michael without the mask, setting it apart from the other versions because he isn’t really The Shape at all. In fact, the more I think about it, the more this film feels like the recent Joker sequel because it’s less interested in sticking to the traditional path, which may alienate some viewers unwilling to give it a chance.

The other character I haven’t gotten to mention is Dr. Samuel Loomis (Malcolm McDowell, A Clockwork Orange), and part of that has to do with the fact that he doesn’t serve much of a purpose in the follow-up. I feel like he’s hear out of obligation, but his evolved character arc does have some interesting ideas. Loomis is so dynamically different here that it does make it hard to reconcile McDowell’s two performances here, but he wanted to see a different version of the character, basing this version on Dr. Phil, and I appreciate that he’s found himself a new level of fame based on the blood and tears of other people. It’s an imperfect characterization but it has certain flourishes.

Rob Zombie was given a lot of freedom upon returning to the franchise, at least when referring to his collaboration with Malek Akkad. While his interactions with the Weinsteins (seriously, fuck the Weinsteins) caused him to eventually disown his time with the Halloween franchise, he was still able to make a visually distinctive Halloween film, choosing a visual style with a lot of film grain that feels like the first Halloween film made by a grindhouse director. I love the way this movie looks, though I wouldn’t want it for the entire franchise.

Halloween II is not an easily digestible follow-up, but neither was its predecessor. It is a fascinating character study and wild departure for a franchise of familiar sequels and a few shocking experiments. It’s biggest flaw comes with Zombie’s dialogue, frequently featuring long-winded sequences of characters screaming at each other, but when it’s working, it’s really cooking, and I appreciate what Zombie’s going for with this bold sequel.

4/5
-Kyle A. Goethe

• For my review of Rob Zombie’s Halloween, click here.
• For my review of Rob Zombie’s House of 1000 Corpses, click here.
• For my review of Rob Zombie’s Lords of Salem, click here.