I can see people's ratings! Could ciao have actually fixed something?
I can see people's ratings! Could ciao have actually fixed something?
Member since:05.05.2005
Reviews:969
Members who trust:377
At the tender age of 6, Michael Myers calmly stabs his sister to death. Institutionalised, he shows no remorse. Fifteen years later, when he makes a break for freedom, psychiatrist Sam Loomis is deeply concerned, knowing that Michael will return to his childhood home of Haddonfield and will start to look for more victims. Michael does exactly this, but although Loomis follows him to Haddonfield, Michael still manages to keep himself hidden. In the meantime, he starts to stalk three teenage girls from the neighbourhood. Can Loomis convince the authorities to help him find Michael before it is too late?
I just about remember all the hype surrounding Halloween when it first came out, but was way too young to see it, so had to wait a few years. It was really my first introduction into horror films, and, at the time, it scared me to death. Many years later, after watching countless horrors, it doesn't seem anything like as scary, but for nostalgia purposes, it is hugely comforting. Of course, the special effects are not comparable with today's amazing efforts, but they are still vivid enough to do their job. And as it is claimed to be the first real slasher film, it is a must for any serious fan of horror.
As so often happens with this genre, the acting is not exactly top-notch. Sam Loomis is played by
Donald Pleasence, who probably gives the best performance, although he doesn't feature in the film all that often. His story is more of a sub-plot than anything else - the main story features the teenagers, with occasional flashes to Loomis to remind us that Michael Myers is out there and intent on murdering. Pleasence exudes creepiness even though he is supposed to be on the side of good here. This is perfect casting, because it just adds to the general doom-laden atmosphere, and it makes the viewer doubt whether he is good enough to catch up with Myers.
This is Jamie Lee Curtis' first major film role. She plays Laurie, an ordinary, hard-working girl from an ordinary neighbourhood, who plays the plain jane compared to her far more out-going and sexually aware friends, Annie and Lynda. I can't say she really blew me away in the role, but she is good. There are some wooden lines, but, to be honest, I think this has more to do with the script that Jamie's abilities as an actress. Certainly, towards the end when she doesn't have all that much to say, but has to look terrified, she does really well. Her hairstyle is slightly off-putting - a seventies layered bob with bits flying around everywhere - her shorter eighties hair suits her much better, but that is a sign of the times and she can't really be blamed for it.
Her two friends, Annie and Lynda, played by Annie Kyes and P J Soles, are generally incredibly annoying. They don't think much of anything apart from their boyfriends, and are always ribbing Laurie for her lack of boyfriend and interest in study. Lynda also has an annoying habit of sticking 'totally' into every sentence. The performances are wooden and painful to watch - this is probably deliberate so that we root for Laurie to survive rather than them. There are a couple of children involved - Laurie is babysitting Tommy Doyle on the night in question. Played by Brian Andrews, he actually gives a really good performance, and, like Laurie, really gets the chance to come into his own towards the end of the film.
You may wonder why I haven't mentioned Michael Myers. That is for a very good reason - apart from the scenes where he is a little boy and kills his sister, he doesn't really appear in the film. That is, he is very definitely there, but the audience doesn't get to see him as such, instead, we get to see the neighbourhood through his eyes, but without ever getting more than a glimpse of his face - it is as if the camera takes the place of his eyes. This is hugely effective in building up the atmosphere, because, for all we know, Michael could be any young man that appears in the film. Critics have likened director John Carpenter's film-making here to Alfred Hitchcock himself - and I can see why - Carpenter has a way of making the ordinary very far from being so.
This is a horror film, and there are some nasty moments when Michael slashes his victims. However, it isn't really these moments that make the film scary. It is more the knowledge that something could happen at any time, but we don't know what or when. Something as innocent as a phone ringing can make you jump - unless you've seen the film as many times as I have, of course. There is an 18 rating on the film, so obviously parents may want to vet it before letting children watch - I must have seen it around the age of 14 and it did really scare me then. One scene where Laurie discovers dead bodies at every turn always sticks out in my mind.
There has been a lot of criticism in feminist literature about the way that the film portrays the 'good girl', Laurie, as the heroine, whereas there are hints that her more promiscuous friends deserve to die. I can see why this could be offensive to some. However, it does actually seem to be Laurie that Myers is primarily targetting, so I'm not sure how much this argument stands up. And it is just not women that are targetted. Obviously, if you think you are going to be offended in any way, then don't watch it - you certainly need to be able to watch the film without being too deeply drawn into semantics.
There are various versions of the DVD, so if you are interested in special features, you will need to choose carefully. My version just has one special feature - a theatrical trailer. However, the 25th anniversary version, for example, has two discs and a whole slew of features and documentaries, so shop around for what you want.
This film is now thirty years old. It has been copied, it has even been re-made, yet I think it still stands the test of time. It may be that I am a child of the seventies and feel comfortable with the era, but I still think it's worth watching. I haven't yet seen the re-make, but the reviews are not good, and I have to wonder why it was re-made at all. Of course, the film has flaws. The acting is often rubbish, the script feels forced and, made on a budget, the film looks cheap. However, it still manages to do the job and I love it. If you haven't seen it, and can stomach horrors, it is a must-see. Recommended.
The DVD is available from play.com, with prices beginning at £2.99.
Production Year: 1980 - Horror - Director: Paul Lynch - Original Language: English - Classification: 18 years and over - Starring: Jamie Lee Curtis, Leslie Nielsen, Casey Stevens, Anne-Marie Martin, Antoinette Bower
Production Year: 1981 - Horror - Director: Rick Rosenthal - Original Language: English - Classification: 18 years and over - Starring: Jamie Lee Curtis, Donald Pleasence, Lance Guest, Charles Cyphers, Jeffrey Kramer, Dana Carvey
The Night He Came Home Perhaps the most influential and successful independent film ever ... more
made Halloween is the movie that put director John Carpenter on the map as a viable filmmaker. An exercise in simple pure horror Halloween takes us into the wo...
Postage & Packaging: £0.00 Availability: 3-5 working days
Advantages: Score, FX, Acting, Not A Straight-forward Re-Make... Disadvantages: Acting, Repetitive Obscenities, It Will Always Remain Inferior To The Original...
iGayParis 29.04.2008 (29.04.2008)
·
Read review
Ciao members have rated this review on average: very helpful
Review of Halloween (DVD)
![Halloween [1978] [DVD]](http://picnica.ciao.com/uk/78486290.jpg "Halloween [1978] [DVD]")
Mar 12th, 2009
very helpful by (100%):
