cheighlee H20 is probably in the hall of the worst movie names ever. Fortunately, it's not the worst movie ever.It actually does two things right.It actively ignores and erases Thorn trilogy from canon and continues 20 years after Halloween II. It brings back Jamie Lee Curtis as Laurie Strode.We also get young Josh Hartnet and Michelle Williams. Which is kinda sweet. We get a bit of PTSD Laurie Strode that self medicates with booze while trying to run a school and raise a teenager and all that under a fake name. It's a competent revival, an homage a bit, a bit fresh stuff. Probably the worst thing I can say about it that it's forgettable as a movie but has some cool scenes and that it still clings onto Laurie is Michael's sister storyline that no one cared about.It's on par with Scream movies that were all the rage at the time, if that means anything to you. Ok, kinda popcornish experience.

TheLittleSongbird John Carpenter's 1978 'Halloween' is wholly deserving of its status as a horror classic. To this day it's still one of the freakiest films personally seen and introduced the world to one of horror's most iconic villainous characters Michael Myers.Which is why it is such a shame that not only are all of the sequels nowhere near as good but that the decline in quality is so drastic. Ok, the original 'Halloween' is very difficult to follow on from, but most of the sequels could at least looked like effort was made into them. The exception however is 'Halloween H20: 20 Years Later'. It's not perfect and nowhere near as great as the original, but it's the only sequel that's above average, let alone good and by far the best since the original. It does a great job breathing fresh life into a series that had gotten stale as quick as one can down a can of coke gone flat and such a welcome addition after the badness of the fifth and sixth films. 'Halloween H20: 20 Years Later' has its flaws. It is too short and at times erratically paced, sometimes rushed and then taking a bit of time to get going after the opening. There is not enough breathing room for development of characterisation, which generally is shallow apart from the central relationship and the script tends to be weak (not unexpected, though actually it's far worse in the previous sequels, at least it sounds complete).On the other hand, 'Halloween H20: 20 Years Later' is the best-looking of the sequels, the first half in particular being close in style to the autumnal look of the original, something that none of the previous sequels did. The editing is coherent, it's not shot too darkly and there is an eeriness to the setting which can be properly appreciated as a result. The music is a welcome return to being an asset than a drawback like in the previous two sequels. While not quite a character of its own like in the original, it adds to the atmosphere and enhances it.Luckily there's nowhere near as much unintentional camp, out of place humour or bizarre subplots or idea that muddle the story. Instead much of the film is fun and there is a tension, creepiness and suspense, even poignancy at times, that the previous sequels were sorely lacking in. The deaths are the most creative and shocking since those in the original, while the opening scene is unsettlingly tense and the ending is creepy and touching. The central relationship is handled quite well. Although the characters are underdeveloped, none of them are annoying and they do have enough personality to stop them from being too dull. The direction is in control of the material and is at least competent and often well above that, especially in the second half when the film really does come alive. Of the sequels, 'Halloween H20: 20 Years Later' is by quite some way the best acted, Jamie Lee Curtis' wonderful performance being the film's best asset.In summary, the best of the sequels/follow ups and worth the wait. 7/10 Bethany Cox

zkonedog Once the new millennium dawned, many films (Rocky, Rambo, Lord of the Rings, Batman, etc.) went the "homage" route to their predecessors, while also establishing a new sense of continuity in the process. "Halloween H2O" beat them to the punch by a few years, but ultimately ended up being a complete flop.For a basic plot summary, "H2O" sees Laurie Strode (Jamie Lee Curtis) living in California after having faked her death to escape the wrath of Michael Myers. When Laurie's son John (Josh Hartnett) turns 17, the same age Laurie was when attacked in 1978, Myers is again "activated" to seek out the Strode family and destroy it.The one good thing I can say about this movie is that it tried. It really did. It tried to put a more fitting conclusion to the Halloween saga after pretty much relegating the events of sequels 3-6 to non-cannon material. However, the writing/directing/producing failed miserably in the task.For starters, this is perhaps the most predictable film I have ever viewed in my life. Viewers know that Myers will come back (otherwise why even make the movie?) to torment Laurie, so the first hour of character-development is rendered moot because you already know what will happen. It doesn't help that the supporting cast is so bland as to make you not care one way or another when they get knocked off.Also, much like Anthony Perkins' performance in the later "Psycho" movies, I don't quite know what to make of Jamie Lee Curtis here. On one hand, she seems to be paying tribute (with a decent effort) to the franchise that gave her an acting career. On the other, though, it sort of reeks of desperation that she's doing the sixth Halloween sequel.Thus, it pretty much boggles my mind to think that writers Debra Hill and John Carpenter (the masters of the original) would phone in such an uninspired effort. I would like to think that a better story, with more heart and suspense, could have been told. Perhaps, though, there was just nothing creatively left from a franchise chugging along on one week of the year's profits...the week leading up to October 31.

MaximumMadness Ah, the mid-to-late 1990's... sort-of a rebirth of horror in a way. After all, the period from 1990 to about 1995 was wholly and decidedly a relatively murky period for the genre, with quality releases being very few and far between. Audiences were tiring of the holdover 80's slasher flicks and ho-hum ghost stories, with really only a handful of stand-out creep-shows to keep horror fans satiated. With so few quality-choices (notably the mini-series "It" from the book by Stephen King and the wonderful thriller "Candyman" from the stories of Clive Barker), it was no wonder that the early 90's were considered a "dead" period.Then, "Scream" happened and changed everything. It proved that not only could horror be widely appealing at the hands of gifted writers and quality filmmakers, but also showed that the old tropes and clichés could be "hip" and "cool" again when handled with care and a degree of nostalgic love.So, it should come as no shock that after the colossal misfire that was the previous film ("The Curse of Michael Myers"), the "Halloween" series got a new lease on life with a post-"Scream" sensibility in this 1998 release- "Halloween H20: Twenty Years Later." A minor degree of self-awareness, a focus on modern teenage and young adult culture and a fun blast from the past by way of original star Jamie Lee Curtis made the series relevant and modern in a way that both worked to re-invigorate interest and also pay homage to the series origins.The film was lovingly crafted to serve as a book-end to the original, cleverly taking advantage of being released on the twentieth anniversary of the John Carpenter classic as part of it's schtick. It was built up as the "Halloween" to end all "Halloween's"... A "Halloween" for the modern era. A "Halloween" for the sharp and post-modern 90's crowd. And a "Halloween" that honored the long- beloved roots of the series.Directed by Steve Miner, the film revolves around Jamie Lee Curtis' Laurie Strode, now living as a teacher under a false name. Still haunted by nightmares of her murderous sibling Michael Myers, Laurie is trying her hardest to move on. But when her brother comes calling, the stakes are set for a final and apocalyptic battle from which only one can emerge alive.The success of the film really falls onto its clear adoration of the original and the desire to "evolve" and "complete" the story that it started in a new and fresh way. You can feel the love for that film oozing in virtually every scene here, with many subtle homages and call-backs. Yet it also builds and evolves the franchise in a way that previous films hadn't. Whereas prior sequels truly did feel like they were simply trying to re-create the magic of the original to increasingly diminishing results, "H20" actually has the guts to say "No, the best way to pay tribute to the origin of the series is to make homage and continue the story, but allow it to change with the times." A huge part of that is the result of that late-90's self-aware mindset popularized by other films, and I think it works wonders. There are numerous levels of subversion that make you second-guess where it's all leading, there's plenty of banter and humor that satisfies the audience, and it also makes the wise move to make all the characters likable... nobody here really has their own agenda as so many other slasher-sequels have done with their characters.Miner's direction is strong, with a keen sense of scope, atmosphere and composition. He finds just the right balance between old- fashioned cinematography and 90's era aesthetics, giving the film a unique tone and visual palate that both compliments and contrasts with the Carpenter original.Performances are uniformly strong for the material. Curtis is a joy in her returning role, giving Laurie a grand sense of pathos but also a drive to finally face her fears. Supporting roles by the likes of Josh Hartnett, Adam Arkin and even rapper LL Cool J round out a likable and believable cast. And there's no sore thumbs to be found. Also of note is voice-over artist Tom Kane, who perfectly re- creates the brilliant dialog of the late Donald Pleasance in a wonderful opening sequence. (Also, keep your eyes peeled for future superstar Joseph Gordon- Levitt in a small role in the opening sequence!)Should I have to address any negatives, I would definitely have to dock some slight points for a frankly shaky first act, which does fall back on the old tropes and clichés a bit too much. It just feels contrary to the much stronger second and third acts of the film, and it doesn't do much to subvert expectations or built on the legacy of the series. I also take some slight issue with the film's at times break-neck pace... it's already a fairly short film, and it rushes a bit too much for everything to really set in.Still, those flaws being stated, I can't help but feel that for my money, this is the best of the "Halloween" sequels. It built off of what came before, served as a loving tribute and also book-ended the series with what was at the time built up to be the final entry in the series. To me, the "Halloween" franchise is a trilogy- Carpenter's "Halloween", it's first sequel "Halloween II" and this film, "H20." Everything else to me is pure fan-fiction.I give "Halloween H20: Twenty Years Later" a strong 8 out of 10 as a horror fan and in particular as a fan of the franchise. Definitely worth seeing. (It's follow-up "Resurrection"... not so much.)