Halloween 5: The Revenge of Michael Myers (1989)

In my review for Halloween 4: The Return of Michael Myers I described my overall attitude towards it as a love/hate relationship.  I really liked the relationship between Rachel and Jamie, and I enjoyed Donald Pleasence’s over the top performance as the half crazed Dr. Loomis. Unfortunately, it is the horror aspect of the movie that fell completely flat for me.  When it comes to Halloween 5: The Revenge of Michael Myers, I am not nearly as conflicted – I don’t care for it.  I wouldn’t go so far to say I hate Halloween 5, and it is by no means the worst movie in the franchise, but it is quite possibly the most difficult to watch.  

The most curious part of Halloween 5 is how it shrugs off the ending to the previous movie – Michael Myers has been defeated but the evil has been passed on from him to his niece, Jamie.  When Jamie gets home, she (donned in a similar clown costume and mask that Michael wore in the first movie) apparently kills her foster mother with a pair of scissors.  She appears at the top of the stairs with the bloodied scissors and Dr. Loomis, realizing she has been consumed by evil, is about to fire upon her with his gun, but it is stopped the sheriff.  I personally didn’t care for this ending, but it is an almost perfect set up for Halloween 5.  Sure, Michael Myers may have been stopped but the evil lives on.  This would have been an ideal opportunity to take the Halloween franchise in a completely new direction, while also further developing the character of Rachel. How would she react to her foster sister being turned to the dark side? Would she try to reach out to Jamie? Could she bring herself to kill her foster sister? 

Instead, director Dominique Othenin - Girard went for the safe approach and brought Michael Myers back, yet again. AAAHHHH!!!After the events of Halloween 4, Michael has been in a coma for a year (while given shelter by a homeless guy) and Jamie has been institutionalized in a children’s hospital (while being watched over by Dr. Loomis).  It has been retconned so that Jamie merely injured her foster mother rather than murdered her.  It also turns out that Jamie is psychically linked to Michael and can sense when he is about to kill her loved ones.  Unfortunately, her previous experience with Michael was so traumatic that it rendered her mute. She can only communicate through gestures and hand written notes.  Honestly, I’m really not bothered by this plot device because it does create some genuine tension.  There are a few scenes where Jamie senses her friends are in danger and Dr. Loomis, and company, have to prod the information out of her to prevent a senseless killing.  Again, these scenes are fairly tense and give the movie a sense of urgency; it is really everything else that I have a problem with. 

The biggest bone headed decision was killing off the character of Rachel. I get that killing off Rachel is supposed to signal to the audience that “no one is safe in this movie,” but the problem is that “killing off the survivors of the previous movie” had become fairly clichéd by 1989. In fact, the previous year’s Nightmare on Elm Street 4: The Dream Master did the exact thing.  It would have been more shocking had the kept the character alive.  It is also a bit disheartening to see the likable Rachel killed off in a similar manner that was reserved for all the interchangeable sex kittens in the Friday the 13^th series.  

The appeal of Rachel is that she looked and behaved like your average Midwest teenager.  She was the type of girl who, while pretty, was often overlooked by her male peers.  There is a scene in the town drug store where a group of guys are gawking at Kelly, the town hottie, and don’t even bat an eye when Rachel enters.  When Rachel discovers her boyfriend, Brady, has been cheating on her with Kelly, it stings for two reasons: the fact he is cheating on her and the fact that it is with Kelly, the girl who is constantly getting the better of Rachel. When Brady tries to explain his position, Rachel sarcastically snaps back, “I thought you were different from other guys.”  There is a sense that Brady wasn’t first guy that Rachel lost to Kelly.  Yet, in Halloween 5 there is an odd decision by the filmmakers to sex up the character of Rachel; she spends most of her brief screen time either wet in a towel or half dressed.  After she has come home from visiting Jamie, Rachel opts to take a shower.  There is a long shot where her figure is slightly obscured by the translucent shower curtain.  Jamie senses Rachel is in danger and Dr. Loomis calls her on the telephone. Rachel, wet and in a towel, answers the phone and, on the advice of Dr. Loomis, runs out the house and calls out to her neighbor to call the police. 

After the danger is over, Rachel goes back into the house and lounges around in a half dressed manner (director Othenin- Girard shoots this scene at an extremely low angle thus allowing the audience a good look at Rachel’s underwear).  Granted, this stuff is fairly tame compared to the gratuitous nudity in other slasher movies. It’s just depressing to see this character be given this kind of treatment.  In Halloween 4, a half dressed Kelly is murdered by Michael Myers (impaled with a shotgun), and in Halloween 5, a half dressed Rachel is stabbed to death by Michael Myers. Way to go, Dominique! 

With Rachel out of the way, it is the character of Tina who assumes the role of big sister to Jamie.  There a few flaws with this idea, the first being that Tina isn’t nearly as interesting as Rachel.  She is your fairly stereotypical party girl who pops up in just about every slasher movie imaginable.  While I’m sure Tina genuinely likes Jamie, they idea that the two of them formed a sisterly bond seems far fetched. Tina just wants to go out and have a good time (get drunk, get laid), she doesn’t want to bind herself to an 11 year-old with serious issues.  It actually infuriates me that the first word to come out of Jamie’s mouth, after a year of silence, is “Tina.”  This is meant to be an emotional scene: Tina cries tears of joy and asks Jamie to say it again.  Unfortunately, this entire scene rings hollow and would have worked much better with Rachel in Tina’s place. Danielle Harris does her best to sell this moment (and nearly succeeds) but is defeated by the material. A history between Rachel and Jamie has already been established, and it would have been for more believable for Jamie to call out Rachel’s name.  Again, there is no reason to assume, other than because it’s in the script, that Tina would have formed a sisterly bond with Jamie. In fact, prior to this “heart warming” moment, the two of them only shared one brief scene together, in Jamie’s hospital room, at the beginning. The only reason Tina shows up in the first place is because Rachel is there, visiting Jamie. It is also more in line for Rachel to sacrifice herself to save Jamie than it is Tina. 

 I can appreciate  Othenin-Girard’s attempt to flesh out the character of Tina instead of making her a routine sex kitten (if this were a Friday the 13^th movie, Tina would be introduced at the beginning and then killed off a few scene later), but it falls flat. If Rachel wasn’t such a strong presence, the bait and switch might have worked. However, her presence (or lack thereof) completely haunts the movie. Every time there is a scene between Jamie and Tina, I find myself thinking, “This would have worked better with Rachel.”  Sorry, Tina! The brief interaction with Jamie and Rachel reiterates this point; the interplay between Ellie Cornell and Danielle Harris is fantastic (even though there is no little dialogue involved).  You can sense the genuine affection between these two actresses.  Jamie wakes up in her hospital bed and finds Rachel sleeping at her side.  Rachel wakes up and Jamie notices there is eyeliner running down Rachel’s cheeks (indicating she’s been crying). Jamie points it out, Rachel wipes off the eyeliner, and the two of them laugh it off.  It is a GENUINELY touching scene.  

The other piece of awkward direction is the introduction of two bumbling deputies, Ross and Farrah.  It’s really hard to describe just how jarring these two characters are; whenever they appear onscreen they are accompanied by zany sound effects (straight out of a Looney Tunes cartoon).   These wacky deputies would completely be at home in a Police Academy movie but are total distraction in a dour horror movie. My personal theory is that that these two actors meant to audition for Police Academy 6: City Under Siege but took a wrong turn and ended up auditioning for Halloween 5 by mistake. Then Dominique Othenin-Girard mistook their broad slapstick for postmodern art and enthusiastically gave them the roles. “This is a brilliant deconstruction of the stereotypical movie policemen.  You guys are geniuses. You’re hired!” 

It is implied….actually that is too subtle of word….it is blatantly presented that Dr. Loomis is as much of a threat to Jamie as Michael Myers is.  Dr. Loomis is so obsessed with finding and destroying Michael Myers that to him no cost is too great, even Jamie’s life.  In the previous movies Dr. Loomis was a bit nutty, but he also genuinely wanted to save lives.  He contacted the Haddonfield police department after Myers’ escape and co-operated with them to the best of his ability.  At the end of Halloween 5, Loomis sets up a trap for Michael Myers (in Michael’s childhood home) and he uses Jamie as bait to lure the killer in.  The house is swarming with police and then Jamie (on Loomis’ instructions I assume) sends the officers on a wild goose chase by claiming that Michael is stalking her friend Billy at the children’s hospital. This leaves Dr. Loomis and a couple of deputies to protect Jamie.  When the deputy that is guarding Jamie suggests they take her to the police station, Loomis holds him at gun point and tells him that they’re not going anywhere. Sure enough, with the police force on the other side of town, Michael makes his move.  Because of Loomis, the deputy is killed and Jamie barely makes it out alive. This is Donald Pleasence at his hammiest; he completely chews the scenery every time he is onscreen.  Though, I actually think it’s fairly consistent with the character of Dr. Loomis; he has spent nearly a decade trying to destroy Michael Myers and he is finally at the point where anything goes. If he can successfully capture Michael Myers, then the end justifies the means.  

There is a rather neat scene where Dr. Loomis tries to reason with Michael; the two of them stand side by side and, in a calm voice, Loomis tries to reach that child within. He knows that is probably futile, but he’ll give a go, any ways.  Again, at this point Loomis is willing to try anything.  There is also a sense that Dr. Loomis is reaching Michael and when it looks like he is about to give up his blade, the evil takes control and Michael severely injures Loomis.  There are interesting moments in Halloween 5, but they are far and few between.  

My biggest issue with Halloween 5, other than the sense of déjà vu,  is sheer sadism that hangs in the air. I know this is an odd criticism to levy against a horror movie. After all, the whole point of the horror movie is to explore mankind’s darker side.  Halloween 5 is by no means the most violent, or even gruesome, horror movie that I watched but I still find it difficult to watch.  It is just difficult for me to watch a sweet little girl go through so much suffering without even a ray of hope insight.  I know the argument will be, “Well, in the real world….”  Yes, there is a lot of suffering in the real world but movies are supposed to be an escape from the real world (even horror movies).  In the course of 98 minutes, we can only watch as Jamie:  witnesses a friend get knifed to death; gets chased by a car across a corn field; crawls her way out of a laundry chute as a madman stabs at her with a knife; gets manhandled by Dr.  Loomis, who uses her as bait to capture Michael Myers; stumbles upon the corpse of her caring foster sister; and breaks down in tears when she realizes that Michael Myers has been sprung from jail by a mysterious man in black. It is a complete downer of a movie.  It is not just me that feels way; Halloween 4 was lowest grossing movie in the entire franchise.  Though, it is leagues above Halloween: Curse of Michael Myers and the abhorrent Halloween:Resurrection. 

 It is fairly interesting listen to Danielle Harris’ commentary on both Halloween 4 and Halloween 5; her memories of the former movie seem to be fairly cheerful, while she has far less positive things to say about the latter. She praises her co-stars, especially Michael Myers portrayer, Don Shanks, but she isn't too keen on director Dominique Othenin – Girard.   Ellie Cornell, in her interviews and commentary, seems even less thrilled about Halloween 5 than Harris, and I don’t blame her.

Credits 

Cast: Donald Pleasence (Dr. Loomis), Danielle Harris (Jamie), Ellie Cornell (Rachel), Wendy Kaplan/Foxworth(Tina), Don Shanks (Michael Myers/Man in Black), Beau Starr (Sheriff Ben Meeker), Jeffery Landman (Billy), Tamara Glynn (Samantha), Matthew Walker (Spitz), Jonathan Chapin (Mikey), Troy Evans (Deputy Charlie), Betty Carvalho (Nurse Patsey), Frankie Como (Deputy Nick Ross), David Ursin (Deputy Tom Farrah).

Director: Dominique Othenin-Girard
Screenplay:  Michael Jacobs, Dominique Othenin – Girard, Shem Bitterman.
Running Time:  98 min.

The Monster Squad (1987)

It is common to compare Fred Dekker’s The Monster Squad to The Goonies; and with good reason, both of them feature a group of misfit preteens battling evil to save their town. The parallels between the two are certainly there: Phoebe befriending the Frankenstein Monster is reminiscent of Chunk befriending  the deformed Sloth; Mary Ellen Trainor plays the protagonist’s mother in both movies; and the chubby Horace is a dead ringer for Chunk (they sport similar tacky Hawaiian shirts).  However, the stakes are a lot higher in The Monster Squad;   Goonies are merely trying to save their homes, while the fate of the entire world rests in the hands of the Monster Squad. The Goonies is a self contained adventure, while The Monster Squad is much more epic in scope (despite being made on a smaller budget).   If The Goonies is the superior movie out of the two, that’s because its protagonist’s goals are more relatable – we all, inevitably, have to face the reality of moving and being separated from our friends.  The plot to The Monster Squad is bit convoluted. In fact, rather than sort it out myself, I’ll just copy and paste the Wikipedia synopsis:

The Monster Squad is a club of pre-teenagers who idolize classic monster-movies and their non-human stars. They hold meetings at a tree-clubhouse in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Club leader Sean (Andre Gower), whose younger sister, Phoebe (Ashley Bank), desperately wants to join the club, is given the diary of legendary monster hunter Dr. Abraham Van Helsing (Jack Gwillim), but his excitement abates when he finds it is written in German. Sean, his best friend Patrick (Robby Kiger), and the rest of the Monster Squad visit an elderly man, known as the "Scary German Guy" (Leonardo Cimino), actually a kind gentleman and a former concentration camp prisoner, to translate the diary.
The diary describes, in great detail, an amulet that is composed of concentrated good. One day out of every century, as the forces of good and evil reach a balance, the otherwise indestructible amulet becomes vulnerable to destruction. With the next day of balance happening within a few days, at the stroke of midnight, the kids realize they must gain possession of the amulet and use it — with an incantation from Van Helsing's diary — to open a hole in the universe and cast the monsters into Limbo. As shown in the film's prelude, Van Helsing had unsuccessfully attempted this one hundred years ago in order to defeat his old adversary Count Dracula (Duncan Regehr); his apprentices then emigrated to the United States to hide the amulet, where it was out of Dracula's immediate reach. 

Essentially, the kids must stop Dracula from destroying the amulet, or else darkness will reign supreme. It also turns that only a female virgin can read the incantation that opens the portal.
Though, I never really understood why Dracula needed help from the other Monsters to fulfill his plan. I guess The Wolf Man is a fairly capable henchmen (at least he is given a few fun scenes), but The Mummy and The Gill Man are fairly useless in the overall scheme, while his attempt to control the Frankenstein Monster magnificently backfires. OOPS!    

While the similarities with The Goonies (and Stephen King’s It) are striking, The Monster Squad is actually more indebted to Abbott & Costello Meet Frankenstein, and all the other Universal monster brawls of the 40s. It even sports a similar plot to Abbott & Costello Meet Frankenstein – Count Dracula wants to take over the world with help from the Frankenstein monster, but his plans are thwarted by unlikely heroes; in Abbott & Costello, it is two bumbling baggage clerks, while in The Monster Squad, it is group of middle school boys.   It is also important to note that both movies take their main villain seriously; there is no scene of Dracula slipping on a banana peel, or getting his pants pulled down.  Though, both of them feature a bit of physical comedy with the Wolf Man; in Abbott & Costello, Wilbur punches the Wolf Man in the face, believing it’s his friend playing a prank on him, and in The Monster Squad, Horace kicks the Wolf Man in the “nards” and then runs away.  The Mummy is also played off as being something of a joke, which probably was a good move on Fred Dekker’s part.  The Mummy, at least the version that appeared in 1940s Universal Series, was always something of a goofy monster. In the old series, he would limp across the countryside and then clutch at people with his one good hand. If his would be victims just walked away at a normal pace they could easily outdistance themselves from him. It’s not surprising that the Mummy is more of a comedic foil for our heroes rather than a menacing monster.  Bela Lugosi’s portrayal of the famous count is iconic, but Duncan Regehr is equally good and far more menacing.  In Abbott & Costello Meet Frankenstein, the Frankenstein Monster was merely a walking prop that terrorized the boys, and played rather woodenly by Glenn Strange.  In The Monster Squad, Tom Noonan gives a nice sympathetic turn as the Monster (recalling Boris Karloff’s performance in the first two Frankenstein movies) and even brings an air of tragedy to the character.  There’s a childlike innocence to the Monster and so it isn’t too surprising that he forms a bond with the five year-old Phoebe.  

The kids themselves are likable enough even if their performances are a bit uneven. Ryan Lambert comes off best as the “cool” kid, Rudy.  Andre Gower brings enough gravity to the role of Sean, the leader of the Monster Squad, that it’s easy to root for him. He, arguably, has the hardest task of doling out exposition to the audience and does an admirable job.  Brent Chalem is pretty funny as the overweight Horace (He genuinely looks scared in the scenes with the monsters).  Robby Kiger is kind of the odd man out, not because he’s bad, but his character of Patrick is given very little to do. He is, essentially, Sean’s right hand man, but the only significant thing he does in the entire movie is print out “MONSTER SQUAD” business cards.  The youngest of the boys is Eugene (Michael Faustino), who naturally approaches this monster business in more naïve fashion – he writes a letter, in crayon, to the army asking for help. He also can’t go anywhere without his pet puppy.   And then there’s Ashley Banks as Sean’s little sister, Phoebe, whom is merely required to look and behave in a “cute” fashion. It’s a credit to Fred Dekker’s direction that she pulls this off effortless without every getting on the audience’s nerves.  What really sells movie is that the children behave like actual children; not the Hollywood facsimile that dominates many movies.  The most important thing is that the kids have fairly good chemistry and are completely believable as friends. 

The Monster Squad is very much a product of its time. It is a reminder of what filmmakers were allowed to get away with in the 1980s (versus the political correctness that dominates the industry today).  How many modern movies would make the “cool” kid a Peeping Tom?  While the Monster Squad is devising a plan to stop Dracula, Rudy is spying on, and taking pictures of, Patrick’s older sister.  Their tree house gives him a great vantage point for his peeping; he can see her standing in her bedroom window.  There’s also a running gag over whether or not Patrick’s sister is a virgin. YIKES!!! 

Even though The Monster Squad is targeted towards children, it is a fairy violent movie: Horace blows away the Gill Man with a shotgun; Rudy stakes Dracula’s Brides through the heart; the Wolf Man gets blown up by dynamite (and puts himself back together again, because only silver bullets can kill a werewolf); Detective Sapir gets blown up in a squad car; and Dracula gets impaled on a wrought iron fence.  This isn’t a criticism because the violence actually ups the stakes (no pun intended) in this movie.  In fact, if anything The Monster Squad is reminder as to how toothless many modern day blockbusters have become – Super Hero movies are fun but there’s never a genuine sense of danger. In The Monster Squad, there’s a scene where a pissed off Dracula grabs a stick of dynamite, throws it into the boy’s tree house, and watches gleefully as their hang out Is blown to bits.  He is not content with just scaring the kids, he genuinely wants to kill them.  Duncan Regehr’s Dracula is absolutely ruthless and will gladly destroy anyone that gets in his ways; even if that someone is a five year-old girl.  

Fred Dekker’s direction is pretty uneven (he simply cannot resist throwing in a cheesy montage), but it’s also fairly imaginative.  In a single shot he tells us everything we need to know about Scary German Guy’s background story.  The kids befriend an old man, whom they dubbed as Scary German Guy because of his creepy house and mysterious background, and they have a discussion about monsters. As the kids are leaving his house, they comment that he sure knows a lot about monster and he tells them they come in all different shapes. The camera then zooms into number tattooed onto Scary German Guy’s forearm – informing the audience that he is a survivor of the Holocaust.  This is a nice, subtle way of giving us Scary German Guy’s back story; the movie doesn’t fade into a long winded flashback, it allows for the image to speak for itself.  If you notice this detail, then it allows you to fill in the blanks about Scary German Guy. If you miss the tattoo, it doesn’t impact that narrative in the least bit.  It’s brief moment that doesn’t halt the pacing of the movie.  There is also a nice tracking shot that shows us firsthand how powerful Dracula; he is slowly walking towards Phoebe (who is in possession of the amulet) and effortlessly brushes aside the police officers that are trying to stop him. They are insignificant pests to him and he barely acknowledges their existence.

The movie’s brief running time (82 minutes) is also a huge asset.  The Monster Squad moves at a rapid pace and this because isn’t bogged down in unnecessary subplots.  We get an exciting opening sequence, followed by the introduction of our main characters, a few scenes of exposition, and then it’s off to the races.  I’d rather have a movie be too short than be too long.  If you leave a movie wanting more, then the filmmakers have done their job.   

The Monster Squad was a huge bomb when it was released on August 14, 1987 (it grossed 3.8 million against a 12 million budget).  It is really hard to explain why a movie (especially a fairly good movie) bombs, but I think there were two factors that worked significantly against The Monster Squad.

1. Who is this movie’s target audience? The Monster Squad is too violent (and a bit too raunchy) for
truly small kids. The movie was slapped with a PG-13 rating and I’m sure that might have turned off a few parents.   On the other hand, preteens probably looked at the title and scoffed, “This is for little children.” 

2. The horror market (especially the horror-comedy market) had started to wear thin by 1987. In the 1980s, the market had become so oversaturated with horror movies that by 1987 people were starting to move. There were exceptions to the rule (A Nightmare on Elm Street 3: The Dream Warriors proved to be a hit for New Line Cinemas) but the box office returns were starting to diminish. In 1984 we were treated to such classic horror comedies like Ghostbusters and Gremlins, by 1987 the studios were pumping out dreck like Teen Wolf, Too and House II: The Second Story.  Unfortunately, The Monster Squad got lumped with this garbage.  However, I tend to believe that if a movie is genuinely good it will inevitably find an audience.  This, happily, turned out to be the case for The Monster Squad.

Credits

Cast: Andre Gower (Sean), Robby Kiger (Patrick), Duncan Regehr (Count Dracula), Tom Noonan (Frankenstein’s Monster), Ryan Lambert (Rudy), Brent Chalem (Horace), Stephen Macht (Del), Ashley Bank (Phoebe), Michael Faustino (Eugene), Leonardo Cimino (Scary German Guy), Mary Ellen Trainor (Emily), Jonathan Gries (Desperate Man), Lisa Fuller (Patrick’s sister), Stan Shaw (Detective Sapir), Jack Gwillim (Van Helsing), Jason Hervey (E.J.), Adam Carl (Derek), Sonia Curtis (Peasant Girl), Carl Thibault (Wolfman), Tom Woodruff, Jr. (Gillman), Michael Reid MacKay (Mummy),  David Proval (Pilot), Daryl Anderson (Co-pilot), Robert Lesser (Eugene’s Dad).

Director: Fred Dekker
Screenplay: Shane Black, Fred Dekker.
Running Time: 82 min.