Stallone and Schwarzenegger finally teaming up in a big action movie should be a major event, and Escape Plan seemed like it had that potential from the trailer and the general premise. In the right hands, this could have been forged into a highly entertaining and exciting film. Unfortunately, at no fault of Stallone or Schwarzenegger, Escape Plan falters in a lot of ways stemming from the fact that it’s backed by a director, screenwriters, editor, and cinematographer that really have nothing of good, special note to their credits, and that really shows.
Ray Breslin (Sulvester Stallone) is the world’s foremost authority on structural security. After analyzing every high security prison and learning a vast array of survival skills so he can design escape-proof prisons, his skills are put to the test. A new, shady job to test out a CIA prison facility goes awry when he is abducted and incarcerated in a master prison designed based on his analytical work. Once inside, he finds an ally in fellow inmate Rottmayer (Arnold Schwarzenegger) who agrees to help him find a way out. Now, Breslin needs to escape and find the person who put him behind bars.
This is not a bad movie, but it has a number of obvious flaws that prevent it from really capitalizing on its assets. Escape Plan’s problems really begin with the screenplay. I don’t think this movie is very well written, let alone well executed. Firstly, the film becomes so pre-occupied over and over again with showcasing Ray Breslin’s long-winded analyses and exposition of his elaborate escape plan scenarios that it sucks up valuable, extensive screentime for it. Screentime that could have been used to actually establish and develop some characters and personalities in this movie. A good screenwriter could have deconstructed these moments far better and streamlined them for a much snappier, more succinct narrative. Instead, screenwriters Miles Chapman and Jason Keller decide to overcomplicate matters to the detriment of the film. For a while it seemed like Schwarzenegger’s character was merely there to give Stallone someone to dump exposition upon because it was so bluntly handled, and it doesn’t progress too far beyond that. Anyone who has read my reviews before knows how in-depth I go into performances and characters, but there is really next to nothing to comment on about these performances. It’s not a fault of the actors, but the material they are given.
I own a good thirty movies starring Stallone and/or Schwarzenegger with Rocky III and Predator being my respective favorites of theirs. I’ve seen them in great movies and bad movies, but they’ve always delivered on their exceptional charismatic screen presences. Here, there’s just extremely little material for them to inject any charisma into because it is so entrenched in exposition. There are one or two sparks of fun chemistry between them, but it’s very fleeting when that’s exactly what should have been here in abundance. What depth of character we get is merely a few lines of dialogue talking about a single aspect of their back stories, which is just more exposition and doesn’t give us much of a personality to grasp onto. There’s more gained from Breslin than Rottmayer, but it’s very marginal. The fact of the matter is that the script is very flat and unimaginative. If Stallone and Schwarzenegger were not cast in this movie, I don’t think I’d care to maintain any attention on Breslin or Rottmayer at all because the screenwriters do nothing to actually create any characters to care about.
However, even if the characters aren’t all that interesting or dimensional like Marion Cobretti or John Matrix, if the film they are placed into is exciting and entertaining enough with clever, sharp dialogue, it can still work and bring out the better qualities of the actor. Unfortunately, while Escape Plan maintains a solid pacing that doesn’t make it feel like a nearly two hour long movie, the action is very minimal. There are some prison riots, a few beat downs, and an attempted prison break or two, but in terms of straight up action like shootouts and fights with the villains, there’s very little until the climax. The film was a decent, easy watch, but never did anything ever come out and blow me away. There are even points in time where it seemed like it was edging towards something purely awesome, but then, it comes up quite short. So many things factor into that including some poorly structured and executed sequences.
To that point, the editing in many cases is very incoherent. The prime examples are that there are montages of sorts showing Breslin getting tortured, or simply showing his plans going into motion. These sequences are so sloppily edited that I couldn’t understand the narrative or linear flow through them at all. They’re a real mess of chronology that was quite confusing. Tying into that is the flat, bland direction that really never gives life to the proceedings of the plot. Intercutting between The Tomb and Breslin’s team throughout the second act just felt clunky and uneven. There’s little coherency or urgency put into what Breslin’s team is doing to give a crap about them. They ultimately don’t do crap until the last three minutes of the movie, anyway. And those characters are poorly conceived and flatly written to be either very obvious or simply not worth devoting your attention or interest in. Again, the actors aren’t bad, they just have crap to work with. Scenes are just strung together very haphazardly giving you a lack of context, narrative flow, or natural segues. While I’m certain that a better editor couldn’t have radically improved this movie, it at least would have made it far more coherent and smoother.
Now, the only real shining quality of this movie, which is also the one person who seems to be having a delightfully fun time, is Jim Caviezel. His villain of Warden Hobbs is very charismatic, smarmy, and particularly sadistic, but Caviezel avoids going over the top. He keeps it low key and fairly subtle while still delivering an especially enjoyable adversary. He definitely was putting his full commitment into this role, and he embraces it with plenty of imagination and zeal. I love the little nuances he adds to Hobbs such as being very meticulous in his appearance and manner. Caviezel is an actor I really like I lot from The Count of Monté Cristo to Outlander to Person of Interest, and seeing him as a villain here is wonderfully entertaining. He made the movie particularly enjoyable, and Vinnie Jones does quite a charismatic job as Hobbs’ right hand man Drake. There’s also an unexpected appearance by Sam Neill as the prison doctor. He also does a fine job with what little he is given to do. It’s clearly another case of having an actor I really like making the role any bit enjoyable or interesting for me.
Escape Plan attempts to have some semblances of plot twists or turns, but some are so obviously telegraphed or simply amount to nothing that you wonder what the point was. I believe to have a good movie you really have to start with a good script, and this movie didn’t have one. Even then, this film needed a far better, more talented director to maximize its potential. If you handed this project over to a highly experienced action director like Renny Harlin, John McTiernan, Walter Hill, or, if he were still alive, George P. Cosmatos, I think this could have had some potential for success. They would have molded and refined the story and given it the competency and life it needed. They also would have tailored the script to the strengths of it leads so that charisma and personality could have lived and thrived on screen. Alas, we are left with the movie we have, which is probably good for a rental, but not much better. There’s no need to see Escape Plan on the big screen, unfortunately.
So, over twenty years later Rick Rosenthal would return to the Halloween franchise for this entry. I honestly have never liked Halloween: H20 for a multitude of reasons, and I don’t wish to sit through it again to review it. Thus, I was so immensely glad that this film promptly retconned the ending of that movie, and allowed for Michael Myers to live again and not die like a punk. I know there are those who disagree with that feeling, but so be it. While I do find this sequel enjoyable to a degree, it does have valid issues to critique about it.
For the first broadcast of the new reality website Dangertainment, a group of college students are hired to explore the ruins of the house of infamous murderer Michael Myers. Six cash-strapped friends decide to explore the home, but what they don’t know is that Michael is on his way home back to Haddonfield after a fateful confrontation with his sister Laurie Strode (Jamie Lee Curtis). Now, being broadcast across the internet, these unsuspecting victims will fall prey to Myers’ methodical blade.
If this movie was made ten years later, it probably would have been a found footage horror movie. Very little would have to change to accommodate that approach, but thankfully, that’s not the case here. I can understand why this story idea was used. This is the eighth movie in this franchise, including Season of the Witch, and a studio is going to feel like they need a fresh gimmick to drive in audiences. Paramount felt the same thing when they made Jason Takes Manhattan. The problem is that these ideas are usually not all that favorable with audiences. I love slasher movies, but I do like someone doing something fresh with the formula every so often. Frankly, I think Halloween: Resurrection executes this idea as well as it can be. In fact, it has some strangely honest commentary on reality television. Dangertainment mocks up the entire Myers house with false clues about Michael’s upbringing because they know actual reality is boring. No one would watch a bunch of people wandering through an empty house. The head of the company, Freddie Harris, has to dress it up and create an illusion and sell it as reality so to make it entertaining. I like that the Freddie character does come around to denouncing that illusion and the using of Michael Myers as a sound bite to drive viewership up. It shows an effort on the part of the filmmakers to make something of the premise, which is indeed dated. Halloween: Resurrection might be far from the pinnacle of this franchise, but it’s far more consistent than the rushed mess of The Revenge of Michael Myers.
If you watched the trailer for this you might believe that Jamie Lee Curtis had a larger role in it than she really does. Her story is confined to the opening sequence at a psychiatric hospital where she has her final confrontation with Michael. A quick summation at the film’s start states that Michael Myers had switched outfits with a paramedic before the last film’s climax, and it was that poor soul with a crushed larynx that Laurie decapitated. What ensues in this opening sequence with Laurie and Michael puts the storyline to rest. I’m sure there are fans who did not like this at all, possibly as much as I hated the ending of H20, but taken on its own merits, it is a well done sequence that is to the point. Laurie doesn’t go out in a blaze of glory, but really, you shouldn’t set your expectations that high for this movie. It’s just not that ambitious.
I do really like the look of this sequel. It makes great use of atmospheric lighting. It has the polish of a major studio feature, but Rosenthal and his cinematographer just know how give it that shadowy, moody quality. True to the John Carpenter roots, there’s some very solid use of blues and fine steadicam work. The video camera footage of the internet broadcast is about what you’d expect in the pre-high definition digital era. We get more and more of it as the film progresses, and you could take it or leave it depending on your disposition towards it. It has some effectiveness in certain sparse moments for us to see things from the characters’ point of views, which is evocative of the found footage genre like The Blair Witch Project had already shown, but there’s nothing special to witness here in that regard.
The biggest highlight of this movie is that I absolutely LOVE the score by Danny Lux. I honestly believe it is the best score of the sequels. Lux adds a heavier punctuation to the familiar themes, and overall, he crafts a more haunting, partially gothic aura to the film. It’s a score that really soars far above the quality of the film it is attached to. Regardless of what you think of this movie, you should definitely give this score a standalone listen. It is immensely effective. Danny Lux does an amazing job with it.
Now, I don’t think this is a bad cast. For the most part, they do come off as fairly standard slasher film fodder, but this cast does seem like they are putting forth an honest effort. Each one tries to make their character enthusiastic, charismatic, and somewhat entertaining. There’s no real standout, but everyone essentially delivers a performance of a consistent, equal level. I wouldn’t say this new cast features anything approaching greatness, but it’s good for the expectations you would likely have.
Bianca Kajlich does well in making Sara a relatable and sympathetic lead. There’s very little to the character, same with everyone, but there’s enough of a decent, vulnerable person in her performance for it to work. She has this internet based relationship with the high school freshman Myles. Through that, they’ve built a foundation of trust and friendship, and it plays fairly well into the movie near the climax. Ryan Merriman is endearing as Myles. He’s definitely the audience’s conduit into having sympathy for the victims. He and his friends are at a Halloween party watching the online stream of the Myers house expedition, and witness the horror as it progresses with little to be able to do about it. Despite Myles and Sara being strictly internet pals, Merriman does a fine job creating an emotional connection between both characters. It’s almost a shame that the film never allows them to actually see each other face-to-face.
The role of Freddie Harris is indeed filled by Busta Rhymes. Clearly, he didn’t need to be in this movie, but I will give him credit that he doesn’t slack off. He portrays a role that’s within his ability as a charismatic salesman, but also does a fine job with the more fearful, regretful moments later in the film. We surely could have done without the Kung Fu fight against Michael, but at least the filmmakers did enough to set it up earlier on. In the fiery climax, he’s certainly played up for the sake of his fans, and it does feel rather out of place. You might as well have Arnold Schwarzenegger charge in there for as much as its played like an action hero moment. It would be essentially the same effect.
The role of The Shape is filled by Brad Loree who I feel does a decent job. It’s definitely Dick Warlock inspired, but not quite so rigid. His performance is simply okay. It doesn’t standout, the same as the rest of the cast, but it works fine for the demands of this film. Also, while he is listed as 6’2”, I think the baggy coveralls make him appear smaller in stature than he likely really is. The mask for his Michael Myers could have done with a little less airbrushing detail, but really, no sequel has really gotten the mask to look right compared to the original film. I’m not sure why that’s been so difficult.
The most important question, though, is if this film is scary. Well, it has the potential to be depending on how weathered of a horror fan you are. Rick Rosenthal really does a lot to set a strong visual atmosphere conducive to scaring an audience. There are plenty of spooky moments of Michael Myers lurking in the shadows, only seen in glimpses. It certainly has moments that could scare certain people, but generally speaking, it’s not going to do much for the seasoned horror fan. Especially ten years on, with the far more intense films we’ve gotten in this genre, regardless of your preference, Halloween: Resurrection is fairly tame. Even John Carpenter’s original is not really an effective horror film anymore to me, but I respect it immensely on every artistic level. It is, after all, the movie review of mine that launched Forever Cinematic in the first place.
The Halloween franchise is kind of a mess. There are a lot of subjective ups and downs depending on what storylines you enjoy. For me, I really liked where things were potentially going with the sixth film, The Curse of Michael Myers, mainly in its Producer’s Cut form, but so much tanked that potential resulting in Halloween: H20. I hated that film for killing the continuity and storyline that I loved, and intending to dispatch Michael Myers in an unimaginative, bullheaded fashion. This sequel ultimately feels like a weak whimper trying to extend the bankability of the franchise just a little further without enough ambition or unique talent to elevate it. It just tries to be a fun slasher flick, and if you take it as that, it’s fine. I can sit down and burn ninety minutes with it on a whim, but it’s entirely forgettable and dismissible. Aside from the potentially divisive opening with Laurie’s death, it really plays it safe with an either fun or lame premise. Essentially, you can take this film or leave it. If it’s on cable, and you’ve just time to kill, it’s a decent watch. I would like to give it a better recommendation, but knowing that there are a some far stronger films in this franchise, I can’t give it any further credit than this.
There has been one conspicuous omission from my reviews of the Halloween franchise, and it is this first sequel. The reason for this is, one, I have never really written a full review of it before, and secondly, I’ve never really cared for it at all. This stems from the fact that it has very little to offer me as either a fan of John Carpenter’s original or as a big slasher movie fan. Simply said, so much of it just doesn’t appeal to me. From the reworked score to the bland hospital environment to the clear shift from atmospheric horror to a reliance on gore, this isn’t the Halloween sequel that I want to see. Even the ones that are technically worse films, they have an entertainment value that I can indulge in on some level. There are many reasons why this film doesn’t even give me that much.
Picking up exactly where the first film left off, it seems the inhuman Michael Myers is still very much alive and out for more revenge as he stalks the deserted halls of the Haddonfield Memorial Hospital for Laurie Strode (Jamie Lee Curtis). As he gets closer to his main target, Dr. Loomis (Donald Pleasence) discovers the chilling mystery behind the crazed psychopath’s actions
It might sound somewhat unfair, but the vast majority of my gripes with this film are in comparison to John Carpenter’s original. However, with the fact that this film picks up exactly where the first left off, it demands that comparison because it is trying to convince us that this is a seamless continuation of that movie. The problem is that it doesn’t feel seamless in many aspects, and they are largely on the technical side. Still, there are issues with the quality of the script, and just the effectiveness of Halloween II as a horror movie that I wish to address.
To be straight up honest, I do not like the score for this movie at all. Yes, they are the same themes with John Carpenter and Alan Howarth doing the score, but the overly saturated synthesizer sound has never been to my liking. It doesn’t sound like a horror movie score to me. It sounds silly and over bloated. The first film’s score felt far more subtle and artistically applied. To me, the score for Halloween II just evokes no sense of tension, suspense, or chilling atmosphere for me. There are many instances where a strategic use of score could have been utilized to craft great suspense and nerve-racking tension, but instead, it’s dead silent. This score relies more heavily on the musical stingers, and feels poorly implemented overall. Carpenter’s scores usually craft a brilliant soundscape for a unique auditory experience, but there seems to be a significant lack of score in the moments where it should flourish.
Now, this is a very well shot movie, done so again by acclaimed director of photography Dean Cundey. It has some very good lighting schemes in certain scenes, and the continued use of the Pana-glide camera work is excellent. Director Rick Rosenthal does make an effort to emulate John Carpenter’s visual style, but I have always felt that the color palette of Halloween II was never quite right when compared to the first film. The hospital interiors feature a terribly bland color scheme, as most hospitals do, and because of this, it doesn’t have any of the visual pop of the first movie. There are no daytime scenes to soak in that late autumn feeling as this is all set at night, and really, it feels like it could be any night of the year. The film also lacks the atmospheric blue tones that Cundey used in the original as well as several other films he’s shot. Also, when I look at this film in certain instances, the lighting just doesn’t look quite right. The feeling, the mood, the balance of light and dark, at times, doesn’t feel consistent with the first film. This is especially evident when new footage is spliced into the revisited footage from the ending of Halloween. It’s not even knowing that it is new footage married with old footage. Back to the Future, Part II did this sort of thing seamlessly, and was also shot by Dean Cundey. These issues, I think, also stem from the fact that the first movie was a late 1970’s independently produced film while this is an early 1980’s studio produced sequel. It is inevitably going to have a slightly different visual feel due to extra money, studio mandates, a shift in filmmaking aesthetics, and a change of directors.
Even then, Rick Rosenthal’s film was tampered with by the studio and Carpenter as they felt it was too tame in comparison to other recent slasher films. While I can see the clear evidence of that since there is a definite lack of suspense, although much of that is, again, due to the absence of a score in key scenes, this is a sequel that didn’t stay true to its predecessor. Yes, of course, this is a slasher film that is going to follow many of the tropes of the genre which were originated in Halloween. However, this sequel feels like it’s trying to fit in with the Friday The 13th style slasher film craze instead of staying true to the Halloween style slasher. The genre exploded after the success of Friday The 13th, and it became very indulgent in gore and sexuality. It essentially became exploitative in that regard, and this film embraced that mentality whereas Halloween was a film built entirely on suspense and atmosphere. There is some suspense here, but it is especially sparse. Instead of holding to what made Halloween successful and effective in the first place, Halloween II tries to conform to what was popular at the time, and thus, feels second rate to me. Rick Rosenthal tries to match Carpenter’s style in many regards, but then, Carpenter comes in and tries to veer it away from what he originally did. It’s certainly not a film that is one director’s vision, and even then, Rosenthal isn’t given much to work with to make this as good as the first movie. I really didn’t get the feeling that there was enough creative effort put into this film to make it succeed in the creative vein.
One of the bigger problems here is that Halloween II feels scattered. The first film had a distinct plot progression as elements gradually converged with one another in a tight, cohesive way. This sequel is extremely loose in that regard. Laurie is essentially a stationary target throughout the movie, spending a good chunk of it asleep or screaming, but Michael Myers roams about the hospital killing everyone else while Loomis is out scouring the streets for Michael. No longer is Loomis in sync with his prey anticipating his psychology and instinctual impulses. He’s tagging along with the police instead of driving the narrative forward. Even the majority of his dialogue feels retreaded from the first movie as he re-explains the history of himself and Michael, and his talk about evil incarnate. It entirely feels like it is only there in case someone watching this movie never saw the first one. Even Donald Pleasance seems a tad monotonous delivering this reworked dialogue. While his performance is still of a high quality, there’s just nothing new for him to do here. The film also hardly feels like it’s building any momentum. John Carpenter reportedly had a very difficult time coming up with a story for this film while writing the script, and it really does show. Dr. Loomis and Laurie Strode have next to nothing to do here except uncover newly conceived secrets about Michael and Laurie’s past, which amounts to nothing. There’s no mounting tension heading into the third act, and Laurie’s chase scene earlier on is very mild and slow paced. This film doesn’t offer a sense of escalating threat until the last few minutes before Loomis engulfs himself and Michael in an inferno. The pacing is very monotonous because the story is very loose and lacks directional momentum.
The supporting characters here are mostly a lot of interchangeable hospital staff going about their mundane duties getting killed, and an audience likely couldn’t care less about any one of them. They feel like standard, hollow slasher film fodder, but without even the crutch of a stereotype to make them funny or entertaining. Carpenter’s original was smartly and greatly cast filling out very lively characters, but here, there are just so many throwaway characters with very little personality that very little care was needed to put together a memorable supporting cast. Even Sheriff Brackett vanishes from the film after learning of his daughter’s death, and so, we get new police officers who have really nothing fresh or pertinent to contribute to the story.
And it really is a shame that Jamie Lee Curtis got hooked into doing this film. It is an utter waste of her talents. She spends the majority of the film either laying in a hospital bed, running away from Michael Myers, or hiding in a parked car. This is a sequel that brings people back to simply do nothing new or challenging. To me, it’s another sign that there was a lack of creative drive behind this. Every character feels either generic or wasted. Also, since Jamie Lee Curtis had since adopted a shorter hairstyle, she had to be fitted with this blatantly obvious bad wig. This just further adds to the nagging inconsistencies between the two films.
Now, I know there are people who are fans of Dick Warlock’s Shape, but I have never liked his lethargic, robotic movements at all. If this movie is supposed to pick up at the exact moment the first left off, there should have been a demand for consistency. Nick Castle’s Shape moved with a relentless fluidity. He felt like a shark hunting his prey with a fierce single-minded focus. Warlock is so horribly stiff that I see no ferocity or cunning intellect here. Before, Michael’s actions had a clearly evident intelligence and deliberateness behind them. He stalked his prey with patience and purpose. He observed them before striking. Here, he just shows up and starts killing like a mindless machine, and to me, that’s just not interesting or intriguing at all. Warlock is a great stuntman, but as Michael Myers, he does nothing good for me.
I can appreciate some bad slasher movies because many of them at least show that they are trying. Their end result might not be creatively successful, but the filmmakers put forth a visible effort to make a somewhat effective horror film. For me, Halloween II doesn’t even give me that much. I find it to be a very dull, bland, and boring slasher movie. It has none of the atmospheric tension or magic that John Carpenter harnessed for the first movie, and the story is very lazy even for a slasher film. I think Halloween 4: The Return of Michael Myers is the vastly superior sequel in every aspect. Also, released the same year, I passionately believe that Friday The 13th, Part 2 is one of the best slasher films ever made. I don’t hate Halloween II. It just doesn’t do enough either way to motivate a passionate response from me. Any other films in this franchise I don’t end up reviewing are simply because I don’t wish to subject myself to them again or even for the first time.
I don’t think any of the sequels to The Howling have a good reputation, and that’s quite clear from this very first one. You cannot take this movie seriously, which goes under either the subtitle of Your Sister is a Werewolf or Stirba Werewolf Bitch, neither of which can be taken very seriously either. However, you can have a vastly inferior sequel that is surely not a good film still be a greatly entertaining one. If you want to trade scares for some stupid werewolf action then Howling II might be for you.
After countless millennia of watching, waiting and stalking, the unholy creatures known as werewolves are poised to inherit the earth. After newscaster Karen White’s shocking on-screen transformation and violent death, her brother Ben (Reb Brown) is approached by Stefan Crosscoe (Christopher Lee), a mysterious man who claims that Karen has, in fact, become a werewolf. But this is the least of their worries as to save mankind, Stefan and Ben must travel to Transylvania to battle and destroy Stirba (Danning), the immortal queen of all werewolves, before she is restored to her full powers!
I honestly don’t know how this film was approached as a sequel to The Howling. Practically no effort is put into making it feel or look like a natural continuation of that story in that world with those characters. Howling II can only be described as seemingly taking place in the B-movie alternate universe of the first movie to where artistic brilliance and visionary storytelling is replaced with as much “new wave” music inspired flash and cheesy goofiness as possible. Just how they recreate the ending of the last film as a lost piece of news broadcast footage says enough with horrendous makeup effects and an actress who bares zero resemblance to Dee Wallace. Sadly, that’s just a taste of what’s to come.
Some of the editing in this movie is just bad. Certain sequences are choppy, have little coherence to the action that is occurring, and frankly, just comes off like a perplexed mess at times. The plot is much the same. Much of it is rather laughable changing werewolf lore for silly reasons. These werewolves apparently have no vulnerability to silver, and titanium must be used. Of course, stakes through the heart and holy water being some of the weapons of choice here clearly reek more of a botched up vampire screenplay than a werewolf one. So, yeah, this wasn’t a screenplay with much thought put into it, but how stupid this thing is along with some of the performances simply turns this around to being entertainingly bad. The first movie really did, reportedly, throw out a lot of what was in Gary Brandner’s novel, and if his work on the screenplay for this film is any indication, it was likely all for the best. The quality of this sequel is not built on its execution, but the script itself and the ideas it conjures up. You really can’t watch Joe Danté’s original movie followed by this and see any correlation of tone, concept, or artistic quality between them. Howling II is simply pure 1980’s cheesy entertainment value. Scares don’t factor into it, just a lot of jovial laughs because the movie is played so straight.
As ludicrous as the film makes itself out to be, when you have Christopher Lee unloading all of this exposition it’s hard not to buy into it all. With Lee being as stoic and imposing ever, the silliness of the movie is simply enhanced to higher levels of awesomeness. Whether he’s Count Dracula, a Dark Lord of the Sith, Saruman, or anything else, Lee sells every role he takes on with total earnestness and theatricality. That is no different with his performance as Stefan. Of everyone here, he plays it the most dead straight, and is the most awesome because of it. However, when he was cast in Gremlins 2, Christopher Lee apologized to director Joe Danté for having starred in this silly sequel to his remarkable film. That’s some class right there.
Mostly going for broke through his enjoyably non-dimensional acting talents is Reb Brown. His reactions to Stefan’s exposition is probably the same as the audience’s – total, eye-rolling disbelief. It makes for some funny moments, but it’s really when Reb delves headlong into his guttural screams as he blasts away with a shotgun at this film’s sad excuses for werewolves that his base level entertainment value comes to light. A good performance? Not by a long shot, but like so much here, it’s all a lot of bad junk that compiles into a raucous fun time.
Of course, rounding out the cult following cast is Sybil Danning who is here simply to add a busty sexy appeal, and she surely excels at that. However, the werewolf sex scene in this film is purely gratuitous while being entirely unappealing to look at. Whereas the first film made it a great melding of eroticism and primal terror, this sequel just throws in a sex scene for the hell of it and decides to glue a ton of cheap furry makeup on the actors. Aside from Danning ripping off her top, there’s nothing worth seeing in this sequence, and you can stick around for the end credits to see that bare-breasted moment repeated a total of sixteen times.
The werewolf effects in this sequel are not close to being even second rate when compared to Rob Bottin’s amazing work on the first film. They are cheap and often cheesy. Most times, the filmmakers try to disguise them through all the terrible rapid fire, incoherent editing, or by having people be chased by a steadicam point of view shot. Unfortunately, there’s no real hiding substandard quality like this. These bad makeup effects, along with a couple of cheap visual effects, are yet another thing that makes this movie as enjoyably bad as it is.
I suppose the one genuinely good thing in Howling II is the new wave rock main theme by Babel, which is repeated every few minutes. It’s a really catchy tune, and so, it’s not at all a burden to hear again and again and again. However, what score there is beyond that isn’t much worth noting. I’ll also say that the movie is fairly well shot with some good production values and art direction. So, it’s not a poor film to look at. It really is just some of the sloppy editing that makes so much look incompetent.
Like I said, there is nothing here that is remotely scary, but when the shotgun blasting, titanium stake stabbing, and magic wielding action begins, it’s quite enjoyable in all its over-the-top cheesiness. Seeing Christopher Lee and Reb Brown standing back-to-back gunning down crappy looking werewolves is about as much fun as it sounds. Howling II is a terrible sequel to the visionary original, but if you take it as it is in being a film that feels like it exists in an entirely different universe than the first, you can have a lot of fun watching it. It’s just pure B-movie indulgence.
Good werewolf movies are difficult to come by. Most just don’t find a way to make them interesting, alluring, or entertaining like vampire films are more easily able to do. However, there are a few universally accepted classics of this subgenre, and this 1981 film from director Joe Danté based on the novel by Gary Brandner is indeed one of them. For me, it’s a movie that’s taken some time to get into. The first time I rented it on VHS I was working twelve hour shifts to the early morning hours, and fell asleep halfway through, same as with The Amityville Horror. This time, I gave it my full attention and patience.
Severely shaken after a near-fatal encounter with a serial killer, TV newscaster Karen White (Dee Wallace) takes some much-needed time off. Hoping to conquer her inner demons, she heads for “the Colony,” a secluded retreat where her new neighbors are just a tad too eager to make her feel at home. Also, there seems to be a bizarre link between her would-be attacker and this supposedly safe haven. And when, after nights of being tormented by savage shrieks and unearthly cries, Karen ventures into the forest to find answers, she makes a terrifying discovery. Now she must fight not only for her life, but for her very soul.
The Howling is an extremely slow burn film. Joe Danté gives you only the vaguest of teases early on hiding his ravenous creatures in the shadows and brief glimpses, which can be effective. The best execution of this is in the first act of the film where Karen encounters Eddie, the supposed serial killer portrayed by Robert Picardo. The use of darkness, suspense, and subtle backlight is a brilliant work of art. However, my suspicions from way back on first viewing were right in that we don’t see a werewolf in all its full glory until well past the halfway point in the movie. Until then, Danté takes the time to utilize some psychological aspects as Karen is haunted by her experience with Eddie. She is hit with nightmares and startling visions that heighten her fear and paranoia. This film is a bit of give and take. You certainly go into this wanting to see the werewolves reeking havoc often, but you have to wait a very, very long time to get to that point. However, once you do, the pay-off is excellent as Danté doesn’t hold back anything.
Many would know the special make-up effects work of Rob Bottin from John Carpenter’s The Thing, but that would be another year after this picture. Here, he creates some of the most amazing werewolf effects ever. Everything is so lifelike with very fine details and textures in addition to very elaborate methods used in the transformation sequences. Today, it would all be digital effects, but in 1981, you needed a practical effects master to realize something of this stunning vision of horror. The full size werewolves are wholly frightening as they tower probably at a good seven feet tall with every ferocious quality imaginable. What Bottin accomplished here will truly unnerve and terrify many. How he did it on a $1.5 million budget, even in 1981 dollars, just floors me.
This is also one of the absolutely most beautifully shot horror films I’ve ever seen. Joe Danté and his cinematographer John Hora utilize some very inspired camera angles and compositions. However, the most gorgeous aspects are the brilliant backlighting and the use of colored gels to create a wonderful haunting atmosphere. There are films that are simply shot in color, and then, there are films that utilize color in remarkable ways. The Howling is truly the latter as these reds, blues, and greens highlight the creepy and eerie moments like fine brush strokes of artistic inspiration.
The Howling does more than simply give you werewolves slashing and gnawing on humans. Firstly, it has some satire on the entire self-help movement. Trying to aid those afflicted with being a werewolf with therapy and a push towards integration into society is handled with the right kind of wit without being comical. Joe Danté definitely has that talent to fuse horror and humor such as with Gremlins, but he keeps things on point with the horror and barely diminishes that at all. Furthermore, this film gives us a strange but perfectly executed mix of sensuality and terror in one sex sequence. Once again, the artistic beauty of the film is on display as two people engage in sexual activity at a campfire, but as the act becomes more virile, the beats within are unleashed and they begin to transform. What begins as very erotic turns into a frightening, primal act that still gets the heart pumping. This is a very tantalizing and compelling sequence melding these two things together in a very provocative way.
The cast of this horror classic is jam packed with excellent acting talents such as Dee Wallace, Patrick Macnee, John Carradine, Kevin McCarthy, Robert Picardo, Noble Willingham, Dick Miller, and several others. Every single one of them does a solid job bringing forth the distinct qualities of their characters’ personalities. In particular, Dee Wallace leads the film with the right level of vulnerability and traumatic unease. The fear the audience regularly feels is channeled through her performance, and the journey her character goes through in this results in a unforgettable conclusion. Also very notable is Robert Picardo proving yet again that I know he’s a great actor. What he does as the supposed serial killer Eddie is tremendous and dead-on-the-mark showing a very subtle intimidation factor with his restrained charisma and clear full fledged absorption of this character into himself. He also acts through all the wickedly good make-up with exceptional ease. He might have only a few brief scenes, but he really becomes one of the most memorable things about this cast.
The ending of The Howling is fantastic and frightening. First off, the entire third act is just excellent every step of the way as we finally get our full helping of werewolf awesomeness in a hair-raising escape sequence. However, what comes after that when Karen returns to the television studio for her news report is exceptionally tragic and clever. What she sets out to accomplish with her live report is smartly turned on its head by these filmmakers. Almost no one believes what they see and dismiss it as a high quality fabrication. They believe it to be spectacle instead of the raw, chilling reality that it is. The film concludes on a very signature Joe Danté beat of wit and humor. He has always been a unique filmmaker infusing a special, unmatched blend of the bizarre and the humorous with excellent results.
Now, is The Howling a horror movie for everyone? Maybe not. I’m sure there are people who wouldn’t enjoy sitting around for fifty minutes before we get a real good look at a werewolf, which I honestly had an issue with. After Karen’s early encounter with Eddie, there’s very little horror or suspense to engage you on the horror movie level until you’re more than halfway through the movie. The characters and performances are perfectly fine to move the plot forward in the interim, but there’s hardly anything to get your heart pounding with terror in that time. However, I appreciate the artistic brilliance of this film, and anything that doesn’t quite work for me is possibly more attributed to just not being quite my style. I also wholly endorse teasing us with the werewolves, much like Ridley Scott did with his creature in Alien. Build up suspense with it, and then, once you finally reveal it, you’ve got a great, startling moment of awe. This is a remarkably well made movie, and one that absolutely has its rabid fan base that I entirely respect. Whether or not the slow, slow build up and reveal is to your taste, this is one of those horror essentials you need to see. The pay-off for that build-up is definitely well worth the wait, and seeing what practical effects could achieve back in the day will show you what CGI has almost never been able to replicate.