A slew of silly and obnoxious sequels have done little to diminish the power of Carpenter’s original vision. His portrayal of darkness in suburbia remains terrifying. His sense of voyeurism, elegant widescreen framing, and smooth tracking shots are straight out of Hitchcock. But there are no surprises, and the movie takes the path we expect it to take. The ending, that last few seconds of film, is a knockout, though.
"Michael Myers is just a stand-in for all evil. He's a cipher; he's not a real thing or a person." --John Carpenter, 2004 interview
I happen to love this movie,so much that I paused it to go out for coffee right now, and I'm still seeing it in my head, jeez. Nice, uau.
Carpenter brilliantly evokes voyeurism to critique the morally reprehensible interests of the audience. This is most strongly shown in the first sequence where he uses POV to draw upon audience desires and the final sequence showing the aftermath of Michael's rampage layered with his heavy breathing drawing everything full circle "...the idea was that you couldn't kill evil." - writer Debra Hill.
Jonathan Rosenbaum asked "what makes this morally superior to fondling Nazi war relics?", Halloween sidesteps this potential moral quandary by critiquing the genre conventions it created. The real shame is in its predecessors immorality and hesitance towards intelligence or experimentation with form.
Maybe I’m being too critical, but I find the plot to be really silly and it’s full of bad gimmicks. The characters are written as people who make bad decisions all the time.
Michael Myers kills the sexually active teenagers, but cannot kill Laurie because of her "purity". Sam Loomis represents the forces of ration and logic that cannot kill Myers, only ward him off. A very odd combination of Satanic and Baptist theologies.
I remember the thrill, back in the early 90s, of learning the Criterion Collection had released this movie on laserdisc, and seeing for the first time that it wasnt a murky, blurry mess, but actually a sharp, widescreen, and polished work. It was the first time the slasher movies of my teenage years seemed to have enjoyed some credibility. The build-up to the carnage is the definition of scary.
While this film is good it has been way overhyped by the horror community, there are dozens of better movies out there yet in docs they all froth at the mouth when talking about this, some parts of which are comical
Beginning to love Carpenter. The ost is simple and perfectly put. Love the end.
A great even masterous horror movie foolishly remembered for being the first in a terrible series of horror films
Perfection from imperfection. Technical goofs made irrelevant by formal brilliance. Dramatic goofs made irrelevant by formal drive. Horror as the unusued portion of a frame. A masterstroke out of mediocrity. It is in these ways that even the cheapest of Carpenter's films carry themselves amongst the best. Never has a director had a more appropriate name: he is exactly that, a consumate craftsman.
Probably not worth commenting on, what else is there to say? Great style, absent narrative, needs more eccentricities, still great anyway.
Looking through the eyes of The Shape, the metaphorical mask of anonymity, a set up and style that would be mimicked for decades to come. Genius.
As good a horror film as any. I love the steadicam in this film. Happy Halloween!
Perfect horror, for years this was my favorite movie. A gem of a film. Time is passing by and I saw much better horror movies but still...5 stars. Cult stuff here!
5/5 for effectively starting a genre that would make blood n guts and t n a staples of my young cinephile's diet. Hell, it wins for the score alone.
