|
I don't think three is altogether incongruous. Michael, as the Shape, is a walking Halloween mask himself. No face, few lingering threads of identity, just a terrifying image. But, this terrifying image has the capacity to cut a swathe through everything it sees. Seems like a company that makes fatal Halloween masks is a pretty sensible parallel. That said, the protagonist of the movie is flat as a pancake and his acting is an embarassment. Maybe if they'd paralleled things and used Loomis as a connecting thread, having him in there somewhere investigating the insanity, it might have felt like a more organic sequel, not to mention more fun to watch. I know it was meant to stand on its own, but it would have disappointed fewer people with firmer bearings on the franchise. Halloweens 1 through five, I actually stand behind, with a little less loyalty to 3. The war between Michael and Loomis I think has an appeal that can somewhat excuse the redundancy, laziness and all around crapitude that sometimes runs rampant in the movies. (And yes, crapitude is the word.)
|