Reviews & Ratings for
Halloween: Resurrection More at IMDbPro »

Filter:

Best Chronological Prolific Authors Loved It Hated It Hide Spoilers:

Page 8 of 59:

[3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18]

Index

588 reviews in total

---

A complete waste., 24 March 2010
Author: lawrencesleftarm from United States

I saw this movie in the theater right when it came out and I was so disappointed. The other Halloweens terrorized me when I was younger and I was hoping this movie wouldn't disappoint. Man was I wrong. I fell asleep in my seat watching this movie. I'm not going to write some long review, for if I start up, I don't think I'll be able to stop complaining about everything wrong with it.

Basically, if they were going to kill off Jamie Lee Curtis, they should have came up with a way better plot line for the rest of the movie, obviously. They should have brought Hartnett back and had Myers go after him, since that is his only family member left alive. I don't know. Just never watch this movie.

---

surprisingly a really fun movie to watch, 16 February 2010

Author: LinkGoku from United States

well i wasn't expecting anything special from this movie, but i was actually surprised, the story seemed somewhat thrown together but still half-ways interesting, the acting was good for saying that the only actors i recognized were Jamie Lee Curtis, Busta Rhymes, and Ryan Merriman.. the music was still good, and the whole idea though not a great one, was fun, i also thoroughly enjoyed the way they did the cameras, that was a genius idea.. i recommend this movie to anyone, and i don't understand why so many people don't like this movie, because its loads of fun to watch.. the movie may not have a great story or award winning actors, but its still surprising and fun, thus concludes my review of Halloween Resurrection

---

Dumb and pretty bad, but still watchable and somewhat entertaining, 11 November 2009

Author: John Smith from New York

After the surprisingly good and the last one of the Halloween franchise that was released in the 20th century 'Halloween 7', comes the first Halloween movie of the 21st century, the 8th of the franchise, called 'Halloween: Resurrection'. I really didn't know what to expect with this sequel, i have seen a pretty poor rating (even under 4.0/10) here, but on the other side people can exaggerate much, like they did with the previous sequel which was fairly very underrated. I certainly expected more than i got...

The movie starts pretty well, i was glad to see Jamie Lee Curtis make her fourth Halloween franchise appearance, although this one was by far the worst, it's not that she acted very bad, but the script just didn't allow her to make a good appearance, yeah the whole screenplay made for this movie is pretty bad and actually dumb. There are no special or memorable scenes, this whole movie just consists of several kills that are so silly they wouldn't even scare an 8 year old. Other than Jamie Lee Curtis, the whole cast is pretty f***ed up, casting is pretty poor yes, same as acting that was probably the worst in the whole franchise. The likes of Busta Rhymes and Tyra Banks are just put to please the people that don't know much about Halloween franchise but rather watch a lot of MTV and 'America's next Supermodel'. But at least they had an excuse for starring in this movie (if you can call that an excuse) because the whole concept is based on Reality TV spoof or something, whatever it was i didn't exactly favor it. On the other hand, other actors and actresses had unlimited number of flaws which probably exceeded the one set in 'Halloween 5', although some of their faces are recognizable from the hit movies like 'American Pie', their appearance in the Halloween franchise simply proves that the Hollywood producers are just using this whole franchise that started in 1978 to make a quick buck while they're practically making a mockery out of it.

The biggest highlight of this whole movie is the utterly magnificent John Carpenter's 'Halloween theme' that simply made the scenes that would maybe be unwatchable into watchable, and some of them are somewhat entertaining, anyway i guess that this movie caught me in the good mood, because i don't blame people that turned off their DVD player before it was over. There's actually one thing i just couldn't believe, the same director that directed the first sequel back in 1981, Rick Rosenthal was hired to direct this film, i'm not gonna blame him for much because of the script he had to work with, but he could've done a better job for sure.

---

It's not all bad, but pretty bad..., 2 November 2009

Author: sandor-enckell from Finland

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Well, OK, I'm not a fan of the Halloween series, the only one I've seen other than this, is the first one. I'll say the flaws I noticed, while watching. 1) At the beginning, Laurie, is going to "kill" Michael. Now, is she stupid or something...? She has him hanging over a roof and thinks he will die when he hits the ground, when she 20 years ago expirienced stabbing him twice, seeing him get shot several times, falling off a balcony, and still be alive. 2) The acting was bad. 3) Sara, the maincharacter, screams at one time so loud that a glass breaks. This never happens again later in the film, which makes the scene: useless. 4) It was predictable, and you didn't really care if anyone died.

I bought this movie, and wanted to see a horror movie, and that was what I got. The only good things were that you got scared sometimes, the beginning with the great acting of Jamie Lee Curtis (even though she was stupid at the end of her scene), and I also liked the ending. It showes that Michael is not a usual psycho, he is the Boogey Man, something that is forever.

---

Should have ended after H20, 24 October 2009

Author: harmisjack from United States

OK, I first got into Horror movies after seeing the remake of Rob Zombie's Halloween. I then got into the original Halloween franchise after the first one, which wasn't bloody, but we don't need blood to scare us. I then found out there were a bunch of sequels, and Saw Jamie-Lee came back in H20, and was in H:R which I saw got terrible reviews, which I found out why after watching the whole franchise, and especially after seeing how H20 ended. This film completely ruins the entire Halloween series. H20 ended the best way ever, and was even better because the main Halloween character (Jamie-Lee Curtis) ended it (at first). I feel like I'm Jamie-Lee from H20 after what happened 20 years ago, she couldn't get the horrible incident of her head. I can't get it out of my head knowing they made something like this unnecessary to keep it going. The remake of the first one should have been the only continuation. This movie has bad acting, bad story, and bad intro. This movie should be rated "T" for Terrible. I even prefer Batman & Robin over this crap! WHY RICK WHY?!? Did you have to do this? 1/10 (should be 0/10)

---

What a Waste, 17 October 2009

Author: abbychick41 from United States

This is the only Halloween movie I've ever seen and most likely I'll never watch another Halloween movie after this one. Luckily I didn't rent this movie and it was on TV on Friday night so my money wasn't wasted on this movie. What I didn't like about this movie was the poor acting on some of the characters, the acting didn't convince me enough, it made me laugh a little. But most of all, I found Bianca Kajlich the actress who played Sara Moyer a weak screamer, she screams most of the time in the movie and every time she screams it just wasn't powerful, it wasn't convincing to me. It was just weak. Bottom Line, The Halloween Franchise is just a Waste of Time, even if the past movies might be better then Halloween: Resurrection you won't be finding me watching them. 1/10

---

Michael, Busta Move On!, 26 August 2009

Author: thesar-2 from United States

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

It's not surprising the director of 'Halloween: Resurrection' also helmed 'II' as they both had Michael vs. Laurie, both succeeded the best of the Halloween franchise and they both sucked. Jamie! How proud I was to see you return to greatness in 'H20' only to (literally) fall into this mess. I hope you earned enough blood money. And after you read your only scene, how on earth did you agree to this storyline? Absolutely the worst, uh, resurrection of any franchise killer since 'Jaws: The Revenge' which told us the original's long-dead shark actually lived and followed by ocean the Sheriff's widowed wife down from New England to the Keys?? In this, they attempt to make us believe Michael switched bodies in the end of 'H20' and she killed the wrong man. If that were the case, wouldn't the victim simply take off his mask or do the universal "no" movements with his hand since he couldn't speak? And then Laurie doesn't ask this Michael to take off his mask since he's playing the same prank. But, I digress, that's just the first 17 minutes. You have the rest of the movie to hate as well. Reasons: Busta Rhymes (enuff said, but…) and his busta moves, a victim that's on the verge of death texts someone vs. dialing 9-1-1, an overbearing soundtrack and a normal human scream that breaks glass. Obviously they were trying to cash-in on the reality series/webcam boom of the time and bring Michael on camera for people at home (or in this case, just a party) to watch him stalk easy prey in a house that's insides seem like a 37-room mansion with enough hiding places for 6 killers. Do NOT waste your time; of the original series, stick with just #1 and 'H20.'

---

Wrong man..., 15 August 2009

Author: seveleniumus from Lithuania

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

More like wrong movie. I mean how could there possibly been the wrong guy? He came after her, she hit him with a car, crushed him, he was still alive, he wasn't screaming, wasn't wiggling around, she took the shovel, looked him into eyes and took his head off – that WAS Michael Myers and by saying it wasn't movie fails as much as it's possible to fail. Anyways, if he wasn't ever killed, why this movie is called "resurrection" ? Is it like resurrection of the series? What's up with the crap in the beginning about doors to heaven/hell then? The main plot about teens investigating the Myers house however has nothing to do with this and, despite horrible acting, works pretty well, if you'll ignore the fact that this movie is ripping off too many horror flicks to count, that is. Watch it if you have nothing better to do, it's not really horrible, just stupid at most part, I wouldn't recommend it though.

---

Its passable....and i guess they had to move on at some point.., 31 March 2009

Author: shaney_boy1988 from United Kingdom

After watching Halloween Resurrection I have decided to write a review which I don't normally do.

Where do I start? Well the first and most obvious point is how can there be another Halloween movie when Michael thought to of died in the previous one?! The answer to that is money... Yet again these film makers were speaking for the fans and thought they would want another Halloween movie and thought that this one would make big money. Well for the first part yes. I would imagine that the majority of the Halloween fan base would of liked another one but not actually see another one made! As for the second part.....No... This movie did poorly and thus the reason there hasn't been another sequel made since. You can now see why they thought it would be a good idea to revitalise the series by Re-Making the first one but this isn't about that so lets talk about the movie itself.

The first point I am going to make is what I made at the start of this review. How can Michael Myers still be alive after we presumed it was him that got his head cut off. This was the worst thing that put me off this movie when watching it. I do agree that the idea of which it was executed in order for Michael to still be alive was passable but there are so many reasons to explain why the paramedic, who was dressed by Michael, didn't just take the mask off and run away but I guess this is a movie and that does not count.....

The second part is the demise of beloved Halloween star Laurie Strode(Jamie Lee Curtis). When first looking at the DVD cover which shows the actors and of course Jame Lee Curtis, I presumed that Jamie would have a larger role in this movie. The idea of killing of the most important character in the franchise right slap bang at the start was a terrible move. This not only wasted peoples anticipation to see how she and Michael would unfold in the movie but also wasted peoples money who actually bought a ticket to see this on the big screen(who i feel sorry for). Why didn't they just have her in the whole movie and then died at the end because at least this way it shows that she put up a last ditch effort..does it not it?! Also I am led to believe that somewhere along the line the franchise has to move on. We cant and couldn't have the same protagonist always escaping until Halloween "H30" because that would and did get very old.

From H20 to Halloween(1978) and Halloween 2(1981) she had a good run but it was time to move on because after time the audience would start to question Michaels ability to kill just one primary person after chasing her for a long damn time (Story time) In my closing I would give this movie a 4 out of 10 because I am generous and didn't think this movie was that bad, it was just not everyones liking and I wouldn't recommend watching it more than 2 times.

Thanks for reading! :)

---

Or maybe it was all a dream, 1 March 2009

Author: Sandcooler from Belgium

"Halloween H20" was a pretty worthy sequel, a bit slow but still pretty good. Then they just had to level the whole series again. I suppose there is some sadistic fun is seeing how these writers hopelessly try to bend the story their way, but mostly it's just insulting to the audience. I mean, the explanation they give to how Myers can still be alive is terrible. I have seen that Jason movie in which he is brought back from the dead by lightning and I went like yeah, could happen. This could not happen. It makes no sense. I don't expect a good plot from a slasher, but it would have actually been better if they had given absolutely no explanation. About the rest, this thing tries to make up for its story and I appreciate that. There aren't really any creative kills, but the way they're directed makes them look pretty brutal. It's a bother how Michael keeps getting stronger and weaker whenever the script demands it, but really that's a criticism I could give to any of them except for the first one. I like how this one doesn't even try to kid us, leaves the door wide open for a sequel. I just hope it won't have Busta Rhymes.

---

---

Page 8 of 59:

[3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18]

Add another review

---

Related Links

Plot summary	Ratings	Awards
Newsgroup reviews	External reviews	Parents Guide
Official site	Plot keywords	Main details
Your user reviews	Your vote history