It’s an eclectic list, including titles like The Thief of Bagdad, London After Midnight, and Carpenter’s own The Thing. Williams’ nine-paragraph review consists of three paragraphs solely dedicated to listing off thirty-two films that Williams’ claims Season of the Witch ripped off.
Halloween season of the witch movie#
Halloween III is “perhaps the worst movie ever created,” wrote Greg Williams in his review for the Sacramento Bee. Northup felt that Season of the Witch was just another example of horror’s attempt to transition from exploiting women to exploiting children, writing that “these opportunistic filmmakers have refocused their horrific guns on pre-adolescents.” Northup cited other 1982 horror films Poltergeist and Amityville II: The Possession as further proof of the genre’s attack on children and concluded that “ Halloween III ‘s few technical virtues (it’s considerably better than Halloween II ), are totally obliterated by its corrupt values.”
He described the film’s plot as “confusing junk” and “virtually incomprehensible.” Cowan wasn’t a fan of the movie and made it a point to take an unnecessary shot at those that would willingly see it: “People who go to see movies named Halloween III: Season of the Witch probably deserve everything they get.”īrent Northup decided to take on the horror genre as a whole in his review for the Longview Daily News out of Longview, Washington.
He did credit the film’s leading lady, Stacey Nelkin, as “the one saving grace.”įor Salem, Oregon’s The Statesman Journal, Ron Cowan shared similar sentiments as Ebert. Ultimately, he chalked it up as another “low-rent thriller” that borrows bits and pieces from horror movies we’ve already seen. “But the most basic one is that I could never figure out what the villain wanted to accomplish if he got his way.” Ebert understood that the baddie, toymaker Conal Cochran ( Dan O’Herlihy), wanted to kill the world’s children, but he didn’t see what the real end game was. “There are a lot of problems with Halloween III,” Roger Ebert wrote in his 1.5-star review for the Chicago Sun-Times. But that success was a far cry from that of its predecessors and was thumped by other horror releases from the same year. It even managed to place in the top two over its first two weekends in theaters. It racked up over $14 million on a relatively modest budget of $2.5 million. Season of the Witch wasn’t a failure at the box office by any means. Carpenter cohort Tommy Lee Wallace was to begin this shift with Halloween III: Season of the Witch.Ĭritics and fans had different ideas.
Halloween season of the witch series#
Essentially, the franchise would have morphed into an anthology series with the holiday serving as the only connection between the films. The plan was to release a new Halloween-themed film every October.
Instead of continuing to build on the first two films’ beloved villain, Michael Myers, Carpenter wanted to expand the franchise around the titular holiday. The duo agreed, but only if they could take things in a different direction. While not as successful as the original, Halloween II did well enough that Universal called on Carpenter and Hill for a third entry. Carpenter and Hill co-wrote and produced Halloween II in 1981 - this time with Rick Rosenthal in the director’s chair - and a franchise was born. Per the Hollywood code, if something is successful, you must do it again. Made on a shoe-string budget, the film about an escaped mental patient who returns home and starts wiping out babysitters was a box office hit and helped usher in the slasher boom. In 1978, director John Carpenter and producer Debra Hill forever changed the face of horror with Halloween.
How did critics feel about it at the time, and do we see it differently now? In this entry, Chris Coffel explores the original critical reception of Halloween III: Season of the Witch. They Said What?! is a biweekly column in which we explore the highs and lows of film criticism through history.
0 kommentar(er)
