Gresh854 Halloween 5: The Revenge Of Michaels was a jarring experience, for the most part. The editing in this film seriously was giving me an aneurysm, and that's about the scariest part that happened during the runtime I was watching this movie. The great majority of the film is suffussed with uninspiring cheeseball moments and slapstick (yes, I said slapstick; the film attempts to add comedy into the mix) that is barely endurable. I will however admit that the last 20 minutes of this film were near fantastic. They nearly made up for the abundance of idiocy that was witnessed before, and also contained frightening, sinister moments that reminded me of what made the original so damn spectacular. With that being said, I still conclusively think this movie dropped the bomb. Even Michael Myer's didn't want to properly put on his mask for this one as shown in the actual film. (Tuck in the damn mask for heaven's sake!) We haven't quite hit "awful" yet in this franchise, but we've just encountered hitting "bad." (Verdict: C-)

Always Be Happy This film was a huge creative mess. There is so many things wrong with it that this was the "Last Halloween" film for 6 years.The events of this film take place 1 year after "Halloween 4". What was a huge misfire was that "Halloween 4" had a brilliant ending. Sadly that gets pushed to the side for "Halloween 5" and so we end up getting a typical 1980's slasher film. Here is some of the problems the film had* Killing off Rachel * * The Tina Charterer* * The Comic Relief Cops* * The Stupid Soundtrack * * The Myers House Changed * * The Mask was terrible * * The Dork with the laugh * * The Introduction of the Man in Black * * Having Jamie be a mute for 1/2 the film * * The lack of individuality for any the female roles! * * Not Showing the Deaths of the cops (In the television adds we see Michael starting to attack them) * * The Ending*Now believe it or not this film could still be re-edited into a better film. By editing down the "Tina Role" and "Policemen Roles" They could also "Edit out most of the laughs that dork does.Sadly what was wrong with this film was only magnified 6 years later in "Halloween 6".

alexanderdavies-99382 It was the right move to release the next "Halloween" film soon after the fourth one. The events that led to the previous film's conclusion, naturally paved the way for the story of "Halloween 5: The Revenge of Michael Myers." As before, Donald Pleasence as the slightly unhinged Sam Loomis and Danielle Harris as Jamie are back and they make the film watchable. Ellie Cornell is written out near the beginning, which was a mistake in my opinion. She was a good character in the previous film and relevant to the plot. However, it is left to Pleasence and Harris to carry the movie between them and they do this very well. The story moves one year on after the Halloween of 1988. Jamie is now a patient of Doctor Loomis and she seems to be telepathically linked with Michael Myers, in that she can sense where he is and who he will slain next. This part of the film makes little sense as it isn't fully explained. That applies to the story in general. There is no explanation given as to who the man in the cowboy boots is. We don't see his face and no one mentions him in the script. He simply appears out of nowhere and the audience is expected to take it for granted that the character has some relevance. From my vantage point, he does not. The murder scenes are capably handled and Donald Pleasence gives a typically good performance. Danielle Harris is once again an effective performer and has been promoted to "leading lady" status for this film. It was crucial that the two main characters be played by the same actors, especially as this "Halloween" film comes so soon after the 1988 film. I enjoyed the scenes with Pleasence calling out to Myers in the woods after Jamie have been saved for the time being and also the confrontation between the Doctor and his former patient inside the old Myers residence. Michael Myers looks a bit more physically imposing this time around, which is good. The mask still looks a bit stupid though! The ending left me feeling a bit cheated. The mysterious man in the cowboy boots comes along and rescues Myers and slaughters the entire Haddonfield police department. That is all very well but what about Loomis and Jamie? What happened to them? The former character has vanished without a trace and the latter is left standing in the police department on her own.... Not a bad film at all but it needed a better and more cohesive plot.

Anonymous Andy (Minus_The_Beer) Picking up hot off the heels of the action and box office success of 1988's "Halloween 4: The Return of Michael Myers," the titular masked killer returns with swift vengeance just a year later in "Halloween 5: The Revenge of Michael Myers." The film was rushed into production, and brother, does it show. With another director at the helm -- this time French director Dominique Othenin-Girard ("Omen IV: The Awakening") -- and the return of all the major survivors from the previous film, "Halloween 5" keeps continuity but still feels slightly off.It's a year after the events of "Halloween 4." Michael (played by a rather beefy Donald Shanks) has retreated, having survived a blast of gunfire at the hands of the Haddonfield police department. In the wake of his devastation, his poor, innocent niece Jamie (Danielle Harris) has been rendered mute and forever scarred. Once a familiar series of murders start cropping up, Dr. Loomis (Donald Pleasence) presses Jamie -- who now seemingly has a psychic link with Michael - - for information, completely oblivious to the fact that a mysterious man in black is ghosting him the whole time."Halloween 5" isn't a great or even a good movie, but it pretty much hits all the right spots as far as late '80s slashers go, and manages to introduce a few new intriguing elements to the series. Like "4" before, it's another relatively violent affair and the eye of the foreign director certainly gives this one a unique vibe and look. It's a terribly flawed film -- from its plot contrivances to a few annoying characters (oh my god, those cops...) -- but still pretty consistent with what came before. Michael's revenge ultimately isn't as compelling as one would hope, but it's certainly more enjoyable than his future curses and resurrections, respectively.