realityinmind Why? This movie scared the $%@# out of me as a kid! I watched it again last month and maaan, it is a good movie! Just because it says "Halloween" in the title and doesn't have Michael Myers doesn't mean that it is a bad movie. Jason Voorhees didn't appear in Friday the 13th until the 2nd film... does the first one suck because it doesn't have Jason?? No! Does the 2nd and 3rd movies suck because they don't have Pamela?? No! Does Jason Goes To Hell suck because it barely has Jason in it?? No! But it does suck for other reasons. EXPECTATIONS... that is what you had, and that is why it is your fault, not the movie's. Be thankful Rob Zombie didn't remake THIS movie! Yuck.

judemom So when this came out everyone hated because michael myers wasn't in it so they wanted to turn the Halloween franchise into an anthology series it each movie would be a different story in the same universe as the first two i rather have seen the anthology series than the next michael myers halloween movies but the main criticism was no Michael myers so i guess people just wanted the same thing over and over again but this movie is fine and one of the better halloween sequels but if the criticism was about Michael Myers not being in it it was that the main characters were weak and i can see why but there performances help boost up there character you understand what the people in this want you understand there golas but the villian was another weak point and he's actually bad because his plan makes no sense at all and the score by jhon carpenter is one the best in the whole series i say if you go in with a mind set of no Michael Myers in it you might like it.

TheLittleSongbird John Carpenter's 1978 'Halloween' is wholly deserving of its status as a horror classic. To this day it's still one of the freakiest films personally seen and introduced the world to one of horror's most iconic villainous characters Michael Myers.Which is why it is such a shame that not only are all of the sequels nowhere near as good but that the decline in quality is so drastic. Ok, the original 'Halloween' is very difficult to follow on from, but most of the sequels could at least looked like effort was made into them. 'Halloween III: Season of the Witch' had a generally negative critical reception and is still considered by many one of the worst of the series, but has garnered fans overtime. To me, 'Halloween III: Season of the Witch' is not that awful, but it is not a particularly good film either.It is often criticised for straying too far from the formula and not feeling at all like a 'Halloween' film. Actually these complaints are understandable, but a lot of people have also argued that there is much more wrong than just being unrecognisable as a 'Halloween' film. Actually, didn't mind at all that it tried to be different rather than being a retread like 'Halloween II' was, sadly it just didn't work out. Judging it as a standalone, 'Halloween III' also manages still to be problematic.'Halloween III' is not a complete mess. It is one of the better-looking and more polished sequels and has a suitably eerie look. The music has a spine-chilling atmosphere and has a real eeriness. The song is similarly very catchy.A couple of the deaths are disturbing and Dan O'Herlihy tries his best.Like the previous film, the drawbacks are numerous and significant. There is more creepiness than with 'Halloween II', even if just sporadically, but tonally it still doesn't feel right. The weirdness of the story is overkill and parts are unintentionally funny. The science fiction elements feature excessively and confuse the storytelling, as well as because it is more silly than eerie it dumbs it down.Once again there is very little scary or suspenseful. A couple of the deaths are more disturbing but most are not that creative or unsettling. The story was a decent idea that could have been creepy but was instead silly and with even more stupidity and illogic than the previous sequel. Many have said that no awards will be given for good dialogue and acting. That's putting it lightly. The script is clunky and cheesy ineptitude throughout and the acting, Dan O'Herlihy excepted, is pretty awful and fails to do anything with such dull and annoying characters. The gore is gratuitous, the ending is a big head-scratcher and the non-horror scenes are ineptly directed (in a film where direction reeked of inexperience), written and acted.In summation, mediocre and not so happy. Not quite as bad as reputed though. 4/10 Bethany Cox

a_chinn John Carptenter's frequent collaborator Tommy Lee Wallace wrote and directed this non-Michel Meyers Halloween sequel that's more of an "Invasion of the Body Snatchers" type of story than slasher film. Carpenter regular Tom Atkins plays a man investigating a mysterious Halloween costume company run by evil scientist Dan O'Herlihy. The film does have a bit slower of pace than I'd have liked, but I did like the creepy company town vibe that's nicely oppressive. This was the last film that involved producers John Carpenter and Debra Hill, who also did uncredited rewrites. Carpenter and Alan Howarth provided the film's score, so this film still feels consistent with the first two films, even if the story is a drastic departure. Although fans did not like this film at the time of it's release and it had poor box office, I've always liked this oddball entry into the Halloween series and wish there might have been further non-Michel Meyer Halloween films by Carpenter and company.