First off, I really hate the silly gimmicky confusing title. The movie directed by Steve Miner sounds like something that Aquafina would put out during the fall season. It's not scary. The title doesn't even roll off the tongue. It's very wordy. Second off, the film itself is somewhat polarizing as it ignore the continuity of the previous last three films of the Halloween franchise. So if you were a fan of the Curse of Thorn storyline. You might not be happy. Those events are not really considered canon anymore. However, in executive producer Kevin Williamson's treatment of the film, those events would had been acknowledged in certain scenes involving a classroom report here. Nevertheless, they were cut from the final version. Yet, bits of that's treatment are still in the movie with newspaper clippings and a photo of bloody scissors in the opening scene. Sadly, the filmmakers didn't replace those themes with much of anything new. Although it's the only film in the series not to take place in Haddonfield, IL. The film about Michael Myers (Chris Durand) finding Laurie Strode (Jamie Lee Curtis) in hiding as a headmistress of an California boarding school felt like a typical slasher film with all style with no substance. It's sad because I like original creator John Carpenter's idea of having Myers being more of a ghost. It would explain, the off screen teleportation in which, the boogeyman can suddenly appear in front of their intended victims despite said victims clearly being able to outrun them. Also the psychological approach of Strode getting haunted by spirits would add something unique. It would make her struggle with trauma and alcoholism seem more compelling. Yet, this concept was rejected by the producers in favor of a multiply copycat killers 1996's 'Scream' angle. Nevertheless that idea was also cut from the final product, leaving jarring plot holes like the killer's lack of burns and good eyesight. Despite that, Durand does do a good job capturing the mannerism of the shape very well. I just wish, the eyes holes of all the masks they use, weren't so big. It's so bad that you can see the actor's bright pupils in certain moments. It humanize the monster who supposed to have the blackest of eyes. Aside from the many jarring different looking masks & the poorly done CGI one, the film needed more intense suspense. The voyeurism POV perspectives from the first movie was greatly miss. Because of that, the movie's visuals didn't felt that creepy. It need more unmounted camera work to keep us unsettled, off balance, and vulnerable to shock rather than cheap jump scares with loud sudden noised. Without it, the film get boring and drawn out between the bloody kills. The movie tries to fit in some comedy with LL Cool J's idiotic character of Ronnie, but the jokes with him don't really landed for me. As for sex appeal. Since the movie doesn't really have nudity. The misogyny & misandry toward sex is not as noticeable as the other movies. However, some of the teens like Charlie (Adam Hann Byrd) & Sarah (Jodi Lyn O'Keefe) are bit unlikeable cartoony horny for normal people. Not the best acting from them. As for Josh Hartnett as Laurie's son, John. His poor delivery of lines was mostly flat. While he was indeed nineteen at the time. He didn't look like one. His adult like presence playing a kid was also a bit jarring. His underdeveloped character along with Michelle William's Molly don't really add much to the film. I felt that the filmmakers could had explore John's unseen estranged dad, a little more as well. As for cameos. Joseph Gordon Levitt & Nancy Stephens were nice to see. However, it's Curtis's real life mother Janet Leigh that steal the show. Seeing her mention the shower is clogged and getting in a car that is similar to one she drove in 1960 film 'Psycho', with a piece of film's score playing in the background was memorable. Thank goodness, they got her, instead of PJ Soles from 1979 'Halloween'. Seeing her again in the same franchise would be too weird. I just wish the film didn't repetitive ham fisted the audience with exposition about the original Haddonfield murders, a billion times. Those dialogue callbacks from Curtis really got annoying with the redundancy. Nevertheless, it was nice to see Curtis back in the role. Still, it wasn't as bizarre as the jarring out of place recycled music cues from Marco Beltrami's soundtrack for 'Scream' and "Mister Sandman" from 1981 'Halloween 2' played over of the majority of the film rather than the iconic theme from Carpenter. I don't get that, if they want to focus so much on the original, why not have that memorable score play. Regardless it was nice to hear a triumphant sounding version of the theme plays in closely minutes even if they largely scrapped composer John Ottman's score in favor of it. The final conflict ending between Laurie and Myers was indeed really good. However, it doesn't make up for the lack of thrills during the majority of the movie's 86 minute runtime. In the end, while this film was written and intended to be the final chapter in Halloween Saga. Executive meddling from the studios prevented that & in 2002, the film 'Halloween: Resurrection' was released; kinda killing the nice conclusion. Nevertheless, 2018's 'Halloween' retconned the whole series. Because of that, this movie written by Robert Zappia & Matt Greenberg doesn't have much rewatch value. It's pretty pointless to check out unless you want to know where 2018 film got the public bathroom scene idea from. Overall: While truly better than most of the Halloween series sequels. I still found this dated watered down film to be dead in the water. One not worth revisiting.