If we learn anything from this film it would be;If your going to jump out of a window to make a quick escape make sure it's on the first floor 

This movie cracks me up when I see it now. seriously, haddonfield memorial has to have the saddest excuse for a staff I've ever seen. I thought Ms. Alves was a bitch at first, but seeing how she was basically the only responsible one taking care of a group of children, its a wonder she wasn't more unfriendly. 1. one of the night doctors is a drunk. 2.  Nurse Karen shows up late to a hospital where she's in charge of watching newborn babies, and when reprimanded says 'it was just 15 minutes.' hah! if I'm late to my office job by 10 minutes, I have to meet with my supervisor! and this isn't the first time for ms. karen, either. 3. when the phones go out, Ms. Alves asks Janet to go tell mr. garrett. her response? 'hes at the other end of the hall..'. wtf?? are you serious? walk your ass down there! talk about whining over the simplest task. 4. Janet, suddenly possessing a renewed interest in her job, leaves Mr. Garrett despite the fact he was trying to communicate something to her..and she fails to check back up on him or even tell anyone. 5. nurse Karen sees no harm in sneaking off to have sexual relations with the ambulance driver in a hot tub. 6. Bud has to wait nearly 5 minutes to scare pokey karen as she takes her sweet ass time responding to his buzzes. If I were a patient, I'd be pissed! 7. the fact karen didn't know there shouldn't be a patient in that room anyways. 8. no one notices mr. Garretts absence the rest of the night, and subsequently doesn't seem to care either. I could go on, but you get the point. you could not PAY me to seek treatment at haddonfield memorial...I would so drive to the next town  

good sequel but i was never a big fan of the setting which happens to be a hospital....I dont know why but for me it just didnt have the suspese or atmosphere of the original.....i think most slasher fans will still be satisfied but dont expect too much from this because it really is a standard slasher film.

I've never been a huge fan of the first two films of the "Halloween" series. Don't get me wrong, they're pretty good, but as boring as they are entertaining. Spooky music just isn't enough to get me through an hour and a half of sitting on my ass and staring at a movie...there needs to be more substance. True fans of suspense flicks might get more out of this one than I did.

good movie the best sequel not as good as the first one but still good

Not as good as the original but good.

Too predictable. How many times can Jamie Lee just elude Michael? I mean, after all, he kills everyone else with the greatest of ease, but he can't catch a stumbling, injured girl? Too predictable, like when the cop in the hospital walks upon Michael lying on the floor (after he's been shot). All of the others tell him to stay back but no, he won't listen. Then he (cop) gets his throat slit. It's okay but it lacks the scary factor the first had.

It's OK. I still prefer the orginal though

Take one classic horror film. Add in loads of nudity and gallons of blood. Stir in some Donald Pleasanse and an incapacitated Jamie Lee Curtis. And voila! A terrific follow up to one of the best scary movies ever.

Halloween 2 is a good movie, but its definetely not as good as the first one. Getting out of the house was a good idea. The Hospital setting is superb, but this movie drags, and ends up really going nowhere, expect into the next batch of terrible sequels.

awsome follwup nowhere near as good as the first one but how can it be rent it now

While not nearly as good as its predacessor, Halloween 2 has many fine points which makes it the best followup possible to the origional. Halloween 2 adopts the Friday the 13th traits of gore and added nudity, which when combined with the suspense makes for a great horror movie. Halloween 2 was very good- the setting, the acting, and the ending, which would have made a great closure to the series.

A Slasher movie. Nowhere near as good as the original!

In the Shapes humble opinion, Halloween II was the last time we'd see a decent movie in this series until the summer of 1998 (Halloween H20: Twenty Years Later). Like the James Whale sequel Bride Of Frankenstein, Halloween II picks up right at the end of the original film, seamlessly going from one film to the other. A well-done feat, considering there were a couple years in between the two films. True, Halloween II does not come close to Carpenter's original masterpiece. But come on, that's a pretty tall order. You really have to judge Halloween II on its own merits, and when you do that it stacks up pretty well. Plenty of scares abound, and we're lucky to get return performances by Curtis and Pleasence. The rest of the cast does a good job, especially the police captain, sneering at Loomis as he quips "You let him OOUUUT!" Overacting at its finest. Carpenter scripted this sequel, and he does a good job at putting a few twists and turns in the plot (even if a few are needless, such as the "secret" between the hero and the monster). the Shape does remember hearing an interview with him (although he doesn't remember when) where Carpenter said that he had a real tough time coming up with this screenplay, making it fresh and original. The one thing this film did manage to capture was the spirit and feel of the original Halloween. Maybe the Shape has diluted, nostalgic memories about seeing the original Halloween, but after around 1988, there was something missing, some spirit of the good ol' horror films that has yet to be captured again (and we're moving farther and father away from that feel as each successive Scream clone is released). Taken as a whole, Halloween II makes a nice bookend to the original classic.

The most disapointing follow up ever made. Halloween is my all time favorite slasher flick. Why you ask? Because it relise more on the two REAL essential ingrediants that make up a good horror film mood and atmosphere rather than killing people and showing a couple bare breasts. Halloween 2 however took the easy and less talented way out. Michael looses a little spooky factor to merrly become a vehicle for dozens of wham bam thank you mam style killings. It would have been a much more credible follow up if the original actor who portrayed Michael Myers had returned. I saw on a documentary that the guy who played Myers in this film studied the walk and characteristics of the original. He did a terrible job. His Michael Myers is incredibly stiff and mechanic. Myers has a very loose and natural walk. He even strides and walks fast at times which this ingrade never does even during a chase. Donald Pleacense and Jamie Lee Curtis both give good performances. Jamie's was much better in the original while Donald... he's the man. Then add a completly unbelievable and dumb ass ending for a climax (Although it is creepy watching Michael walk down the hall completly a blaze) and you've got a horrible horror sequel. This film is still one of the best out of the sequels...it still sucks though. Not Recommended. See the BRILLIANT original and only see the sequals if you won't let them effect your judgement of the original.Or if you think gore and nudity make a horror film great. Just imagine the rest never ever happened.

I personally enjoyed this one better then the original mainly for one reason: that we finally get out of that tiny little house and into the world, or in this case a city hospital. Unlike the original, this one adds in gore and nudity, the two essential ingrediants in a good horror film.