Rob Zombie's proven that he is a more than capable director. However, he's certainly no John Carpenter. Their directorial styles could not serve as any more of a contrast, as Rob Zombie's preference for handheld camerawork seems quite rough at times, and is obviously inspired by the exploitation films that sparked the creativity that birthed House of 1000 Corpses, and The Devil's Rejects. There is an incredible difference between Zombie's style and Carpenter's use of steady tracking shots and meticulously placed camera angles. Carpenter's style favours suspense; Zombie's style favours intensity.

It is this intensity that invigorates the few sequences in the film that are actually worth watching. Unfortunately, there aren't many of these scenes in the film. Michael's childhood murders are aided by a level of said intensity that elevates the sequence above anything else the film has to offer. The only sequence that comes close to rivalling it is an impressive climax, which has Michael on a relentless rampage of terrifying brutality.

Unfortunately, nearly everything else seems inconsequential. The first act is devoted to developing Michael's character, thus giving the character some depth. This portion of the film is much more effective than the latter half of the film, which is a truncated recreation of the original film. Some sequences are loose reproductions of those in the original. Other sequences lift their dialogue directly from Carpenter's film. Yet not a single sequence lives up to Carpenter's original vision, nor recreates his sense of atmosphere.

Despite an extensive list of cameo appearances that should give die-hard horror fans wet dreams – Bill Moseley, Ken Foree, Brad Dourif, Udo Keir, and Sid Haig – the acting is pedestrian, mostly thanks to Zombie's wife, Sherri Moon, who may be one of the most annoying women on the planet. Her piercingly sharp voice and whiny disposition coupled with the fact that she can't act makes me feel genuinely sorry for Rob Zombie, as he continues to put her in his films. Nearly every character is a picture of one-dimensionality. Aside from Michael, there isn't a single character with any sort of depth. Characters exist only to be slaughtered, as the death count exceeds that of the original film by at least a dozen.

Unfortunately, Zombie's screenplay does very little for Dr. Loomis' character. Malcolm McDowell is a fine actor, but Donald Pleasence will always be Sam Loomis, and no one will ever compare. True Halloween fans will be outraged at Loomis' final scene, not to mention the scenes that precede it. One sequence actually has Dr. Loomis telling Michael, “I feel like you're my best friend.” It is small details like these that have been changed from the original, that impact the overall quality of the film. Carpenter understood, and could appreciate the simplicity of the original film, which had not yet been cluttered with the back story of Laurie's familial relationship with Michael.

While the first third of the film is unquestionably stronger than the rest, that's not to say that it is even appropriate within the film. Michael is given a level of characterisation he has never received before. Is it necessary, though? Is it more frightening to watch a 10 year old boy go from torturing animals to murdering his own family as a means of explaining his future actions, than it is to watch the same character as an adult with no drawn out prologue explaining his actions. Michael Meyers is, pure and simply, evil. What more explanation do you need?

Stick to the original. It's far more effective, both for the elements that are superior, as well as the elements which weren't included in the original that weigh down the remake. That being said, Halloween should never have been remade in the first place. Why remake a film that is as close to perfect as any other film of its kind?