Despite its bad rep, Chris Jordan decides to review the last in the original Poltergeist series.
 |
| "Hi little girl. Want some preacher candy?" |
With the remake of Poltergeist finally reaching the
light this weekend, the complete original trilogy is belatedly making its HD
debut. While the original Poltergeist has been on blu-ray for five years
now, and Poltergeist II: The Other Side followed shortly thereafter,
this week sees Poltergeist III join its predecessors on the format for
the first time, both as a stand-alone disc and in a double-feature package. It
is no secret that the Poltergeist sequels are not especially loved among
horror fans, so it isn't surprising that it took a new remake to inspire this
release. That first movie is a really, really hard act to follow, and after the
first sequel's unenthusiastic reception, it's quite possible that not too many
people were clamoring to add the second sequel to their blu-ray collections.
But this is a film that deserves another look; it is a lot better – and a whole
lot more fun – than it often gets credit for. I'll happily admit it: I really
like Poltergeist III. Is it a worthy successor to the original, which
remains one of the greatest masterpieces of the haunted house subgenre? No, not
really. But it stands on its own quite well as a very entertaining, well-made,
and visually-impressive '80s horror flick, and it really does attempt something
new with the formula. If it was an unrelated one-off movie that wasn't burdened
with the baggage of being Poltergeist III, I can guarantee you that its
reputation would be much, much better.
Poltergeist II: The Other Side was a decent, but
uninspired and not terribly memorable, sequel. In most ways it simply failed to
escape from the shadow of its predecessor, and it tried so hard to re-capture
the first film's Spielbergian dynamic that it never branched out to find its
own identity as much as it should have. And in striking contrast to the
original, it was very long on exposition and short on wild special effects
sequences; a noble storytelling effort, but a letdown after the original's
insane funhouse feel. It's not bad; just not Poltergeist. What it did do
really well, though, was create a very memorable and creepy villain: the
ghostly Reverend Kane, played perfectly by Julian Beck. Equal parts Phantasm's
Tall Man and Something Wicked This Way Comes' Mister Dark, he was
definitely one of the sequel's strongest points. So it was a good decision for Poltergeist
III to keep Kane and dispense with just about everything else: aside from
the villain and recurring protagonists Carol Anne and Tangina, this third film
makes an aggressive effort to break away from its predecessors and be its own
movie. The result is easily the stronger of the two sequels.
 |
| "Hello. I'm Tom Skerritt." |
This time around we have a new setting and a mostly-new cast,
as Carol Anne is sent to live with some relatives (Tom Skerritt, Nancy Allen,
and Lara Flynn Boyle in her first film role) in their swanky, extremely modern
and trendy Chicago high-rise. The plot is nothing new – Kane and fellow ghosts
haunt the building and torment Carol Anne, Tangina gets very philosophical
about the reasons why – but this is partly a deliberate choice. After the
second film got too bogged down in exposition to recapture the fun of the
original, part three is clearly trying to get back to basics: simple plot, lots
of crazy effects sequences, wild haunted funhouse all over again. And while the
change of scenery from suburban home to high-rise apartment complex may sound
gimmicky, it's honestly all the formula needed to set itself apart. Since this
is the late-80s we're talking about, “trendy modern high-rise” naturally means
mirrors all over every available surface, so the ghosts can have a field day
doing creepy things involving reflections. It makes for some really cool,
creepy visuals and “Through the Looking Glass”-ish set-pieces, and makes the
funhouse concept very literal as mirrors constantly distort reality. Granted,
the movie eventually comes awfully close to leaning on this visual trope too
often, but for the most part it works very well. Plus, there is something oddly
unexpected and effective about setting a haunted house story in a brand-new and
very modern structure. Sure, the houses in the original Poltergeist were
new also, but they were at least still traditional homes of the variety that we
imagine ghosts haunting; Poltergeist III is the first time I ever saw
spirits take up residence in swanky downtown apartments. Well, except for Gozer
in Ghostbusters...
Of course, the film's “maximum haunting action, minimum
exposition” attitude is not entirely a good thing: while it is a lot more fun
than Poltergeist II, it is neither as good or as fully-developed a film
as Poltergeist; not by a long shot. It isn't terribly concerned with
character development, and fleshes out the characters just the minimum amount
required for us to care about them; a far cry from how strongly-developed and
fully-human the Freeling family from the first film were. Skerritt, Allen, and
Boyle all do the best they can with what they are given, and make perfectly fine
protagonists we have no problem rooting for, but we never really feel like we
know them. Plus, Lara Flynn Boyle's character brings with her a gang of generic
vapid '80s teenagers who look like they dropped in from a Culture Club music
video, and who are looking for a place to party when the ghosts turn up. No
real attempt is made to develop their characters at all; they are strictly
there to add to the list of potential victims, and to make the film appeal more
to the Elm Street or Friday the 13th crowd.
Those things aren't deal breakers, though: I present those
facts mostly to give an accurate sense of the type of movie Poltergeist III is
trying to be. It has no desire to re-capture the Spielberg style of the first
two, and instead seems to want to be the post-Nightmare on Elm Street
reinvention of the franchise: self-consciously modern (ie, delightfully 80s),
with more of an emphasis on teenage characters and trippy special effects. It
is very telling that when the MPAA originally rated it PG, MGM demanded
reshoots to give the film more teeth and earn a coveted PG-13. And this is
exactly why I said it would have a much better reputation if it wasn't a Poltergeist
sequel: it really needs to be watched as a genre movie with an entirely
different attitude. A more shallow attitude, perhaps, but it's a whole lot of
fun. It's all about visuals and atmosphere, and it provides both in spades. For
the most part, the effects (by writer/director/special effects director Gary
Sherman and effects guru Dick Smith) look great, and they provide a few
genuinely startling moments. Turn your brain off, adjust your expectations a
few notches down from the greatness of the original, and have a good time.
 |
| "Will this stuff give me herpes?!!!!" |
Of course, there is one elephant in the room that must be
addressed when it comes to this film. Superstitious film fans love to say that
this franchise is cursed, due to the sad coincidence that one lead actor died
shortly after the production of each installment. And while I certainly don't
think the films are actually cursed, it is hard to deny that death hangs rather
heavily over Poltergeist III. In part II, Reverend Kane's gaunt, deathly
appearance wasn't all makeup: Julian Beck was actually dying of cancer, and
passed away shortly after making it. As a result, this film has the unfortunate
task of trying to hide the re-casting of Kane using stylized images of doubles
made up to look like Beck, and the results can sometimes be pretty conspicuous.
And then there's the tragic fact that Heather O'Rourke, who played Carol Anne in
the trilogy, died suddenly at the age of twelve just months after the end of
production. Knowing this casts some sadness over the whole thing – especially
since she does look rather pale and sick in much of the film, although her cast
members have said no one had any idea she was so ill. She demonstrates once
again what a good child actor she was, and you can't help but wonder what sort
of a career she might have had.
Still, Poltergeist III remains quite an enjoyable
sequel, and one that certainly deserves another look now that it is on blu-ray.
Is it a masterpiece, or even a very good film? Not really. But I approach it in
the same way I approach the Elm Street sequels: entertaining horror
thrill rides with some memorable scares, atmosphere, and effects sequences. And
I must say, the nostalgic appeal of its distinctly '80s-horror aesthetic has
only made it more fun with time. Could there have been a better Poltergeist sequel?
Sure. But this is easily the better of the two sequels that we got, and it
offers way more than it usually gets credit for. One can hope that this new
remake will dethrone part III as the second-most-enjoyable Poltergeist film,
but this remains quite a cool flick from a decade that was undeniably awesome
for horror. Give it another look.
-Christopher S. Jordan