Review
Culture
Film & TV
Monsters
8 min read

Here's why E.T. is in my list of top Halloween films

What Halloween films reveal about our fears, our families, and our fondness for the ridiculous
A child and E.T. ride a BMX bike across a moon lit sky.
Universal Pictures.

 

Halloween can be exhausting these days. As we continue to import and cement more and more of the American cultural experience, and as I age into maturity and (especially) fatherhood, I find myself spending All Hallow’s Eve in two ways (neither of which is prayer and meditation of the hallowed Saints of the Church, or the Faithful Departed Souls who now rest in Christ): I can take my daughter trick-or-treating, or I can stay home and desperately throw handfuls of sweets and the horde of children in fancy dress who arrive at my door. I always choose option A…I’m a priest…I have a ready-made costume. To aid in the convalescence necessary after such an exhausting evening, I have compiled by Top 5 Halloween Films. 

NOTE: This list is in no particular order, and the entries are not all horror films. In an effort to be ecumenical, and to bring solace to those of all temperaments and dispositions, I’ve taken my criteria as films set on, or around, Halloween. I hope there is at least one offering here that might intrigue and delight you. 

5. The Crow 

A supernatural superhero flick which has gained cult status, this film kicks off the list in style. What style, you ask? The inimitable style of the 90s. Eric Draven and his fiancée are murdered on ‘Devil Night’ (also known as ‘Mischief Night’), on the eve of their Halloween wedding, leaving a distraught Sarah – the young girl they care for. One year later, Eric is resurrected by the spirit of the Crow, who shepherds souls to the afterlife, and resurrects those who die by evil and violence as undead warriors with a mission to find revenge and, perhaps…peace? Certainly not to begin with!  

This film is perfect Halloween fare for those who want the grit and vibe of the holiday without actually having to engage with real fear. The 90s was a decade of looking and sounding edgy without any commitment: the decade of bark, not bite. Brandon Lee (who died during filming in a prop accident – a star in the making, taken too soon) looks terrific as Eric Draven/The Crow, covered in black leather and face paint, excelling at fight and stunt choreography, and towing the line of camp perfectly. The setting is moody darkness and rain and neon, and gothic gargoyles! The music underpins the atmosphere superbly…I mean…the title track is by The Cure! It goes hell for leather in a deliciously pantomimesque fashion and is well worth a watch for spooky fun without the fear. 

4. Halloween II 

The unwanted sibling. The sequel that was never meant to happen. It is unclear to me quite what it was that forced John Carpenter and Debra Hill back to the writing room (perhaps the threat that this sequel would happen with or without them), but it certainly wasn’t passion for the project! Carpenter has described the writing process as one where he essentially had to be drunk to get through it. I must say, if this is the case, it doesn’t show! Halloween II picks up right where the original ends, Laurie Strode (Jamie Lee Curtis) is catatonic after surviving the Haddonfield Halloween night massacre and is immediately transported to hospital. The murderous Michael Myers has disappeared after being shot by his psychiatrist, Dr Loomis (Donald Pleasance returning with the most delightfully hammy performance…in fact with the whole back half of the pig), and now Loomis is back on the hunt. It is all leading to a blood-soaked showdown in Haddonfield Memorial Hospital, and the most contrived plot-twist in horror history; necessary, Carpenter says, for any of this forced sequel (to a perfectly conceived standalone film) to make sense. It isn’t a patch on its progenitor, but it is far better than it deserves to be, allows you to spend some more time with beloved characters, cranks everything up to 11, and is a guilty pleasure of mine – me, a man of taste and refinement, a connoisseur of the creepy, a gentleman in the gathering of the ghoulish. 

3. E.T. 

One for the kids now, especially for those children who find Halloween a bit too much. This is the film that proved Steven Spielberg isn’t just a good filmmaker – he is one of the finest ever to pick up a camera, able to master any story in any genre. E.T. is a small alien who is separated from his group on a routine mission to collect plant samples from Earth. He is taken in by a young boy, Elliot, and protected from the government agents trying to capture him. Over the coming days the two bond, developing an odd empathic link that gives Elliot confidence in school, and gives the two much joy and laughter at home. Soon it is time for E.T. to ‘phone home’ and return to his own planet. Naturally this escape attempt takes place on Halloween, so that the little gremlin-like creature can wear a bedsheet without attracting unwanted attention. After several near escapes form the law, E.T. and Elliot have a goodbye so emotional and poignant that I dare you to watch this with your little ones and not cry…go on…I DARE YOU! E.T. is everything a children’s story should be, and has everything it should have: aliens, coming-of-age shenanigans, clueless parents, a chase with levitating bicycles. It is perfect, and perfectly gentle for a Halloween wind down as a family.  

2. Batman Forever 

Now, I was thirteen when Batman Begins was released; a man of grey-hair and wrinkled visage by the standards of comic books. As a result, Christian Bale is not my Batman – the raspy voice just grates on me! Michael Keaton is my Batman, and is, to this day, the best Batman. However, none of the Keaton films have a Halloween setting as far as I’m aware, so I’m going to recommend the Val Kilmer take on the caped cruder. Kilmer is the billionaire bad-boy Bruce Wayne, a mask he wears to hide his true identity as the crime fighter Batman. Tommy Lee Jones is the once upstanding prosecutor Harvey Dent, who went mad after having acid thrown in his face, and has become the supervillain Two-Face. Jim Carrey plays Edward Nygma, a scientific genius who is researching a technology to send TV signals directly to the brain – research that Bruce Wayne shuts down due to its potential for mind control. Nygma takes on the guise of The Riddler, and he and Two-Face begin to commit a series of robberies to fund the research and, eventually, take down Batman. Their plan culminates on Halloween night, which might explain why no one questions maniacs in ridiculous costume running around Gotham City.  

If you think The Crow is camp (which it is) you haven’t seen anything yet. The gothic is more gothicky, the leather is more leathery, the neon will burn the eyes right out of your skull, and I’m not sure if you can get more 90s than a gurning Jim Carrey menacing Nicole Kidman while Val Kilmer smoulders in anger. If you can keep a secret…I know this film is rubbish, but it was the ‘latest’ Batman film as I was growing up, and I actually really like it, and it brings back so many memories of my childhood, excitedly sitting in front of the telly to watch the action for the fiftieth time. Highly recommended, for the sheer operatic silliness of the film alone – and what is Halloween for if not operatic silliness? 

1. Halloween 

Of course this was going to be on the list. This is THE Halloween film. This is so much a part of the cultural memory that I’m not sure I even need to give a plot synopsis or explain my recommendation. Instead, I could just list the people involved and leave it at that. John Carpenter writing (with Debra Hill), directing, doing the music, probably making the cast’s lunch and everything else! Jamie Lee Curtis in the lead, essentially creating the ‘final-girl’ trope of the slasher flick, and doing it so brilliantly that it has only ever been imitated but never topped. Donald Pleasance…is also there. I can’t quite describe his performance: is it a genius deconstruction of trope and cliché in a valiant attempt to understand the warring forces of light and darkness in the human heart, or is it the work of a man who missed the lunch Carpenter prepared and so has decided to devour the scenery instead? He is bonkers – and I’m here for it! 

Curtis is Laurie Strode, an innocent and virginal (vitally important in the mythos of what becomes the ‘final girl’) high schooler, who will be spending Halloween night babysitting Tommy Doyle while her friends do – ahem – what teenagers do. Honestly, they couldn’t have picked a worse time or place to engage in underaged drinking and pre-marital sex. Haddonfield on Halloween night in 1978 is essentially an abattoir for the morally flexible teen. Because…Michael Myers is on the prowl. Introduced at the start of the film (in a POV shot that has stood the test of time for its chill and shock factor!) as a six-year-old boy who inexplicably stabs his sister to death on Halloween. He is committed to an asylum under the care of Pleasance’s Dr Loomis. On Halloween night, 15 years later, he escapes. Loomis, who’s time with Michael has turned him into a different type of madman, is horrified and starts hunting Michael, accosting innocent children, and all the while screaming about ‘THE EVIL HAS ESCAPED’…he also wonders why the police don’t take him seriously. 

Michael stalks Laurie and her friends, picking them off one-by-one, until only Laurie is left to fight and survive. The film is perfectly taught and lean and coiled: the tension ratchets and ratchets and ratchets until you don’t think you can take anymore. What makes this one of the finest horror films, and my favourite one to watch on Halloween night itself, is its simplicity. Michael Myers has no explanation. Why he killed his sister, why he hunts Laurie, how he is so strong and fast and seemingly invulnerable. He simply is. He happens. He is a force of nature that has no discernible cause or motive. Sometimes evil is like this, and I find my annual viewing of Halloween a tremendous restorative – a reminder of an age when the horror movies didn’t spoon-feed you backstory and explanations…they just gave you damn-good scares! 

Support Seen & Unseen

Since Spring 2023, our readers have enjoyed over 1,500 articles. All for free. 
This is made possible through the generosity of our amazing community of supporters.

If you enjoy Seen & Unseen, would you consider making a gift towards our work?
 
Do so by joining Behind The Seen. Alongside other benefits, you’ll receive an extra fortnightly email from me sharing my reading and reflections on the ideas that are shaping our times.

Graham Tomlin
Editor-in-Chief

Article
Belief
Creed
Politics
7 min read

If a King can pray with a Pope, there's hope for MAGA and woke to talk

Once bitter enemies found peace through prayer - offering a quiet challenge to today’s culture warriors

Graham is the Director of the Centre for Cultural Witness and a former Bishop of Kensington.

The Pope and King Charles walk together from the Sistine Chapel
Royal.uk

Last week, King Charles met the Pope.  

There was a part of me that wondered what Martin Luther, Thomas Cranmer, and even the young Ian Paisley would have of made it. Not much I imagine. The days of sharp theological barbs thrown between Protestants and Catholics over the mass, purgatory, the place of Mary, praying to the saints and so on are largely over. I imagine they had a cup of tea, admired Michaelangelo’s painting in the Sistine chapel and had a chat, but the main thing they did was to pray together - the first time a British monarch had met to pray with a Pope since the Reformation.  

So this was quite a big deal. Prayer carries much more significance than tea. But why did it matter so much?  

To make sense of it, you have to remember the history.  

In the aftermath of the English church’s break from Rome under Henry VIII, later consolidated under Elizabeth I, one of the most influential books that emerged from the English Reformation was Foxe’s Book of Martyrs, originally published in 1563. Alongside the ubiquitous King James Bibles, copies were to be found in English homes up and down the country for centuries afterwards. The book was a grisly catalogue of Christian persecution down the ages, and a thinly veiled side-swipe at the author’s main target - the Roman Catholic church, or “popery, which brought innovations into the church and overspread the Christian world with darkness and superstition.” Back then, that was how most British people saw the papacy.  

In 1605, a plot led by a group of English Roman Catholics to kill King James I of England (and VI of Scotland) and to blow up the Houses of Parliament was rumbled – the infamous Gunpowder Plot. For centuries afterwards on the anniversary of the conspiracy (until Health & Safety and modern squeamishness toned it down) the English lit bonfires, launched fireworks, and burnt effigies of the Catholic plotter Guy Fawkes to celebrate the deliverance of the nation from papal tyranny. At the time - and partly as a result of that event - Catholics were feared in England much as militant Islam is today in parts of the west – as a shadowy force infiltrating the nation from other European countries (mainly France and Ireland in this case), intent on changing the religion of the country, and imposing arbitrary and tyrannical rule on the population of Britain.  

Later in the same century, the looming prospect of a Catholic monarch put Britain into a spin. Charles II had been restored to the throne in 1660 after his father’s execution during the Civil Wars. Charles’ own Protestant credentials were always shaky – a fear that was confirmed by his deathbed conversion to Catholicism in 1685, but at least during his lifetime he remained a Protestant Anglican. The real problem was the heir – Charles’ younger brother James, the rakish Duke of York who was most definitely a Catholic. The same fears of papal tyranny and arbitrary rule, taking away the precious freedoms of the British people were the talk of the coffee houses and broadsheets of the 1670s and 80s.   

All the more remarkable then, that relationships between Anglicans and Roman Catholics have develop to such an extent that Anglicans (alongside other churches) were guests of honour at the late pope’s funeral and the inaugural mass of the new pope - and a King prays with a Pope.  

So why have things changed so much?  

Part of the answer is that times have changed. Europe is less obviously Christian than it was back then. The Christian churches have realised they don’t have the luxury of fighting over such matters. With Christian theology becoming less of a ‘public truth’ that held nations together (much as notions of freedom and democracy do for us today) arguments over it became less fraught and charged.  

Another reason is the lengthy conversations that have taken place between churches in the ecumenical movement throughout the last century that have carefully been able to unpick the disagreements, clarifying what was and wasn’t at stake in the fights between Lutherans, Catholics, Anglicans, Orthodox and others. These conversations haven’t solved all the issues. Different Christian denominations still disagree on a lot, especially today on issues like human sexuality and the like, but over time, they have at least brought clarity and a certain harmony to some of the historic disagreements. Anglicans still convert to Catholicism, and Catholics become Anglicans (or Orthodox or Pentecostals). The King and the Archbishop of York could not take Holy Communion with the Pope, but they could pray. I know from personal experience the depths of friendship that come when you recognise a brother or a sister in a Christian that you disagree with but in whom you can still recognise an essential commonality. 

Another key part of the answer is that the Roman Catholic church has changed. Last year for example, the Vatican department that oversees relationships with other churches issued a study document called ‘The Bishop of Rome’. It was part of an ongoing conversation between the Roman Catholic Church and other world churches on the role of the Pope in the modern world. It talked about the Papacy as having a ‘primacy of service’, its authority linked not to the triumphant but the suffering Christ, of how the Pope offered a kind of ‘personal’ kind of leadership, Orthodox churches a ‘collegial’ form (led by groups of bishops) and the Protestant churches a form that stressed the importance of the whole community.  

In other words, here was the Vatican asking other churches how the Papacy can be a help and support to Christians around the world. Back in the nineteenth century, in the first Vatican Council of 1869, the language was very different. The papacy was there by ‘divine right’, essential for the church, implying that other churches really ought to come back into the fold of the Church of Rome. The Roman Catholic church now seems to take a humbler, more generous stance which makes it possible for a King to pray with a Pope again.  

It's a heartwarming story. We constantly lament today the polarised, fragmented and angry nature of our politics and our cultural debate. The ecumenical movement of the Christian churches over the last hundred years may not be the sexiest development in recent cultural history. It involved long and painstaking conversations, the building of friendships and relationships across suspicion, a willingness to see the good in the other even when you could not agree. Yet this combination of time, patient conversation and humility has yielded fruit. 

In the seventeenth century, British Protestants saw Catholics as the deadly enemy seeing to undermine everything they hold dear - pretty much as some people do today see Muslims, or as progressives see conservatives or vice versa. Does this story hold out any hope of finding healthier ways to live together across our religious and political divides? Maybe. It's different of course because Catholics and Anglicans share the same basic faith, they recite the same Creed, they read (almost) the same Bible, they worship the same Jesus. With Islam we're talking about a different faith altogether. The ‘woke’ and the ‘MAGA’ people don’t seem to share much at all. 

But yet we do share a common humanity. And with patience, conversation, a willingness to look for the good in the other, some form of peaceful co-existence, with freedom to debate, or even to change religion might become possible.  

For that we can hope. And like the King and the Pope, pray.  

Support Seen & Unseen

Since Spring 2023, our readers have enjoyed over 1,500 articles. All for free. 
This is made possible through the generosity of our amazing community of supporters.

If you enjoy Seen & Unseen, would you consider making a gift towards our work?
 
Do so by joining Behind The Seen. Alongside other benefits, you’ll receive an extra fortnightly email from me sharing my reading and reflections on the ideas that are shaping our times.

Graham Tomlin
Editor-in-Chief