Phantasm IV: Oblivion (1998)

What makes it different from others?

One of my all time favorites.

For all the hype it got I was expecting a lot more!

The movie runs out of plot and jokes well before the end of a two-hour running time, long for a light comedy.

I had high hopes for this one. "Phantasm IV: Oblivion" has the inescapable 90's direct-to-video feel to it. Other than that, good shooting location, nice end credits song (Reggie Bannister does an almost-heavy-metalish cover of the Phantasm theme), and my favourite part was the motel scene where the blonde had spheres in her...well, you know where I'm going with this.

Picking up where the previous film ended, story has Reggie pursuing the Tall Man(Angus Scrimm), who has taken Mike for his own purposes, but is once again accompanied by Jody, still trying to tell the secrets of the Tall man's origins(he was a kindly inventor named Jebediah Morningside who enters a space/time tunnel and returns from the trip transformed into the evil Tall Man), before it is too late...Much better than III, though can't approach the first film, from which it uses much unused footage to further explain and enhance its present plot that has the gang going back and forth in time to avert the enslavement of humanity. Sequel is largely absent of the gruesome violence that hurt the past two films, but is slow-paced and jumbled nonetheless.

Phantasm IV (1998) * 1/2 (out of 4)Fourth and final film in the series takes a different approach to the familiar storyline of the previous two films. This time out, starting off at the end of part three, the Tall Man (Angus Scrimm) travels throughout time trying to capture Mike (A. Michael Baldwin) who is trying to figure out the origins of the Tall Man and the secrets behind the death of his brother. Reggie (Reggie Banister) is also out there trying to locate Mike so that he can save him. This fourth film in the series at least had the Tall Man looking for someone instead of the same story of Reggie and Mike looking for him. The one benefit of this is that we get more screen time devoted to the Tall Man but most of the good stuff ends there. Seeing as how parts two through four take place as one continuous story, I couldn't help but think that had the three sequels been edited together as one movie then perhaps the series would have worked better. I felt a lot of the stuff in parts two and three was just carried on to the point of it being boring and I think that holds true here so if the director had simply made one good story instead of three weak ones, I might have enjoyed the series more. Once again the performances are decent, if nothing great with Banister and Scrimm standing out. The gore this time out is rather low, although we do get a few good kills scattered out. The story itself isn't the strongest in the world but it is a mildly interesting one but I wish there had been more backbone to it. We do learn a few new things about the Tall Man but there's still not too much and it really doesn't do any good considering the series is now over.

Ten out of ten stars go to an old friend. That's what I consider the "Phantasm" cast and crew to be, old friends. None of the "Phantasm" sequels have been able to live up to the legendary mystique of the original. What else is new though? Very few sequels ever are able to match originals? Nonetheless, "Phantasm" sequels are overall better than the majority of horror sequels. And in part four, Mike and Reggie continue their struggle to unravel the mysteries of the Tall Man, and save Mike from becoming a flying sphere. But back to old friends... I guess you could say that I'm one of those people that, "Gets Phantasm". I understand why some people might not find any redeeming values in this film series; but to me this film and the characters it portrays are dear friends. Perhaps it's my own life experiences that enable me to level with the "Phantasm" plight. The "Phantasm" experience lies within each of us to most appropriately interpret. I, like many other "Phantasm" friends, have found solstice and understanding in Coscarelli's phantasmal imagining. I've been able to find solutions to my own real life problems and relive past memories through the help of all of the "Phantasms". Part four is definitely a highly nostalgic imagining that die hard fans will certainly appreciate and understand. Others may have problems with part 4 and I understand, but don't know how to convert these people.This film was produced for slightly less than $1,000,000 in 1997! And while I'll be the first to admit that this fourth installment has it's fair share of problems, I commend the production team for a job well done. Part four is just smart film making, plain and simply, done on a minute budget. Coscarelli is a talented film maker; he's really quite a master of visual imagery and camera manipulation. Just think of the staggering number of movies in any genre that are made every year for ten or twenty million, yet still are total garbage. Most of what comes out of Hollywood is overpriced garbage anyway: In 1998 and in 2009. Part four is far from being garbage at any production cost level. Everyone that worked on this movie worked on it because they cared about the people involved and expected something more than money out of it. The actors and production crew were there to make a movie for the fans that have supported the "Phantasm" legacy.