Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Halloween (2018)

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Well John wasn't drunk when he went on to do reshoots of Halloween II so he could have taken it out at the time if he didn't like it. But I guess this was a regret he had years later. But oh well. He created it and it stuck and for the rest of the franchise for the next 36 years it stuck. He should just deal with it. I bet without it, the series wouldn't have gone as far as it did because there was material to work with that that lead to a while cult aspect that TIED to the concept of Halloween, which is what the series needed to dwell into: curses and black magic. It's just shame H6's T-Cut version didn't do justice to fleshing that out and it was just messy and confusing in the end thanks to Joe Chappelle's stupid ass. But anyway, Michael and Laurie being siblings is unique. You know there's plenty of horror movies out there where we have a killer going after random people. Michael was like the only one who, while he was still killing random people along the way, had special targets: HIS FAMILY! These weren't just random people he'd keep stalking for several years and movies until they're dead. If you're gonna do that, then you might as well have them be related. John was smart to throw that in sooner than later that it feels like an after thought. The "soap opera writing" here means no harm and it's about time you lighten up on it. It's just a shame Halloween III didn't dive into the backstory of Laurie and her relationship with the Myers that we never truly knew about, even by H20.

    Comment


    • I've made two posts regarding it so I'm not sure "it's about time i need to lighten up" on anything.
      I've posted an opinion and a fact.

      Comment


      • The fact you can't even debate against that whole paragraph of me countering you, shows where your argument stands here dude. Two sentences of basically lackluster responses that easily show defeat. You posted no opinion worth being credible considering you're pulling out the typical, "Well the original didn't have it, so therefore it's not needed" argument which is as ludicrous as natural disasters. Stories are always making things up as you go along especially in a series. John knew what he was getting into when he got into the movie business and when he decided to write Halloween II, he knew what he was doing all the way until the last day of production so I don't want to hear it. His decision helped shaped the series into what it is before retcons butchered it up. The fact is, the sibling angle made Michael unique from any other horror icon out there and ought to be understood better and respected. That's the problem with you people. You want everything to be the same and "safe" and is too scared to break new ground with these movies/series.

        Comment


        • Moderator note:

          Gentlemen,

          By all means continue the debate (it is very interesting), but please respect each other's opinions, be respectful, or simply agree to disagree.

          Thank you.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by DevonteHuntley View Post
            Well if you're rebooting, it won't be a remake. It will be what Batman Begins was to Batman (1989).
            But, again, I'm not interested in doing that because I like Halloween just the way it is. That's the starting point that I want. It's what comes next that I would be interested in taking a different approach to.

            Well John Carpenter wanted to add a twist and it wasn't that bad. It's a pretty damn good one. I don't see the hate other than "well the original didn't have it" like so what. It means no harm, it works for the story and the fixation Michael have for her, so there should be no problem.
            I never said I hate the sibling angle. I'm simply open to the idea of disregarding it if I like the story that results from doing that. I gave Rob Zombie's complete remake a chance too. It ended up disappointing me, but I still gave it a chance.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by DevonteHuntley View Post
              I bet without it, the series wouldn't have gone as far as it did because there was material to work with that that lead to a while cult aspect that TIED to the concept of Halloween, which is what the series needed to dwell into: curses and black magic. It's just shame H6's T-Cut version didn't do justice to fleshing that out and it was just messy and confusing in the end thanks to Joe Chappelle's stupid ass.
              Okay, I can't get behind this at all. I hate the curse of Thorn. I think it was a bad idea. It might have been fine for another character in another story, but Michael doesn't need to be explained. He's purely and simply evil, that's all that we need to know. It doesn't matter how he got that way; what matters is that he is that way and how the other characters deal with it. The inexplicable nature of Michael Myers is part of his mystique. Taking that away diminishes the character.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Darth Reaper View Post
                But, again, I'm not interested in doing that because I like Halloween just the way it is. That's the starting point that I want. It's what comes next that I would be interested in taking a different approach to.
                Well when you have people wanting to come in and retcon relationships by retconning WHOLE MOVIES, then they need to do that. Again, Psycho III did not retcon Psycho II while reverting back to the original relationship between Norma and Norman Bates that Part II cleverly twisted up.
                Originally posted by Darth Reaper View Post
                I never said I hate the sibling angle. I'm simply open to the idea of disregarding it if I like the story that results from doing that. I gave Rob Zombie's complete remake a chance too. It ended up disappointing me, but I still gave it a chance.
                I don't mind it going away either, but do it right. That's why I suggestion the Myers adopted Laurie thing. It "removes" the sibling angle by making Laurie not even blood and while it's not completely since they're still siblings by adoption, it's the damn best thing you can do without stripping out the mythology completely like it didn't happen and was a fundamental element for several movies. Remove it by doing so respectively. No retcons at all!
                Originally posted by Darth Reaper View Post
                Okay, I can't get behind this at all. I hate the curse of Thorn. I think it was a bad idea. It might have been fine for another character in another story, but Michael doesn't need to be explained. He's purely and simply evil, that's all that we need to know. It doesn't matter how he got that way; what matters is that he is that way and how the other characters deal with it. The inexplicable nature of Michael Myers is part of his mystique. Taking that away diminishes the character.
                I can't get behind this at all. Thorn is excellent and goes well with Michael. Joe tried to make that up by showing that Michael can still be brutal and random with it hence the operating room massacre scene which is the one of the only good changes made to the Halloween 6. It's like Michael can still be the boogeyman while targeting his family. Michael can still be brutal and evil while being under a curse. What's so great about him being a mystery? Nothing at all. It works when you're doing something new and different and you want to leave mystery but by the sixth installment, you need to provide some backstory and explanation if you're gonna keep the series going. They simply had to do things that would provide all the build up the series has been getting and what could be used as ground work for following sequels.



                Last edited by DevonteHuntley; 10-25-2018, 02:52 AM.

                Comment


                • I liked the sister angle idea. I love "Halloween 2" (1981) and H20.

                  H20 is not only my favorite sequel, it is also on my top 10 list of favorite horror movies. I wish I could erase Resurrection from the timeline, though.

                  Although I love "Halloween 4" (1988), I am definitely not to fond of the Thorn storyline. The Thorn storyline reminds me of "Hellraiser: Bloodline." Great potential, but terrible execution.

                  I don't mind the Rob Zombie movies, personally. They feel like "Halloween" meets "The Devil Rejects." Some people, such as myself, didn't care and enjoyed them; other people completely disapproved them.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by DevonteHuntley View Post
                    I can't get behind this at all. Thorn is excellent and goes well with Michael. Joe tried to make that up by showing that Michael can still be brutal and random with it hence the operating room massacre scene which is the one of the only good changes made to the Halloween 6. It's like Michael can still be the boogeyman while targeting his family. Michael can still be brutal and evil while being under a curse.
                    Part of the problem is that the curse of Thorn gives Michael a specific mission and method of action. He's out to kill his family to offer them up as a sacrifice, and he only kills other people when they get in the way. It doesn't work for me to give him such a specific purpose and then say that he also kills at random. The two ideas contradict each other. In this case, you can't have it both ways.

                    What's so great about him being a mystery? Nothing at all.
                    The unknown and the unknowable tend to be more frightening than the well-explained. Knowledge is power. The more of it you have, the more powerful you are. The less of it you have, the less powerful you are. A senseless act is more frightening than an act that makes sense because it can happen anywhere, at any time, for any reason. That scares us because we don't understand it, and that lack of understanding means that we have less power over the situation, and thus are more vulnerable. Michael is frightening because we don't understand him. We don't know what he is or why he is; all we know is that he is, and we have to deal with him without knowing exactly how. He's inexplicable, and because he's inexplicable he makes us feel less in control and more vulnerable.

                    We used to fear fire more than we do now because way back when we didn't understand it. But, with time and study we gained a better understanding of it and learned to harness it. Now, we still have to treat it with respect, but as long as we do, we don't need to fear it as much because we can control it.

                    The ocean's depths still frighten us though, because we still know so little about them. There's still so much out there that we haven't seen, and we don't know what's there. And, it's an environment that we're not well suited to, so that makes it even scarier. I can just imagine being alone in the deepest, darkest parts of the ocean and a chill runs down my spine, because I would be in a hostel environment, I have no idea what would actually be down there with me, and I probably wouldn't be able to see it anyway. Being stranded in the middle of the ocean on a boat scares me, because I would have very little power over the situation.

                    It works when you're doing something new and different and you want to leave mystery but by the sixth installment, you need to provide some backstory and explanation if you're gonna keep the series going. They simply had to do things that would provide all the build up the series has been getting and what could be used as ground work for following sequels
                    We already know everything we need to know about Michael. He's evil. New characters, with new stories to tell, can add new elements to keep the series going. Michael is the familiar element and part of what defines this franchise.


                    Comment


                    • I forgot to reply to this in my last comment so I'm sticking it here:
                      Originally posted by Darth Reaper View Post
                      But, again, I'm not interested in doing that because I like Halloween just the way it is. That's the starting point that I want. It's what comes next that I would be interested in taking a different approach to.
                      Well it doesn't matter what you may want. If they want to remove the sibling angle that requires a retcon and not damaging the other movies and want to spark a new series of movies, then this is the root they should go. Retconning 90% of the series to do this is dumb. Just start from scratch completely or don't even bother. Why convolute an already convoluted franchise? They could have taken this a step further calling it SAMHAIN instead of "Halloween" since we already have two "Halloween's".

                      Originally posted by Darth Reaper View Post
                      Part of the problem is that the curse of Thorn gives Michael a specific mission and method of action. He's out to kill his family to offer them up as a sacrifice, and he only kills other people when they get in the way. It doesn't work for me to give him such a specific purpose and then say that he also kills at random. The two ideas contradict each other. In this case, you can't have it both ways.
                      Well you can because if he's bound to kill his family that doesn't mean he can only kill them and not anyone else. Clearly we see him kill random people along the way, some of which weren't even in his way, so Michael has some choices in what he does while he's cursed.
                      Originally posted by Darth Reaper View Post
                      The unknown and the unknowable tend to be more frightening than the well-explained.
                      Well for me, I never gave a damn about this. I don't mind something being given a backstory. Not everything is meant to be a mystery, especially in the long run. As long as it's still brutal and evil and can put on a scary performance, then I don't mind how much exposure in the backstory and motive we get. People just need to lighten up or else they are never gonna let their minds venture into some new depth.
                      Originally posted by Darth Reaper View Post
                      We already know everything we need to know about Michael. He's evil. New characters, with new stories to tell, can add new elements to keep the series going. Michael is the familiar element and part of what defines this franchise.
                      Um no. We only know what you feel comfortable knowing about Michael because that's the original intent and you feel that has to be the ONLY intent. But any series starts off vague of anything because it's not intended to lead to sequels, but the sequels come and that's bound to happen when you have a successful movie and concept. So things change and so should how you want to handle a mystique character. If you're open for sequels being made, then be open to layers being added to a killer. New characters and new stories lead to recycled rehash and dull drama really fast. That's why a lot of the Friday the 13th movies feel so bland because up until Part 7, there was really nothing new to do. You had gullible teenagers; the naïve brutes and bitches, you had the sex scenes, the gore, the guy in the hockey mask going around killing people, most notably the female heroine and boy did the movies go through them like a revolving door. The killer is the star here and what the people want to see, so they should be the ones with the spectacular elements and background that leads to the new stories and other elements being talked about.
                      Last edited by DevonteHuntley; 10-25-2018, 03:09 AM.

                      Comment



                      • So after mulling it over the past couple of days, my opinion of the movie hasn't changed too much other than I think there's something missing. It's good, but there's something it needs to make it great. I can't put my finger on it. Some of the dialogue scenes still bother me as they feel heavily truncated, but that's not it. Maybe after another viewing I'll figure it out.

                        What I do know is that my favorite track from the film is still this one:

                        People hyping up latest comic book movie to be the GOAT and I'm like "psshh, you guys must not have seen Bigfoot rip off a man's dick before in 1980's Night of the Demon."

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Chex View Post
                          So after mulling it over the past couple of days, my opinion of the movie hasn't changed too much other than I think there's something missing. It's good, but there's something it needs to make it great. I can't put my finger on it. Some of the dialogue scenes still bother me as they feel heavily truncated, but that's not it. Maybe after another viewing I'll figure it out.

                          What I do know is that my favorite track from the film is still this one:

                          WOAH, this track is splendid. I love it.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Chex View Post
                            So after mulling it over the past couple of days, my opinion of the movie hasn't changed too much other than I think there's something missing. It's good, but there's something it needs to make it great. I can't put my finger on it. Some of the dialogue scenes still bother me as they feel heavily truncated, but that's not it. Maybe after another viewing I'll figure it out.

                            What I do know is that my favorite track from the film is still this one:

                            There's no Ted Hollister. Huge failure on that front.

                            In all seriousness, I've seen just about everybody say that's their favorite track.

                            Comment


                            • I haven't even watched the movie yet and if I had any power, I would have made that track the opening one.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Westin View Post
                                I haven't even watched the movie yet and if I had any power, I would have made that track the opening one.
                                Oh, no. Trust me, no. It's perfect where it is. Plus, you need the theme song during those awesome opening credits.
                                People hyping up latest comic book movie to be the GOAT and I'm like "psshh, you guys must not have seen Bigfoot rip off a man's dick before in 1980's Night of the Demon."

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X