Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Halloween (2018)

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

  • #46
    Saw the trailer and it looks good. Here's hoping the actual movie is good.

    I recently realized that there's one small problem for me with ignoring the other sequels to HALLOWEEN. I feel like doing so robs Michael of some of his mystique. Not all of it, just some of it. Michael's not supposed to be just anyone, he's the Boogeyman. He's purely and simply evil. If you take away the inhuman things that he's done, suddenly he doesn't seem quite as special anymore. As it is now, Michael has killed four people (I think), got shot, got taken back into custody, and has spent the last 40 years locked up. There are lots of bad people out there who have killed four people. There are people out there who have killed more than four people. And, there are people out there who managed to get away with murder for a longer period of time. What then makes Michael special? What makes him the Boogeyman? Why should anyone who lives in the world of these movies find Michael to be memorable or deserving of being feared more than any other killer? If they had at least left part 2 in there, I think the nickname would still apply, because then his body count would be higher (most of them killed in one night), and Michael would have demonstrated why he is the Boogeyman and not just another psycho with a knife by getting shot six times and then just walking away, getting shot in the eyes and not even falling down, and then nearly getting blown to kingdom come and still trying to pursue his target. .

    Comment


    • #47
      To briefly summarize my thoughts:

      I am just grateful that we have a Halloween movie and that the trailer looks good.

      Comment


      • #48
        I started out totally skeptical, but slowly grew in anticipation to the point that I was actually getting hyped about this.

        Then the trailer hit and I went from about a 9 out of 10 to about a five. It looks fine. Ok. Worth a watch. That's all of a reaction I can give. Now I'm back to being skeptical. Oh well, it's just a trailer. I think seeing a new entry into the older series of sorts in October will be refreshing and provide a nice 90 minute enjoyment. That's about all I can ask for.
        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


        • #49
          I just saw the trailer for the first time and I think it had the opposite effect for me. I wasn't following this movie at all. The latest installments and/or remakes of our 'big 3' childhood monsters have been disappointing at every turn. The trailer looks promising.

          You gotta believe no matter how good this movie is, it could never live up to the original.

          Comment


          • #50
            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


            • #51
              Ah fuck it, I'm excited. They best not fuck this up.

              Comment


              • #52
                Way too many red flags for me to believe this will actually be good, but hey, the mask looks good.

                Comment


                • Darth Reaper
                  Darth Reaper commented
                  Editing a comment
                  Red flags you say? Please explain.

              • #53
                Ok, I'll follow up a bit. First are the reports of test screenings that went very badly, which the studio initially denied ever took place only to confirm it in a roundabout way by asking the website that published the story to remove it because the source had signed a NDA. Then there were the reshoots. Post production tinkering is never a good sign. I mean, minor pickup shots are one thing, but they shot a new ending (the audience hating the original one was a big part of the test screening reports). Changing the ending a few months from the release date indicates a major problem, even more so when you consider they claim to have worked on this script for nearly a year. Which is way too long to be writing a Halloween film IMO. It just screams overcooked. I can't remember, how long did it take to write the original? Two weeks? Maybe a month tops? And the trailer, the TRAILER, already feels overcooked with the silly documentary crew and the unnecessary reference to the retconned sibling storyline. The TIFF website lists the running time as 109 minutes and from the trailer alone I'd bet cutting 20 of them would make for a better movie. Then the director has been pushing Nick Castle being back again and totally minimizing the other guy as just doing the physical stuff, which completely contradicts what the stunt guy has claimed. So clearly someone here isn't telling the truth. Whoever is playing the Shape isn't a deal breaker to me, but lying kind of is.

                So yeah, this all feels way too sketchy for me to actually get hyped about it. But the mask still looks cool.

                Comment


                • #54
                  It's cool to see the faces of people that come into my work and are horror fans and informing them about a new Halloween movie. Their eyes light up at hearing Carpenter's name and the return of Curtis. Most seem down with the idea of cutting ties with the sequels and making it more streamlined. It's nice to see people get excited.

                  On the other hand, yeah, I've got serious doubts about this. As sagi pointed out, the reshoots, the bad test screenings, and the Castle controversy undermine the interest I had. I'm in the camp of "oh hey, another entry in the series. I'll watch it" and that's it. It's not like the series doesn't have its lows (5, the-entertaining-for-all-the-wrong-reasons-part-6, 7 and its lite slasher feel, 8, and the zombie films although I enjoy them for several reasons yet none for being a Halloween movie).

                  Maybe any lingering doubts will be proved wrong and it'll blow me out of my socks. Or it could just blow. I'm betting the result will be in the middle--a way to pass 90 minutes.
                  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


                  • #55
                    Its a shame this movie sounds like it might be a mess, but I'm still hyped for it. I turned 13 on the day RZ's Halloween 2 and no adult I knew wanted to go see it so I was screwed. It will be nice to finally see one of horror's legends on the big screen.

                    Comment


                    • #56
                      I accept the stuff about reshoots being a red flag - but then listening to test audiences might be a good thing at the end of the day. Rogue One had similar issues and turned out just fine.

                      I always figured the Castle stuff to be over-hyped bullshit anyway. Of course they're playing up his involvement and of course the other guy is a bit pissed off at not getting the credit he's earned. I could have predicted that back at the start though.

                      I also liked the little nod to the sibling storyline in the trailer - because not everyone that sees this is going to be a big Halloween fan that's read all the stuff about retcons, so that line in the trailer is prompting everyone to forget the sister stuff.

                      I think it's fine to have doubts, but from what I've seen I'm excited.

                      Comment


                      • #57
                        And, in fairness, I can imagine it taking longer to write the script for this movie than it did to write the original because in this case the original is a classic and they're trying to figure out how to live up to it and still do something that's also their own. It seems that becoming a legend can be much simpler than living up to the legend.

                        Comment


                        • #58
                          Originally posted by SanicHeghog View Post
                          Its a shame this movie sounds like it might be a mess, but I'm still hyped for it. I turned 13 on the day RZ's Halloween 2 and no adult I knew wanted to go see it so I was screwed. It will be nice to finally see one of horror's legends on the big screen.
                          Huh, thinking about it, I think that's the one I was unable to catch in theaters. I did manage to catch H20, Resurrection, and the 2007 film. The only one that has a special place in my memory banks is H20 as 1998 was the summer of falling into the endless tunnel of horror films. Plus, the shock and awe of the audience at watching "Michael's" fate at the end was fun.
                          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


                          • #59
                            Originally posted by Darth Reaper View Post
                            And, in fairness, I can imagine it taking longer to write the script for this movie than it did to write the original because in this case the original is a classic and they're trying to figure out how to live up to it and still do something that's also their own. It seems that becoming a legend can be much simpler than living up to the legend.
                            Absolutely. I think this often gets overlooked. When you write the first film you've got no limits. You can literally do anything you can imagine.

                            Then you come to write the sequel and you've got all these rules. And fans. Fans are a problem.

                            I'm a fan of all the Halloween films up to 6 so whatever they do with this sequake I'll be a little dissapointed that it doesn't tie in. I'd have loved to see Danielle Harris back in some capacity but oh well.

                            Comment


                            • #60
                              See, here's the thing: this is never going to live up to the first film. It can't be done. Lightning in a bottle and all that. The best you can hope for is something as good as Halloween 2 and then you run into the same problems that film had. I think the issue is less that you have to follow rules and more that you have to establish them and that gets messy. Halloween was like a Ramones song. It was addition by subtraction. Structurally it's already stripped down to the bare essentials. There's really nowhere to go except to do the exact same thing over again, which won't work because it was a film of its time and we've already seen it, or start adding to it. But when you start adding things to it you lose the essence of what made it great to begin with. So how can you really make another sequel to it?

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X