Rob Zombie's HALLOWEEN (Coming 10/19/2007)

[MaulFan]

Richard Lynch

https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0528433/


Posted Link to Differences to Workprint & Theatrical Versions of the
New Halloween in the other Thread!



Just in case you needed to know!

Aha, he is who I thought, I recognized him as playing the lead hunter in Alligator 2, and IMDB says he was in a few episodes of Star Trek: TNG so I'm sure I recognize him from that too. I'll say this, now that I know for sure he is who I thought, his age REALLY shows, you'd either have to be a big fan of his or really keen on faces like I am from my artistic background to spot who he is.

 

[denger4000]

He's so awesome in Puppet Master 3, I highly recommend horror fans to check that out.

 

[Buttmunch]

No. In the original Halloween, the premise was the boogeyman stalks babysitters and Michael was the embodiment of the boogeyman, but there was no rationale really to his killings. When Debra Hill and John Carpenter wrote Halloween 2, they got into creating the brother sister relationship in that film, so to be true to the original, the blood tie would not exist, but being true to Halloween lore, it is there. As a writer, I'm sure Zombie couldn't help but come up with things based on his knowledge of the series and not just solely from the first film.

Huh. I've just always remembered that Laurie and Michael were siblings so I haven't ever caught that that isn't revealed in the first film. That really does make it creepier not knowing they are related, but it makes total sense why he was stalking her of all of the possible teenagers he could have stalked. After you know, it just makes Laurie a girl with a crazy brother.

I think it might have been even creepier if Dr. Loomis was just an old guy that believed in/tracked the boogieman and that Micheal really just was a supernatural force talking a human form.

 

[The Mike]

No. In the original Halloween, the premise was the boogeyman stalks babysitters and Michael was the embodiment of the boogeyman, but there was no rationale really to his killings. When Debra Hill and John Carpenter wrote Halloween 2, they got into creating the brother sister relationship in that film, so to be true to the original, the blood tie would not exist, but being true to Halloween lore, it is there. As a writer, I'm sure Zombie couldn't help but come up with things based on his knowledge of the series and not just solely from the first film.

That is what I was referring to....I was a bit to vague but as MaulFan explained the link between Michael and Laurie was not realized until Halloween 2. I thought it was interesting that Zombie already pulled that part in but after seeing the film (I loved it by the way) it was handled nicely.

 

[denger4000]

Just got back, the movie was great! If you liked the Devil's Rejects you'll like this. Simple as that.

 

[Mark Hazard]

Aha, he is who I thought, I recognized him as playing the lead hunter in Alligator 2, and IMDB says he was in a few episodes of Star Trek: TNG so I'm sure I recognize him from that too. I'll say this, now that I know for sure he is who I thought, his age REALLY shows, you'd either have to be a big fan of his or really keen on faces like I am from my artistic background to spot who he is.

Er, he's pretty unique looking. The second he showed up on screen you recognize him if you've seen him in anything. We were all "it's that creepy guy that tries to rape Al Pacino in Scarecrow!"

 

[black cat]

I went in with an open mind and really enjoy this film and I hate all of Rob Zombie's other films

 

[Dassy]

Finally got around to watching the Workprint Version.

Great Update of the original and now dated classic,great cast and awesome music and soundtrack!.
Loved It.
Well done Rob Zombie!

 

[The Mike]

I'm interested to see the Workprint Edition especially since it differs in some aspect a lot from the theater release. I hope that we get both in a Deluxe Edition DVD release....

 

[Knockworstface]

I'm interested to see the Workprint Edition especially since it differs in some aspect a lot from the theater release. I hope that we get both in a Deluxe Edition DVD release....

They are almost 2 entire different films the work print and the theatrical version.

 

[Dr.Mirakle32]

One thing I wanted to see mentioned in Zombie's film, though it was never touched upon, was a connection to the supernatural and mystical, Celtic origins of the Shape. I've never read the original film's novelization, but the Wikipedia entry on it had me interested:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halloween_(novel)

"The horror started on the eve of Samhain, in a foggy vale in northern Ireland, at the dawn of the Celtic race. And once started, it trod the earth forevermore, wreaking its savagery suddenly, swiftly, and with incredible ferocity".


The prologue of the novel takes place at the dawn of the Celtic race in Ireland and tells the story of a young 15 year old disfigured boy named Enda who is passionately in love with the King Gwynwyll's daughter, Deidre. After being severely humiliated for attempting to win her love Enda attacks and brutally slays Deidre and her fiance at a community ritual event on Halloween. Enda is immediately killed by the other members of the village and his soul cursed to wander the Earth forever, re-creating the events of that night.

To me, this is a much more interesting twist on the character than he standard, real-life "serial-killer origin". I know some of the sequels referenced this, but they never really did a good job with it. Hopefully some eleements of this origin will come into play in Zombie's next installment.

 

[EVILFACE]

Hated House of 1k Corpses and LOVED The Devil's Rejects. Biggest turnaround for any director.

Carpenters Halloween is a classic for a reason. Zombie's version didn't even come close.

I like the first half ok enough. The hulking Michael had nice screen presense. It was brutal. I think the f word was used way too much. Curse words have lost their shock value in this day and age, and using them constantly just comes off as lame. It's nice too see bewbs again in a slasher flick though. McDowell was good as well.

But the last half is just a rehash of Carpenters Halloween on speed. After starting this remake with his own version, I don't see why he rehashed it. Zombie's Laurie Strode was horrible. 18? she looked and acted like a 13 year old. And for the ending, this hulking Myers football tackles Laurie off the balcony and knocked out cold? Lame. This guy broke chains, tore town walls and took bullets.

Another Halloween sequel I can skip on DVD. Halloween 3 was more enjoyable.

The Shape > Human Michael Myers

 

[black cat]

Halloween 3 was more enjoyable.

Um ok no, Halloween 3 was the worst so far and will always be

 

[MaulFan]

Ya, Halloween 3 was pretty much a dumb conceptual film all around. Even there hadn't been 2 Halloween films before it with a main character and story to follow, as a stand alone film I just don't think it had a strong enough concept to really succeed.

 

[Gatack]

Um ok no, Halloween 3 was the worst so far and will always be

Parts five and six are by far worse. Both gave the franchise a boot to the nuts that it never recovered from.

 

[Gatack]

Ya, Halloween 3 was pretty much a dumb conceptual film all around. Even there hadn't been 2 Halloween films before it with a main character and story to follow, as a stand alone film I just don't think it had a strong enough concept to really succeed.

I think the concept was fine. I think that a better director would have gotten more out of it. Tommy Lee Wallace wasn't before and hasn't been a viable director. I would have loved to have seen Nigel Kneale's original vision, to bad it got fubard.

 

[denger4000]

Parts five and six are by far worse. Both gave the franchise a boot to the nuts that it never recovered from.

5 was mediocre but 6 wasnt bad.

 

[Darklord Dave]

I'm not a huge Halloween fan, but I've always enjoyed "origin" stories. However everything and everyone was so incredibly unpleasant in this film that it was difficult to sit through. I was also waiting for a supernatural connection - making Michael just an incredibly big run-of-the-mill psychopath kind of shortchanges the entire mythology.

 

[MaulFan]

Halloween is deffinitely a series riddled with problems, and I think it's largely due to there never being an intent to continue the story past the first film, despite leaving Michael Myers still alive and about in the end, that was more to say he was pure evil and that it never goes away no matter what you do and not to setup a sequel. After that, 2 did a nice job of giving a little more story but also wrapping up matters. H3 should have been made as a unique film and not even carried the title Halloween in my mind; once you introduce a character over multiple films, you've bascially setup a franchise and to have a story in the middle that has nothing to do with your core character is crazy. H4 was a decent return to Michael's story up until the last 2 minutes when the story arc of his evil being passable onto Jamie and them being connected began. I really think they wrote that in just to have a shocking ending and in that it succeeded, but it started Michael's character on a tangent that ruined him. The whole Thorn concept of 5 and 6 really held them back from their potential, so while overall they're fun to watch, story wise they're a tough sell. H20 was a nice revisit to an H1 style of film and worked pretty good. Resurrection had a decent premise with the unique filming style, but story and casting wise was very weak and not too good an installment.

As much as I love Michael Myers and films with the character, I just don't think he's a character made for sequels. I'm unfamiliar with Jason and Freddy films, but I get an impression that their killings and actions follow a pattern that can be justified over multiple films. If Michael had never been tied to any particular place or character, and was simply this evil force that came out on Halloween and terrorized places, not just Haddonfield, then you could probably come up with many stories for him to be involved with. Having Michael's motives tied to family and his home really limits your options for storylines and at some point you either have to say we're done with this character or you come up with bizarre plotlines like the Curse of Thorn to try and stretch things out.

 

[Voorhees27]

Halloween is deffinitely a series riddled with problems, and I think it's largely due to there never being an intent to continue the story past the first film, despite leaving Michael Myers still alive and about in the end, that was more to say he was pure evil and that it never goes away no matter what you do and not to setup a sequel. After that, 2 did a nice job of giving a little more story but also wrapping up matters. H3 should have been made as a unique film and not even carried the title Halloween in my mind; once you introduce a character over multiple films, you've bascially setup a franchise and to have a story in the middle that has nothing to do with your core character is crazy. H4 was a decent return to Michael's story up until the last 2 minutes when the story arc of his evil being passable onto Jamie and them being connected began. I really think they wrote that in just to have a shocking ending and in that it succeeded, but it started Michael's character on a tangent that ruined him. The whole Thorn concept of 5 and 6 really held them back from their potential, so while overall they're fun to watch, story wise they're a tough sell. H20 was a nice revisit to an H1 style of film and worked pretty good. Resurrection had a decent premise with the unique filming style, but story and casting wise was very weak and not too good an installment.

As much as I love Michael Myers and films with the character, I just don't think he's a character made for sequels. I'm unfamiliar with Jason and Freddy films, but I get an impression that their killings and actions follow a pattern that can be justified over multiple films. If Michael had never been tied to any particular place or character, and was simply this evil force that came out on Halloween and terrorized places, not just Haddonfield, then you could probably come up with many stories for him to be involved with. Having Michael's motives tied to family and his home really limits your options for storylines and at some point you either have to say we're done with this character or you come up with bizarre plotlines like the Curse of Thorn to try and stretch things out.

What he said. Nah, just kidding, I do definetely agree with everything you mentioned above and do think the reason the Fridays and Elm Streets success in sequels is because of its "open ended" possibilities.

I'm not neccessarily saying that they were very "Successful" sequels but they did manage to make 11 Friday movies so that must mean they make $$$ at least.

Jason drown as a child and came back so why would he die from a gun shot. Freddy torments kids in their dreams so how do you stop that?

Myers in a perfect world would have ended at part I or hell even II, but we all know this isn't the case.

Just my opinion though.