|
Post by seahawksraawk00 on Oct 19, 2018 18:19:47 GMT
Well, it's out and probably one of the most anticipated films of the year. Let's talk about it.
|
|
|
Post by HorrorMetal on Oct 19, 2018 18:37:59 GMT
I personally really enjoyed it. It put a fresh and interesting twist on things while still being respectful and true to the character of Michael Myers. The makers of this film knew when to keep him in the shadows and when to show him up close. He was mysterious and expressionless but brutal and merciless at the same time. It blended subtlety and blatantness very well. There were a few minor complaints I had, mostly with certain characters making odd choices and things taking unrealistic turns for plot convenience, but I feel like this was definitely one of the better sequels. Also love how the got rid of the "sister" angle, that unnecessary addition always made Myers far less scary to me.
|
|
|
Post by seahawksraawk00 on Oct 19, 2018 18:43:26 GMT
I personally really enjoyed it. It put a fresh and interesting twist on things while still being respectful and true to the character of Michael Myers. The makers of this film knew when to keep him in the shadows and when to show him up close. He was mysterious and expressionless but brutal and merciless at the same time. It blended subtlety and blatantness very well. There were a few minor complaints I had, mostly with certain characters making odd choices and things taking unrealistic turns for plot convenience, but I feel like this was definitely one of the better sequels. Also love how the got rid of the "sister" angle, that unnecessary addition always made Myers far less scary to me. *Ahem* The doctor.
|
|
|
Post by HorrorMetal on Oct 19, 2018 18:45:42 GMT
I personally really enjoyed it. It put a fresh and interesting twist on things while still being respectful and true to the character of Michael Myers. The makers of this film knew when to keep him in the shadows and when to show him up close. He was mysterious and expressionless but brutal and merciless at the same time. It blended subtlety and blatantness very well. There were a few minor complaints I had, mostly with certain characters making odd choices and things taking unrealistic turns for plot convenience, but I feel like this was definitely one of the better sequels. Also love how the got rid of the "sister" angle, that unnecessary addition always made Myers far less scary to me. *Ahem* The doctor. Yep, you guessed it. To be fair though, it was a bit... creative?
|
|
|
Post by seahawksraawk00 on Oct 19, 2018 18:49:33 GMT
Yep, you guessed it. To be fair though, it was a bit... creative? Well, I think it was meant to be taking Loomis character and flipping it. Generally that's what the entire movie did, taking a lot of elements from the original flipping them on their heads.
|
|
|
Post by HorrorMetal on Oct 19, 2018 18:51:11 GMT
Yep, you guessed it. To be fair though, it was a bit... creative? Well, I think it was meant to be taking Loomis character and flipping it. Generally that's what the entire movie did, taking a lot of elements from the original flipping them on their heads. Yeah, true that.
|
|
|
Post by masterofallgoons on Oct 19, 2018 19:37:34 GMT
All of the above is true, but I found that moment very bizarre and contrived. I was certainly surprised by it, which means it served its purpose I suppose, but I found it so strange and just sort of an attempt to shock.
I also think I might have preferred a more patient film with more of an emphasis on suspense and the creepy stalking early scenes of the original over the grisly and graphic kills that we see. And while it is well shot and has a nice look, I was sort of thrown by some of the faster editing and extreme close ups that made it clear they weren't going for a John Carpenter aesthetic. Some of the non sequitur dialogue lasted too long and could have been trimmed. Also, I didn't like or care about most of the younger characters. They seemed to be introduced just to be killed off, and one was introduced that could have been killed off and wasn't, and I wished he was.
But generally it's solid. I liked it. The kills, though they felt like more of a general slasher movie than the first Halloween are very well staged. Michael looks good. The characterization of Laurie works well. Those iconic images mentioned above being flipped on their head and reversed are really nice. The John Carpenter score is good (although I wanted to here some more of the original stripped down tracks for longer periods of time). And the cast mostly does a very solid job.
I was expecting a more conclusive ending though.
|
|
theshape25
Sophomore
@theshape25
Posts: 877
Likes: 536
|
Post by theshape25 on Oct 19, 2018 22:57:17 GMT
All of the above is true, but I found that moment very bizarre and contrived. I was certainly surprised by it, which means it served its purpose I suppose, but I found it so strange and just sort of an attempt to shock. I also think I might have preferred a more patient film with more of an emphasis on suspense and the creepy stalking early scenes of the original over the grisly and graphic kills that we see. And while it is well shot and has a nice look, I was sort of thrown by some of the faster editing and extreme close ups that made it clear they weren't going for a John Carpenter aesthetic. Some of the non sequitur dialogue lasted too long and could have been trimmed. Also, I didn't like or care about most of the younger characters. They seemed to be introduced just to be killed off, and one was introduced that could have been killed off and wasn't, and I wished he was. But generally it's solid. I liked it. The kills, though they felt like more of a general slasher movie than the first Halloween are very well staged. Michael looks good. The characterization of Laurie works well. Those iconic images mentioned above being flipped on their head and reversed are really nice. The John Carpenter score is good (although I wanted to here some more of the original stripped down tracks for longer periods of time). And the cast mostly does a very solid job. I was expecting a more conclusive ending though. I'm sure the ending was done that way on purpose, should a sequel end up happening. I thought it was solid as well. I would go as far as to say it's probably my favorite sequel. It wasn't perfect, but even the original wasn't either.
|
|
theshape25
Sophomore
@theshape25
Posts: 877
Likes: 536
|
Post by theshape25 on Oct 19, 2018 23:02:10 GMT
I personally really enjoyed it. It put a fresh and interesting twist on things while still being respectful and true to the character of Michael Myers. The makers of this film knew when to keep him in the shadows and when to show him up close. He was mysterious and expressionless but brutal and merciless at the same time. It blended subtlety and blatantness very well. There were a few minor complaints I had, mostly with certain characters making odd choices and things taking unrealistic turns for plot convenience, but I feel like this was definitely one of the better sequels. Also love how the got rid of the "sister" angle, that unnecessary addition always made Myers far less scary to me. *Ahem* The doctor. I thought something was fishy about the doctor when he started in with the, "you can't harm him" stuff. Then when he took out the sheriff and started loading Myers into the vehicle I was hoping this wasn't going to turn into a Halloween 6 situation with the Dr and Myers in cahoots.
|
|
|
Post by moviebuffbrad on Oct 19, 2018 23:11:57 GMT
All of the above is true, but I found that moment very bizarre and contrived. I was certainly surprised by it, which means it served its purpose I suppose, but I found it so strange and just sort of an attempt to shock. I also think I might have preferred a more patient film with more of an emphasis on suspense and the creepy stalking early scenes of the original over the grisly and graphic kills that we see. And while it is well shot and has a nice look, I was sort of thrown by some of the faster editing and extreme close ups that made it clear they weren't going for a John Carpenter aesthetic. Some of the non sequitur dialogue lasted too long and could have been trimmed. Also, I didn't like or care about most of the younger characters. They seemed to be introduced just to be killed off, and one was introduced that could have been killed off and wasn't, and I wished he was. Not to mention he is immediately killed off, so the whole bit was pointless. I agree with all of that. I'm much more negative about it than everyone else in this thread, and the reviews in general. Didn't hate it, but the tone and feel was completely off to me.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 19, 2018 23:21:44 GMT
All of the above is true, but I found that moment very bizarre and contrived. I was certainly surprised by it, which means it served its purpose I suppose, but I found it so strange and just sort of an attempt to shock. I also think I might have preferred a more patient film with more of an emphasis on suspense and the creepy stalking early scenes of the original over the grisly and graphic kills that we see. And while it is well shot and has a nice look, I was sort of thrown by some of the faster editing and extreme close ups that made it clear they weren't going for a John Carpenter aesthetic. Some of the non sequitur dialogue lasted too long and could have been trimmed. Also, I didn't like or care about most of the younger characters. They seemed to be introduced just to be killed off, and one was introduced that could have been killed off and wasn't, and I wished he was. But generally it's solid. I liked it. The kills, though they felt like more of a general slasher movie than the first Halloween are very well staged. Michael looks good. The characterization of Laurie works well. Those iconic images mentioned above being flipped on their head and reversed are really nice. The John Carpenter score is good (although I wanted to here some more of the original stripped down tracks for longer periods of time). And the cast mostly does a very solid job. I was expecting a more conclusive ending though. I'm sure the ending was done that way on purpose, should a sequel end up happening. What are the odds?
|
|
|
Post by seahawksraawk00 on Oct 19, 2018 23:45:20 GMT
I want a sequel but at the same I don't either because this could have the proper sequel to just end it. And I think a good and better way really that would give proper closure is that they could have had Laurie die with Michael. Somehow she sacrifice herself and take Michael down with her (in the fire maybe) to save her daughter or granddaughter. I think it'd be so much more effective and emotionally resonating because of how popular JLC is as Laurie.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 20, 2018 1:07:43 GMT
I'm disgusted with the idea of a sequel. They shouldn't even have resurrected the franchise, but of course, gotta have that $$$$$$$$
|
|
|
Post by masterofallgoons on Oct 20, 2018 13:35:56 GMT
All of the above is true, but I found that moment very bizarre and contrived. I was certainly surprised by it, which means it served its purpose I suppose, but I found it so strange and just sort of an attempt to shock. I also think I might have preferred a more patient film with more of an emphasis on suspense and the creepy stalking early scenes of the original over the grisly and graphic kills that we see. And while it is well shot and has a nice look, I was sort of thrown by some of the faster editing and extreme close ups that made it clear they weren't going for a John Carpenter aesthetic. Some of the non sequitur dialogue lasted too long and could have been trimmed. Also, I didn't like or care about most of the younger characters. They seemed to be introduced just to be killed off, and one was introduced that could have been killed off and wasn't, and I wished he was. But generally it's solid. I liked it. The kills, though they felt like more of a general slasher movie than the first Halloween are very well staged. Michael looks good. The characterization of Laurie works well. Those iconic images mentioned above being flipped on their head and reversed are really nice. The John Carpenter score is good (although I wanted to here some more of the original stripped down tracks for longer periods of time). And the cast mostly does a very solid job. I was expecting a more conclusive ending though. I'm sure the ending was done that way on purpose, should a sequel end up happening. I thought it was solid as well. I would go as far as to say it's probably my favorite sequel. It wasn't perfect, but even the original wasn't either. Yes for sure. That's what I was a little surprised by. Of course they're going to want to make sequels, you don't score rights to a franchise and feel satisfied making just one film, but considering the approach of the film and that fact that it's just a sequel to the first with Laurie facing off against Michael it would have seemed that they'd want to do a more definitive and climactic end to their battle. But yes, I think it's good. I definitely we will have to see it again to be sure, but I think it's objectively the best sequel as far as quality of filmmaking, even if it might not be my favorite.
|
|
|
Post by masterofallgoons on Oct 20, 2018 13:45:47 GMT
I thought something was fishy about the doctor when he started in with the, "you can't harm him" stuff. Then when he took out the sheriff and started loading Myers into the vehicle I was hoping this wasn't going to turn into a Halloween 6 situation with the Dr and Myers in cahoots. I also also don't think the doctor would likely have been able to do that considering he only really had the use of one arm.
|
|
|
Post by masterofallgoons on Oct 20, 2018 13:47:32 GMT
I want a sequel but at the same I don't either because this could have the proper sequel to just end it. And I think a good and better way really that would give proper closure is that they could have had Laurie die with Michael. Somehow she sacrifice herself and take Michael down with her (in the fire maybe) to save her daughter or granddaughter. I think it'd be so much more effective and emotionally resonating because of how popular JLC is as Laurie. Yeah, I didn't really buy that Laurie would leave the scene without actually watching Michael die. I agree that she more likely would rather have died with him than have left without making sure the job was done.
|
|
theshape25
Sophomore
@theshape25
Posts: 877
Likes: 536
|
Post by theshape25 on Oct 20, 2018 14:50:28 GMT
I thought something was fishy about the doctor when he started in with the, "you can't harm him" stuff. Then when he took out the sheriff and started loading Myers into the vehicle I was hoping this wasn't going to turn into a Halloween 6 situation with the Dr and Myers in cahoots. I also also don't think the doctor would likely have been able to do that considering he only really had the use of one arm. That's right. I forgot that he only had one usable arm. I also wondered why Laurie would take off without making sure he was dead. The only thing I could think of is since she is the one who put the trap room together maybe she was confident that he wasn't going to get out.
|
|
northernlad
Sophomore
@northernlad
Posts: 898
Likes: 620
|
Post by northernlad on Oct 20, 2018 22:28:05 GMT
Just saw it, loved it! It's probably the best of all of the sequels and I'm glad they went this route with it. In fact, looking at it after I've seen it, they could once again pick right back up with it again and carry on with it again. I'm very happy with it.
|
|
northernlad
Sophomore
@northernlad
Posts: 898
Likes: 620
|
Post by northernlad on Oct 20, 2018 22:30:09 GMT
All of the above is true, but I found that moment very bizarre and contrived. I was certainly surprised by it, which means it served its purpose I suppose, but I found it so strange and just sort of an attempt to shock. I also think I might have preferred a more patient film with more of an emphasis on suspense and the creepy stalking early scenes of the original over the grisly and graphic kills that we see. And while it is well shot and has a nice look, I was sort of thrown by some of the faster editing and extreme close ups that made it clear they weren't going for a John Carpenter aesthetic. Some of the non sequitur dialogue lasted too long and could have been trimmed. Also, I didn't like or care about most of the younger characters. They seemed to be introduced just to be killed off, and one was introduced that could have been killed off and wasn't, and I wished he was. But generally it's solid. I liked it. The kills, though they felt like more of a general slasher movie than the first Halloween are very well staged. Michael looks good. The characterization of Laurie works well. Those iconic images mentioned above being flipped on their head and reversed are really nice. The John Carpenter score is good (although I wanted to here some more of the original stripped down tracks for longer periods of time). And the cast mostly does a very solid job. I was expecting a more conclusive ending though. The part with the doctor is the one downside of the movie for me. It thankfully didn't destroy the movie for me that's for sure...but I sure didn't like that part of the story.
|
|
simest
Sophomore
@simest
Posts: 243
Likes: 222
|
Post by simest on Oct 20, 2018 22:41:16 GMT
I have to say I was largely disappointed with this. There was so little suspense and the whole thing went right down the road of Myers versus Laurie as though she was somehow his chief focus despite killing indiscriminately before this - seemingly without even the most vague pathology. Somewhere amongst all this, Judith Myers seems completely forgotten and the whole concept of Myers reliving her murder by seeking out, then strategically stalking victims that somehow represent her, are replaced with a Super-bowl-type showdown with Laurie that we are building towards even before he escapes.
For me, this means throwing out the sister/brother angle was a waste of time because for all that, it was still all about Myers coming after Laurie.........only this time for reasons unknown. They might as well have left the sibling angle in because they still killed off the concept of him killing Judith over and over by targeting teenage girls of her type. This was the only insight we had into the character from the original story but it was enough to make him terrifying yet keep him unfathomable. If they had stuck to this and had Laurie make it her business to step in to try and thwart him (rather than be his star focus), that would have been consistent with the Myers character and been a believable extension of Laurie Strode. As it is, Strode and her descendants are again painted as the passion of Myers' bloodlust - something we've seen all before several times over. Laurie's doomsday pad had me gasping in disbelief that the story had so centred on her again being the object of Myers' psychotic desire........a motive far removed from his urges in the original.
Judith gets merely an obligatory mention from the villainous and utterly pointless Dr character, who is synthetically injected into the plot to provide an absurd twist by himself turning homicidal - presumably out of obsession with Myers - only to end up the next victim himself mere moments later! It hardly seemed worth including the character and I thought was daft to present us with a character that has presumably spent years in his specialised profession........ only to wait around for Myers escape (an event that may never have occurred) and then act out some hitherto subdued homicidal urge of his own. This I thought was desperation on the part of the writers to give the movie an extra shot in the arm, perhaps to make up for substance they suspected was lacking.
I also thought - given how many deaths there were at the crash scene and then the gas station - the low key police presence on the streets of Haddonfield for the longest stretch of the evening seemed fairly absurd. Only when yet more bodies turned up, did there seem to be any real kind of manhunt. Even HALLOWEEN II presented a more realistic law enforcement reaction around Haddonfield to the crimes that had been only then just discovered.
I wished there had been more daytime scenes and patient buildup to the night terrors that lay in wait. There was little structured pacing here. This was HALLOWEEN for the Millennium. A brief set-up, then straight in with the brutality and barely 5 minutes without Myers onscreen in case audience attention spans begin to wane and people start checking their SnapChats.
Myers' spent so long in the original film (often offscreen) observing people and dogging their steps before choosing his moments to strike. Think of him watching Annie from a few feet away on several occasions at the Wallace house. Or standing in a doorway watching Bob and Lynda - both downstairs and upstairs - before toying with them and luring them to their deaths. Here he just nonchalantly walks into houses straight off the cuff and kills without any pre-selection or stalking. The victims seemingly have no tie to his pathology around reliving Judith's murder - while at the same time also have no connection to his now-updated mission to target Laurie Strode and her kin. He spent a whole day in the original patiently observing and planning his movements around Haddonfield without strolling into peoples houses and slaughtering whoever was unlucky enough to live there.
Maybe I'm too wrapped up in the original.......maybe I can't move with the times! But even dismissing Carpenter's film, for me this was a badly paced, generic slasher with little suspense, almost no scares and plot deviations that are often pointless and occasionally absurd. A lot of the kills are pointless and brutal, very much out of sync with how Myers operated previously and worst of all - were more reminiscent of some of what I saw in Rob Zombie's celluloid catastrophes.
Then after all Laurie's convictions to "end this", she walks from a fiery inferno - without the certainty of his death - when she had him trapped in a basement where she could just fill him with holes from any of the plentiful firearms she's been stockpiling for 40 years.........I audibly groaned at this point.
I really wish I had got more out of this and hope others manage to enjoy it but for me the film was light years short of the simple, yet powerfully effective concept that a low budget independent movie from 1978 presented to us..........and which I fell in love with on first viewing.
I think I'm just getting old and grumpy!!!
|
|