|
Post by naterdawg on Oct 31, 2017 16:55:29 GMT
Did you notice that when Michael stalks Tommy at school, he's already wearing the Halloween mask? This was way before the break-in where the mask was stolen. He's also wearing the mask when Laurie looks out of her bedroom window and sees Michael by the laundry. Again, this is before the break-in. Someone earlier posted that the robbery happened but no one responded right away. If memory serves me, there was a rather loud burglar alarm--which would be pretty hard to ignore.
|
|
northernlad
Sophomore
@northernlad
Posts: 898
Likes: 620
|
Post by northernlad on Nov 1, 2017 13:58:44 GMT
Did you notice that when Michael stalks Tommy at school, he's already wearing the Halloween mask? This was way before the break-in where the mask was stolen. He's also wearing the mask when Laurie looks out of her bedroom window and sees Michael by the laundry. Again, this is before the break-in. Someone earlier posted that the robbery happened but no one responded right away. If memory serves me, there was a rather loud burglar alarm--which would be pretty hard to ignore. Yeah pretty sure Michael was wearing that mask all day. So do we know in fact that Michael was responsible for the break in at the Hardware store?
|
|
Royale H. Oaks
Junior Member
Hoax Extra
@charli3
Posts: 2,687
Likes: 750
|
Post by Royale H. Oaks on Nov 1, 2017 18:46:22 GMT
The owner of the hardware store (Mr. Riddler?) is he the same man who Laurie told Annie was watching her? Probably all he can do at 87
|
|
tresix
Sophomore
@tresix
Posts: 491
Likes: 195
|
Post by tresix on Nov 1, 2017 21:03:57 GMT
Was just watching this one the other night. Things that made me think a little... 1. Michael killing Judith...she didn't put up much of a fight. She clearly was bigger than he was and she was still very much alive after the first slash with the knife. She could have easily gotten up and broke his wrist. 2. Michael stalking Tommy Doyle at school. Made me wonder if Michael planned to kill him too. 1. I would think that Judith would be in shock from (a) getting stabbed and (b) discovering that your younger brother is the one doing the stabbing.
2. I was thinking that maybe Michael looked at Tommy as a kindred spirit. Michael may have been bullied himself and he wanted to make sure Tommy was all right.
|
|
Flynn
Sophomore
@flynn
Posts: 515
Likes: 270
|
Post by Flynn on Nov 1, 2017 22:16:33 GMT
1. I would think that Judith would be in shock from (a) getting stabbed and (b) discovering that your younger brother is the one doing the stabbing. I also think it's important to recognize that we are seeing stylized violence rather than real violence. It doesn't conform to reality because other concerns were given greater importance, like getting the shot in one take, making the action shot through a mask look coherent, and establishing the terrible sadness of what we just saw happen through the score as Michael walks out to the street. For that matter, the parents' reaction is stylized as well. The end result is an opening sequence that lends the events a mythic quality. It's not AN event; it's a representation of a type of event.
|
|
|
Post by Primemovermithrax Pejorative on Nov 1, 2017 23:09:20 GMT
There should be a special edition version where Michael removes the mask at the end and its William Shatner underneath.
One thing about the start. I think it would have been better if we did NOT see Michael's face. That kid did not look scary and having Loomis describing the Devil's eyes and his face works a lot better than what they showed by that front shot. Keep the camera on his back as they removed the mask.
I have read that Peter Cushing and Christopher Lee were considered for Loomis (and Lee was also considered for the Fog--the Holbrook part).
Lee would have been a really bad choice for Loomis. He'd be taller than Michael Myers! Great in a lot of things, but they needed a more mousey type for him.
I read Ann Dusenberry was also considered for Laurie.
She deserved more roles. She was the "ssshshshshshshsaaaarrk!" girl Tina in Jaws 2.
|
|
Reynard
Sophomore
@reynard
Posts: 627
Likes: 291
|
Post by Reynard on Nov 2, 2017 0:15:46 GMT
One thing about the start. I think it would have been better if we did NOT see Michael's face. That kid did not look scary and having Loomis describing the Devil's eyes and his face works a lot better than what they showed by that front shot. Keep the camera on his back as they removed the mask. I've always thought that Michael didn't "transform" into how Loomis describes him until that night and that the effect wasn't immediate. Another thing is that the killer turning out to be a kid must have been a good shock to audiences back in 1978. Not so much these days now that killer kids are a horror movie cliché and pretty much everyone who's going to see Halloween for the first time knows the basics of the series anyway. I agree that Christopher Lee would have been too dominating with his height and dramatic voice. Cushing had already done enough monster hunter roles. Not to mention that Cushing's Van Helsing was more no nonsense type while Dr. Loomis was supposed to be so obsessed with Myers that he often seemed like a lunatic himself.
|
|
|
Post by cwsims on Nov 2, 2017 0:17:56 GMT
I love all the films in this series even both of Rob Zombies remakes I'm looking forward to the new film next October
FWIW the original opening to Halloween 4 was suppose to explain how Michael and Dr. Loomis survived the explosion in Part 2 the original opening was suppose to feature "Loomis being blasted out of the hospital and Loomis trying to stop the firemen from extinguishing Michael and yelling "Let him burn."
btw I got all that info about part 4 from bloody disgusting
|
|
|
Post by Nalkarj on Nov 2, 2017 0:34:32 GMT
Flynn Exactement. I watched Halloween again the other day with some friends, one of whom (believe it or not) had never seen it; that friend enjoyed it but got a good chuckle out of the parents' just standing there, not doing anything. I did try to explain that it was supposed to be stylized... Primemovermithrax Pejorative Some very interesting information. I would have loved to have seen Lee in the Holbrook part in The Fog; I think he certainly would have given the role more gravitas. While I agree that he would not have worked exactly in Halloween, I can see how he would have pulled it off; as for the height difference, I don't believe we ever see Michael and Loomis in the same shot (even at the end, Carpenter cuts between them when Loomis fires, if I'm not mistaken). I do believe Cushing could have performed the role exceptionally; there are moments of sheer obsession for his characters in Horror of Dracula, Frankenstein Must Be Destroyed, and The Beast Must Die such that they almost prefigure the Loomis character. Still, I'm happy with what we have. While I'm not exactly enamored of Pleasance's over-the-top performance, it's fine for what it is, even if I laugh a bit while watching it. (OK, fine, it's stylized too! It's all stylized! Every'ting's stoyloized except for me and you. And sometoimes Oy 'ave me doubts about you.)
|
|
Flynn
Sophomore
@flynn
Posts: 515
Likes: 270
|
Post by Flynn on Nov 2, 2017 3:56:23 GMT
NalkarjYeah, I agree. People tend to comment on how the sex the sister and her boyfriend have in the opening scene happens impossibly fast, but what they don't take into consideration is that it's all stylized. In a sense, the onscreen events presented to us is a hyper version of reality. Although it's a single take, there is still a compression of time occurring. And again, it's all to lend the scene a mythic quality. It's as if the events we are watching is the version of the story that has been passed around the town over the years. There's really nothing about that opening scene that is realistic. It's all myth-building.
|
|
|
Post by Primemovermithrax Pejorative on Nov 2, 2017 4:21:50 GMT
"He's gone from here! The evil is gone!"
|
|
|
Post by Nalkarj on Nov 2, 2017 4:23:26 GMT
Nalkarj Yeah, I agree. People tend to comment on how the sex the sister and her boyfriend have in the opening scene happens impossibly fast, but what they don't take into consideration is that it's all stylized. In a sense, the onscreen events presented to us is a hyper version of reality. Although it's a single take, there is still a compression of time occurring. And again, it's all to lend the scene a mythic quality. It's as if the events we are watching is the version of the story that has been passed around the town over the years.There's really nothing about that opening scene that is realistic. It's all myth-building. A superb way to think about it (connecting it with The Fog, perhaps), and I completely agree.
|
|
tresix
Sophomore
@tresix
Posts: 491
Likes: 195
|
Post by tresix on Nov 2, 2017 6:02:52 GMT
Some people are wondering why Michael's parents just stand there. If you see your 6-year-old son standing on the front lawn holding a bloody knife, again, you're liable to be in a state of shock.
|
|
|
Post by jonesjxd on Nov 2, 2017 10:33:55 GMT
Last week I was thinking about why Halloween is held in such higher regard than other slasher films of it's kind. There are the more obvious aesthetic reasons, it was a trendsetter, its got a great score, the Michael Myers mask is so unique, it launched Jamie Lee Curtis, it's classically directed and Dean Cundey was an amazing cinematographer. But as I was watching it the other night, I realized something else about it. Halloween features all the classic archetypal characters from a fairy tale. It could be a tale "old as time", and could've even been an early Disney film. Here's your fable.
An outcast wizard (Dr Loomis) travels from the outskirts of town to convince the King (Sheriff Brackett), that the Town Jester (young Michael Myers in the clown suit) has broken out of the stockade (Smith Grove), and has disguised himself as a Ghost (The Shape) in attempts to take over the Kingdom (Haddonfield), but not before he goes after the Young Handmaiden (Laurie Strode) to the Evil Princesses (Annie and Linda), and in the end it turns out the Town Jester isn't disguised as a Ghost, but is a Ghost. There's also a Haunted Castle (The Myers House) that strikes fear into the hearts of the town subjects.
I can't think of any other slasher film that so perfectly fits into fable terminology.
|
|
|
Post by jonesjxd on Nov 3, 2017 10:13:12 GMT
Doesn't matter if it was intentional or not.
|
|
Ban
Sophomore
@tepebenjamin
Posts: 423
Likes: 141
|
Post by Ban on Nov 3, 2017 15:43:13 GMT
Masterpiece. One of my favorite movies of all time.
|
|
Ban
Sophomore
@tepebenjamin
Posts: 423
Likes: 141
|
Post by Ban on Nov 3, 2017 15:46:30 GMT
Last week I was thinking about why Halloween is held in such higher regard than other slasher films of it's kind. There are the more obvious aesthetic reasons, it was a trendsetter, its got a great score, the Michael Myers mask is so unique, it launched Jamie Lee Curtis, it's classically directed and Dean Cundey was an amazing cinematographer. But as I was watching it the other night, I realized something else about it. Halloween features all the classic archetypal characters from a fairy tale. It could be a tale "old as time", and could've even been an early Disney film. Here's your fable. An outcast wizard (Dr Loomis) travels from the outskirts of town to convince the King (Sheriff Brackett), that the Town Jester (young Michael Myers in the clown suit) has broken out of the stockade (Smith Grove), and has disguised himself as a Ghost (The Shape) in attempts to take over the Kingdom (Haddonfield), but not before he goes after the Young Handmaiden (Laurie Strode) to the Evil Princesses (Annie and Linda), and in the end it turns out the Town Jester isn't disguised as a Ghost, but is a Ghost. There's also a Haunted Castle (The Myers House) that strikes fear into the hearts of the town subjects. I can't think of any other slasher film that so perfectly fits into fable terminology. Very interesting thought. I doubt it was intentional, but it does explain the timelessness that many other early slasher films lack.
|
|
Reynard
Sophomore
@reynard
Posts: 627
Likes: 291
|
Post by Reynard on Nov 3, 2017 16:33:55 GMT
Many John Carpenter movies tend to have certain timeless / archetypal feel to them. Halloween definitely was going towards that kind of thing intentionally - Michael being portrayed as evil incarnate and the boogeyman instead of just some guy who kills people, like most slasher movie maniacs that were to follow.
Escape from New York has always had strong mythical feel it too, like something out of Greek legends. Assault on Precinct 13 was an archetypal western story and a prelude to Halloween in many ways. Prince of Darkness was very conscious about it to a point of even directly referencing Ridley Scott's Legend, which wasn't even well-liked at that time.
|
|
|
Post by Nalkarj on Nov 3, 2017 16:44:51 GMT
While I quite agree with Toasted Cheese and Ban that the schema jonesjxd articulated was probably unintentional, I don't think that Jones was arguing for its intentionality (correct me if I'm wrong, Jones) but only for its observability. That is to say, one can see it in the film--it fits the pattern--even if Carpenter didn't intend it. I'm somewhat reminded of the great Joseph Campbell's work on storytelling and myth; nearly all of the stories we tell fit distinct patterns even if we didn't intend it that way. It seems, Campbell observed, a natural consequence of being human. (Then again, I'm sympathetic to the argument because I argued something similar about Dracula [1931]--which, I think, possesses a kind of "mystic poetry" that bespeaks less a clear storyline than a nightmare. I didn't argue that Browning and his writers intended it, but the images on the screen point to a very clear and understandable interpretation. In legal reasoning, one may consider it the difference between "original intent" [looking into what the lawmaker meant] and "original meaning" [looking into what the law meant].)
|
|
|
Post by jonesjxd on Nov 4, 2017 11:38:42 GMT
Carpenter's intention was just to make a scary movie, but inspiration tends to come from the subconscious. I have no idea if Carpenter grew up adoring fables and fairy tales, but he has acknowledged that he writes archetypal characters, typically western archetypes, but Halloween fits classic fairy tale archetypes, and I feel that contributes to why it's such a classic.
|
|