|
|
Post by anthonyrocks on Oct 24, 2018 8:04:55 GMT
I just got done watching both the Original 1978 "HALLOWEEN" and the 1981 "HALLOWEEN II" Back to Back.
I have watched both movies before a dozen different times (especially the 2nd movie which is My Favorite Michael Myers Movie) and I really have to say that they did a Pretty Darn Good Job making both movies look as if they take place on the exact same (and very very long) night.
What does everybody else here think ?
|
|
|
|
Post by James on Oct 24, 2018 9:04:52 GMT
I get a bit irritated when II goes on for so long, it makes it unimaginable to believe it’s the same night. We already had enough of the night from the first, so it feels inordinately long. There’s 12 hours in a night, not 24 lol.
Anywho, I thought it was a neat idea to take place right after the first. The movie is good enough to be a worthy sequel, despite feeling a lil bit slow and feeling more tongue-in-cheek with the slasher vibes (albeit with memorable deaths).
|
|
|
|
Post by anthonyrocks on Oct 24, 2018 20:09:05 GMT
I get a bit irritated when II goes on for so long, it makes it unimaginable to believe it’s the same night. We already had enough of the night from the first, so it feels inordinately long. There’s 12 hours in a night, not 24 lol. Anywho, I thought it was a neat idea to take place right after the first. The movie is good enough to be a worthy sequel, despite feeling a lil bit slow and feeling more tongue-in-cheek with the slasher vibes (albeit with memorable deaths). LOL, I actually have never had a problem with that night being so freaking long in the 2 Movies. In a way, I actually think it's almost a bit funny and it definitely works (to me at least) with the atmosphere and tone of the 2nd Movie. |
|
|
|
Post by Popeye Doyle on Oct 24, 2018 20:15:57 GMT
I get a bit irritated when II goes on for so long, it makes it unimaginable to believe it’s the same night. We already had enough of the night from the first, so it feels inordinately long. There’s 12 hours in a night, not 24 lol. Anywho, I thought it was a neat idea to take place right after the first. The movie is good enough to be a worthy sequel, despite feeling a lil bit slow and feeling more tongue-in-cheek with the slasher vibes (albeit with memorable deaths). LOL, I actually have never had a problem with that night being so freaking long in the 2 Movies. Reminded of a recent rewatching of Superman (1978) -
The 3rd act of the movie - We see Luthor and Co. change the coordinates on the missile by causing multiple distractions. We then cut back to Jimmy at the dam and Lois doing her story on someone buying up all the land; this occurs during daylight hours. Luthor, now back in Metropolis, contacts Superman. They have their meeting and Luthor reveals his plan to sink California. Superman manages to escape and stop one of the missiles, but the second strikes while Jimmy and Lois are still out West during daylight hours. All this happens in one day?
|
|
|
|
Post by James on Oct 24, 2018 21:25:54 GMT
I get a bit irritated when II goes on for so long, it makes it unimaginable to believe it’s the same night. We already had enough of the night from the first, so it feels inordinately long. There’s 12 hours in a night, not 24 lol. Anywho, I thought it was a neat idea to take place right after the first. The movie is good enough to be a worthy sequel, despite feeling a lil bit slow and feeling more tongue-in-cheek with the slasher vibes (albeit with memorable deaths). LOL, I actually have never had a problem with that night being so freaking long in the 2 Movies. In a way, I actually think it's almost a bit funny and it definitely works (to me at least) with the atmosphere and tone of the 2nd Movie. I guess it does. Night represents darkness, and this film is obviously trying to have a dark and empty atmosphere like in the original. |
|
|
|
Post by anthonyrocks on Oct 25, 2018 4:57:44 GMT
What does everybody else here think ?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2018 5:50:22 GMT
I think it's a little less seamless, starting with Loomis shooting Michael 7 times and going from "I knew it" looks when Michael disappears in H1 to hysterical madman with a gun in the same scene here.
That twist also makes parts of H1 nonsensical. Why is Michael stalking Tommy at school and why's he racking up corpses at Lindsay's house if all he cares about is his sister? What a coinky-dink that of all people, she's the one delivering keys to their old house while he's inside munching on puppies.
|
|
|
|
Post by Primemovermithrax Pejorative on Oct 25, 2018 6:17:26 GMT
I never liked the sister angle.
|
|
theshape25
Sophomore
@theshape25
Posts: 877
Likes: 536
 
|
Post by theshape25 on Oct 25, 2018 6:45:00 GMT
I think it's a little less seamless, starting with Loomis shooting Michael 7 times and going from "I knew it" looks when Michael disappears in H1 to hysterical madman with a gun in the same scene here. That twist also makes parts of H1 nonsensical. Why is Michael stalking Tommy at school and why's he racking up corpses at Lindsay's house if all he cares about is his sister? What a coinky-dink that of all people, she's the one delivering keys to their old house while he's inside munching on puppies. I agree. Its much more probable that he was hanging out in his house, saw Laurie, and decided to make her his target. Then he saw Tommy, Annie, and Linda with Laurie and decided to stalk them as well. |
|
