|
|
Post by seahawksraawk00 on Sept 8, 2020 22:49:30 GMT
Always loved this opening. It's getting cooler where I am, and it just reminded me of this opening. Love the creepy music building up, the creaking sounds, the wind blowing, and how atmospheric it is for a day time shot. And it's one of the few Halloween movies to really let you know that it takes place during Halloween in the fall. As great as Halloween '78 will always be, the fact it was filmed during the summer time and it's glaringly obvious has always been a distraction.
|
|
|
|
Post by spooner5020 on Sept 9, 2020 0:23:28 GMT
It really was a great opening. I always liked 4, but I can understand why a lot of people don’t.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nalkarj on Sept 9, 2020 3:00:56 GMT
It’s a brilliant opening; if only the rest of the movie lived up to it!  Actually, 4 is actually my second-favorite Halloween after the original… It’s goofy as anything, but it’s fun-goofy. I wish they’d gone with Dennis Etchison’s script, though. |
|
|
|
Post by seahawksraawk00 on Sept 9, 2020 9:52:02 GMT
It’s a brilliant opening; if only the rest of the movie lived up to it! Actually, 4 is actually my second-favorite Halloween after the original… It’s goofy as anything, but it’s fun-goofy. I wish they’d gone with Dennis Etchison’s script, though. Oh I'm gonna have to check that out. Did you read it?
|
|
|
|
Post by James on Sept 9, 2020 9:59:00 GMT
Yeah, it really puts you in the October feel.
|
|
|
|
Post by masterofallgoons on Sept 9, 2020 11:56:07 GMT
I enjoy this movie quite a bit, and other than first it's the one I've probably seen the most and is a regular October staple. Also, other than the first none of these movies are legitimately good films, but I think this one is the best at being a fun, atmospheric slasher movie, and that atmosphere is really well established in this opening sequence. It feels like the midwest/north in the fall. We all love the original, but the lack of an authentic fall atmosphere is clearly q failing of the movie and one area where this sequel actually improves upon it.
Curious to check out what this other script was though.
|
|
|
|
Post by seahawksraawk00 on Sept 9, 2020 12:29:47 GMT
After the opening, it went downhill from there. It was also not shot in the scope ratio, which was part of the reason why Carpenter’s were so successful and his use of framing and lurking shadows. Part 4 insults ones intelligence and part 5 was even worse. 6 was sort of interesting, but so darn convoluted by then and looked like an MTV music video, it had lost all the essence of what made the first 2 so memorable. H20 I really like, Resurrection was crud. The last JLC outing was nothing like it promised and Zombie’s reboot tried but failed. I loved his sequel though. I mean, I pretty much agree with each assessment except for 4. I don't think it really sets out to be this clever movie. It clearly knows what it is and that the audience knows Michael was supposed to be dead after 2, since Season of the Witch was it's own film. So it's not like they set out with an intricate and elaborate exposition of how Michael could have survived or grew his eyeballs back other than he's just a force of nature that can't be killed. And clearly there is a bit of Terminator inspiration in his characterization rather than replicating Nick Castle's movements again. It was a simple sequel, even if uninspired. |
|
|
|
Post by Nalkarj on Sept 9, 2020 12:49:40 GMT
It’s a brilliant opening; if only the rest of the movie lived up to it! Actually, 4 is actually my second-favorite Halloween after the original… It’s goofy as anything, but it’s fun-goofy. I wish they’d gone with Dennis Etchison’s script, though. Oh I'm gonna have to check that out. Did you read it? Yes—it’s not perfect and would have needed some revisions, but the concept is brilliant, kind of proto-Scream (or, more accurately, proto-New Nightmare), and Etchison’s dialogue is pretty good. |
|
|
|
Post by masterofallgoons on Sept 9, 2020 13:00:49 GMT
H20 took it back a little more to the original characters roots and did something interesting with Myers and Laurie’s manifestation of him back into her life. It wasn’t really him anyway, (even though that was ambiguous, Resurrection set that in stone) Never seen this interpretation before. I never gave it a second thought that Resurrection made it clear that it was only not Michael at the very end when he was in the ambulance.
|
|
|
|
Post by masterofallgoons on Sept 9, 2020 13:02:25 GMT
After the opening, it went downhill from there. It was also not shot in the scope ratio, which was part of the reason why Carpenter’s were so successful and his use of framing and lurking shadows. Part 4 insults ones intelligence and part 5 was even worse. 6 was sort of interesting, but so darn convoluted by then and looked like an MTV music video, it had lost all the essence of what made the first 2 so memorable. H20 I really like, Resurrection was crud. The last JLC outing was nothing like it promised and Zombie’s reboot tried but failed. I loved his sequel though. I mean, I pretty much agree with each assessment except for 4. I don't think it really sets out to be this clever movie. It clearly knows what it is and that the audience knows Michael was supposed to be dead after 2, since Season of the Witch was it's own film. So it's not like they set out with an intricate and elaborate exposition of how Michael could have survived or grew his eyeballs back other than he's just a force of nature that can't be killed. And clearly there is a bit of Terminator inspiration in his characterization rather than replicating Nick Castle's movements again. It was a simple sequel, even if uninspired. I didn't think there was anyone else around who liked Zombie's sequel. You learn something new everyday. |
|
|
|
Post by seahawksraawk00 on Sept 10, 2020 0:18:42 GMT
Never seen this interpretation before. I never gave it a second thought that Resurrection made it clear that it was only not Michael at the very end when he was in the ambulance. Only Resurrection made that clear at the start. Myers was long dead to my mind considering the context of what happens at the end of 2. H20 was a direct sequel to part 2. Laurie was so obsessed, I saw the manifestation of a killer resembling Myers as psychosomatic in a sense. It couldn’t possibly be him. The new one disregarded 2 and makes 2’s event redundant now. Ridiculous! Well hold up. It's an interesting theory, but in the beginning of H20, the cops mentioned that Michael's body was never found after the fire, so their intent was that Michael indeed survived. And because he's this force of evil, they didn't really need a backhand explanation of why he has his eyes back or no burn scars all over. |
|
|
|
Post by masterofallgoons on Sept 10, 2020 13:22:17 GMT
Well hold up. It's an interesting theory, but in the beginning of H20, the cops mentioned that Michael's body was never found after the fire, so their intent was that Michael indeed survived. And because he's this force of evil, they didn't really need a backhand explanation of why he has his eyes back or no burn scars all over. That looked like a pretty intense fire and incendiary explosion. There was perhaps nothing left remaining of him. Halloween 2’s intention was to have both Loomis and Myers perish. H2O wanted to plant a seed of doubt. Part 4, Myers had some scars on his hands, I’m like yeah whatever. By the time the events of H2O came along, MM would have been an urban myth. Any psycho could have wanted to play pranks on others pretending to be him especially around Halloween. I don't see how it planted a seed of doubt. I think pretty much everyone took the movie at face value with the intent that it was Michael again. Without calling it attention to it directly, it basically ignores all sequels except for the Halloween 2 (which feels way more convoluted than ignoring all of them) so that fire counts, I guess, but other than that I don't see any way that it intends to make the audience doubt that it's meant to be Michael. It also includes a Creed song, Dawson's Creek dialogue, a piss poor CGI mask, and a running gag where LL Cool J is an aspiring romance novelist; so maybe they didn't fully think it all through. |
|
|
|
Post by masterofallgoons on Sept 11, 2020 0:07:21 GMT
I don't see how it planted a seed of doubt. I think pretty much everyone took the movie at face value with the intent that it was Michael again. Without calling it attention to it directly, it basically ignores all sequels except for the Halloween 2 (which feels way more convoluted than ignoring all of them) so that fire counts, I guess, but other than that I don't see any way that it intends to make the audience doubt that it's meant to be Michael. It also includes a Creed song, Dawson's Creek dialogue, a piss poor CGI mask, and a running gag where LL Cool J is an aspiring romance novelist; so maybe they didn't fully think it all through. I just can't take Myers return as objective after part 2. It just doesn't work to my mind and claiming they never found his body was just a way round explaining his return that just can't make any logical or rational sense. Being burnt up in that explosion, not to mention being blinded by being shot blind in the peepers, Michael Myers perished on cinematic celluloid in 1981 and no sequel or follow-up from this is going to convince me of anything other. Even his eyeball made an appearance in H2O. They made this series confounded with the direction they took it. FT13th at least made more sense with a zombiefied Jason. I hear ya, but like I said, that shit just wasn't well thought out. But I see nothing in the movie itself that says it's not him. |
|
|
|
Post by masterofallgoons on Sept 11, 2020 11:57:47 GMT
I hear ya, but like I said, that shit just wasn't well thought out. But I see nothing in the movie itself that says it's not him. Carpenter thought it out and Myers died. Miner did a good job, considering it was no longer new and a tired and worn formula overall within the slasher genre. I still stand by my own assessment, that it possibly couldn’t be Myers. Laurie manifested a psycho into her life due to neurosis born out of her own kept trauma. That is the only way it can work for me. Still a jolly good entry as far as I’m concerned, considering the other crappy sequels. I meant the sequels didn't think it through. They just brought him back because they needed to for anyone to care about another Halloween movie. If you enjoy your theory that's cool, but the movie is not putting that info forth. Considering the other stupid things in the movie I'm ok with accepting that it's just another one. |
|
|
|
Post by Nalkarj on Sept 20, 2020 16:41:34 GMT
seahawksraawk00, let me know if/when you get a chance to read that Etchison script. I’d be interested in discussing it.
|
|
