Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 18, 2020 23:17:18 GMT
First of all, let’s talk about character development.
Laurie Strode is the same character through the film, from beginning to end in 2018 Halloween. The teenage Gossip Girl subplots add nothing to the story. The replacement Loomis was useless and annoying. Even Jaime Lee Curtis Says “So you’re the new Loomis” as a joke to the audience. What’s his endgame? Why help Michael? That was a terrible twist. He could have died on the bus, and have Michael pop up and kill the officer in that scene instead of the Doctor, and it wouldn’t have changed anything. The jokes seemed out of place. There was never really any suspense.
I did like the reverse of Laurie being like the boogeyman. When Michael looks down, Laurie is laying there, he looks away, then looks back and she has disappeared. That was cool. There were a few good scenes, but ultimately. It felt pointless. Rarely, does a reboot sequel feel more pointless than a “remake” but it does. Even the ending felt anticlimactic.
In RZ Halloween, we see lots of character development. We see how Michael changes over time. Loomis, the environment he grew up in. I loved how he killed as a boy (the bully). Then the family members that bullied him. And it shows he kills animals. Great development as an “Antisocial Personality Disorder.” Loomis is great in this film. He feels necessary. Tyler Mane (6’10”) was so intimidating.
All the characters felt like they fit. Michael has an actual purpose in this film. Laurie is is baby sister, she is all he has left after his moms suicide. He thinks after 15 years he can find his sister and be a family again. He’s institutionalized. So he kills people he feels get in the way. Then when Laurie stabs him and runs. He finally realizes, that dream of a family isn’t going to happen, so he gets pissed and wants to take out his anger on her. Plus, the development of Loomis and Myers at the Hospital was so well done, their showdown at the end felt like two forces coming to a head. It felt right and earned. The tension was great. Even after repeat watches, it felt great.
The teenagers in this film felt real, not “CW Gossip Girl” kind of stuff. The whole film felt raw and grounded. I genuinely feel gross and disturbed. Which means the horror film does it’s job. I even liked the idea that Michael Myers wore homemade masks to cover his “ugliness.” It was very deep psychologically.
Overall,
Halloween (2007) 8/10
Halloween (2018) 6/10
|
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on Oct 18, 2020 23:27:12 GMT
The original movie was not something that had much to use for remakes.
It's not like Dracula or Frankenstein. There's always a new angle. But a serial killer in a mask who goes after babysitters?
One of the most killjoy examples of corporate media failure. The world does not need more Halloween remakes/sequels.
It has even less potential than Friday the 13th which was a poor man copy of it.
And no one can tell me it is about name brands because GET OUT wasn't a brand anything and yet supposedly was super popular and important.
So yes, they can make new films if they wanted, they just won't.
|
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Oct 18, 2020 23:42:59 GMT
My issue with Halloween remake is that it is poorly dirtected (Rob Zombie is a bad filmmaker imo), it hits every cliche of the serial killer to a laughable degree, that it is a remake of Halloween, but throws out what makes the original so effective, is overly violent, that Michael Myers is a hulking beast (which makes him less scary to me) and that once the actual remake parts of the film start it focuses on a very boring version of Laurie Strode. The movie is just not scary, emotional or suspensful. There is some stuff I like about the movie, such as Malcolm McDowell as Dr. Loomis. I would have respected the movie a lot more if Rob Zombie just made a different movie that wasn't a remake, but followed the birth of a serial killer plot. His best stuff is the Firefly trilogy, because it is a true original vision where the white trash aspect of it actually adds to it instead of detracts. He pays homage to the grindhouse horror films of the 1970's, instead of pointlessly remaking something that is as good as it can be. He changes the purpose of the movie and changing the purpose of Michael Myers changes the fundamental point of the original. Halloween 6 makes this mistake in an even more unforgivable way.
The 2018 sequel is just silly fun that is basically a love letter of sorts to the franchise as a whole and comes full circle, until it betrays it's own purpose with Michael not dying. It is dumb entertaining horror fun, whereas the remake is not fun at all. One thing I really think is quite great in a darkly humorous way is that the new Dr. Loomis character is actually the ant-Dr. Loomis. That he wants to know what it feels like to actually be a psychopath and fanboys Michael Myers. He doesn't want to catch him, he wants to watch him work, which taps into some of the primal urges and curiosities of human nature. I love how self-aware the movie is. I would argue there is no need for character development in this movie. I think this movie would have been the perfect last movie in the franchise, but they ruined that with making yet another sequel.
The remake might have been entertaining if I actually gave a crap about anything that was happening or any of the characters. Ideas alone and proper character development can only take a movie so far. I will state as a fact that every idea in the remake has been done many times and done much better many times. Partly it is such a common take on serial killers that it is quite boring in fact.
2007 - 4/10
2018 - 6.5/10
|
|
|
|
Post by moviebuffbrad on Oct 18, 2020 23:46:52 GMT
Michael Myers is a character that is less effective the more you develop him and try to explain his evil. From making Laurie his sister and continuing into those whacky cult shenanigans, this franchise has been going out of its way to piss on what made him scary in the first place. So giving him a 45 minute origin story didn't do him any favors.
Not that this movie, even taken on its own merits, had anything interesting to say about the makings of a killer. Every stereotype is present to almost parodic levels. He's got a mean stepdad, a stripper mom, tortures animals, and Spy Kid bullies him. Woah there Dr. Robert, is this gonna be on the MCAT?!
Then we cut to a rushed remake of the first film with infinitely more annoying characters. I don't know what teens you're hanging with, but I was in high school when this came out and none of the girls sounded like 42 year old ex-heavy metalists.
I'm not even a fan of Halloween 2018, but this makes that movie look like Casablanca.
|
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Oct 18, 2020 23:48:12 GMT
Michael Myers is a character that is less effective the more you develop him and try to explain his evil. From making Laurie his sister and continuing into those whacky cult shenanigans, this franchise has been going out of its way to piss on what made him scary in the first place. So giving him a 45 minute origin story didn't do him any favors. Not that this movie, even taken on its own merits, had anything interesting to say about the makings of a killer. Every stereotype is present to almost parodic levels. He's got a mean stepdad, a stripper mom, tortures animals, and Spy Kid bullies him. Woah there Dr. Robert, is this gonna be on the MCAT?! Then we cut to a rushed remake of the first film with infinitely more annoying characters. I don't know what teens you're hanging with, but I was in high school when this came out and none of the girls sounded like 42 year old ex-heavy metalists. I'm not even a fan of Halloween 2018, but this makes that movie look like Casablanca. Deja vu
|
|
|
|
Post by moviebuffbrad on Oct 18, 2020 23:50:32 GMT
Michael Myers is a character that is less effective the more you develop him and try to explain his evil. From making Laurie his sister and continuing into those whacky cult shenanigans, this franchise has been going out of its way to piss on what made him scary in the first place. So giving him a 45 minute origin story didn't do him any favors. Not that this movie, even taken on its own merits, had anything interesting to say about the makings of a killer. Every stereotype is present to almost parodic levels. He's got a mean stepdad, a stripper mom, tortures animals, and Spy Kid bullies him. Woah there Dr. Robert, is this gonna be on the MCAT?! Then we cut to a rushed remake of the first film with infinitely more annoying characters. I don't know what teens you're hanging with, but I was in high school when this came out and none of the girls sounded like 42 year old ex-heavy metalists. I'm not even a fan of Halloween 2018, but this makes that movie look like Casablanca. Deja vu Well, hard to break new ground on why a 13 year old movie sucks. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 19, 2020 0:29:36 GMT
Michael Myers is a character that is less effective the more you develop him and try to explain his evil. From making Laurie his sister and continuing into those whacky cult shenanigans, this franchise has been going out of its way to piss on what made him scary in the first place. So giving him a 45 minute origin story didn't do him any favors. Not that this movie, even taken on its own merits, had anything interesting to say about the makings of a killer. Every stereotype is present to almost parodic levels. He's got a mean stepdad, a stripper mom, tortures animals, and Spy Kid bullies him. Woah there Dr. Robert, is this gonna be on the MCAT?! Then we cut to a rushed remake of the first film with infinitely more annoying characters. I don't know what teens you're hanging with, but I was in high school when this came out and none of the girls sounded like 42 year old ex-heavy metalists. I'm not even a fan of Halloween 2018, but this makes that movie look like Casablanca. But nobody can explain to me (effectively) why 2018 Halloween is actually good and why 2007 Halloween is so bad. |
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Oct 19, 2020 0:43:47 GMT
Michael Myers is a character that is less effective the more you develop him and try to explain his evil. From making Laurie his sister and continuing into those whacky cult shenanigans, this franchise has been going out of its way to piss on what made him scary in the first place. So giving him a 45 minute origin story didn't do him any favors. Not that this movie, even taken on its own merits, had anything interesting to say about the makings of a killer. Every stereotype is present to almost parodic levels. He's got a mean stepdad, a stripper mom, tortures animals, and Spy Kid bullies him. Woah there Dr. Robert, is this gonna be on the MCAT?! Then we cut to a rushed remake of the first film with infinitely more annoying characters. I don't know what teens you're hanging with, but I was in high school when this came out and none of the girls sounded like 42 year old ex-heavy metalists. I'm not even a fan of Halloween 2018, but this makes that movie look like Casablanca. There are different things that define a movie as good. Dumb fun equals good, just as much as well written and intelligent equals good. Rob Zombie's Halloween is not well written and is even worse directed. Just because everything makes sense doesn't make a movie good. You are perceiving the stuff in Halloween 2007 as being good, whereas that same stuff me and people who hate the movie perceive it as bad. The fact that me and moviebuffbrad are on the same exact wavelength about the remake and that his reasons exactly matched mine is an example of how we understand eacthother's reasons. We aren't just pulling shit out of thin air. The difference between me and you is that I don't care what other people think about a movie. You think the movie is good, so why care what other people think about it? You can't come at a movie like you do with a book. There is much more that a movie requires to be good than just the writing. Rob Zombie could have directed the same basic script as the 1978 movie and it would have likely been not good, because he is a crap filmmaker.
|
|
|
|
Post by darksidebeadle on Oct 19, 2020 0:58:45 GMT
Halloween (2007) 1/10
Halloween (2018) 5.5/10
|
|
|
|
Post by thisguy4000 on Oct 19, 2020 1:21:21 GMT
I think Dr. Sartain from the 2018 film is supposed to be a meta-commentary on how filmmakers over the years have gone out of their way to try and explain and rationalize Michael Myers as a character. That’s why he assumes that Michael is drawn to Laurie Strode, and also desperately wants to hear him speak.
|
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Oct 19, 2020 1:28:23 GMT
I think Dr. Sartain from the 2018 film is supposed to be a meta-commentary on how filmmakers over the years have gone out of their way to try and explain and rationalize Michael Myers as a character. That’s why he assumes that Michael is drawn to Laurie Strode, and also desperately wants to hear him speak. I think that is more of just a commentary on the way we as the audience see the character, not as a commentary on how the filmmakers have gone out of their way to explain him. Only Halloween 6 and Rob Zombie's movies even attempt to do that as far as I remember. Halloween 5 hints at the cult stuff, but doesn't explain any of it until Halloween 6.
|
|
|
|
Post by thisguy4000 on Oct 19, 2020 1:34:14 GMT
I think Dr. Sartain from the 2018 film is supposed to be a meta-commentary on how filmmakers over the years have gone out of their way to try and explain and rationalize Michael Myers as a character. That’s why he assumes that Michael is drawn to Laurie Strode, and also desperately wants to hear him speak. I think that is more of just a commentary on the way we as the audience see the character, not as a commentary on how the filmmakers have gone out of their way to explain him. Only Halloween 6 and Rob Zombie's movies even attempt to do that as far as I remember. Halloween 5 hints at the cult stuff, but doesn't explain any of it until Halloween 6. The sixth film and the Zombie films are the biggest offenders of that, but the seeds of it were planted as early as the second film, where we’re told that the reason Michael is going after Laurie is because she’s his sister.
|
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Oct 19, 2020 1:37:16 GMT
I think that is more of just a commentary on the way we as the audience see the character, not as a commentary on how the filmmakers have gone out of their way to explain him. Only Halloween 6 and Rob Zombie's movies even attempt to do that as far as I remember. Halloween 5 hints at the cult stuff, but doesn't explain any of it until Halloween 6. The sixth film and the Zombie films are the biggest offenders of that, but the seeds of it were planted as early as the second film, where we’re told that the reason Michael is going after Laurie is because she’s his sister. Eh, that seemed to be more a reason to keep her in the franchise. It doesn't really explain anything. It just states that he likes killing family members, but still goes out of his way to kill many other people. It doesn't actually explain anything. It is like this strange ambiguous thing the movies just throws in there. It still is essentially he is evil personified and the fact that he prefers killing his own family makes him even more evil, though I suppose someone could see that with some Freudian connotations.
|
|
|
|
Post by thisguy4000 on Oct 19, 2020 1:44:08 GMT
The sixth film and the Zombie films are the biggest offenders of that, but the seeds of it were planted as early as the second film, where we’re told that the reason Michael is going after Laurie is because she’s his sister. Eh, that seemed to be more a reason to keep her in the franchise. It doesn't really explain anything. It just states that he likes killing family members, but still goes out of his way to kill many other people. It doesn't actually explain anything. It provides more insight into his character than what the original film ever gave us, though. We have absolutely no explanation given for what compels Michael to go after Laurie in the original, but the second film gives us a reason for it, and suggests that he’s fixated on killing her in particular. Even John Carpenter has said that he wishes he hadn’t come up with that twist. In fact, the decision to retcon the twist in the 2018 film was made specifically so that Michael could go back to being this mysterious figure of evil.
|
|
|
|
Post by jcush on Oct 19, 2020 1:44:52 GMT
I don't care much for the 2018 film, but I despise the Rob Zombie movie.
|
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Oct 19, 2020 1:52:53 GMT
Eh, that seemed to be more a reason to keep her in the franchise. It doesn't really explain anything. It just states that he likes killing family members, but still goes out of his way to kill many other people. It doesn't actually explain anything. It provides more insight into his character than what the original film ever gave us, though. We have absolutely no explanation given for what compels Michael to go after Laurie in the original, but the second film gives us a reason for it, and suggests that he’s fixated on killing her in particular. Even John Carpenter has said that he wishes he hadn’t come up with that twist. In fact, the decision to retcon the twist in the 2018 film was made specifically so that Michael could go back to being this mysterious figure of evil. He is still a mysterious figure of evil even with the family aspect imo. It adds a slight bit more to it without actually explaining anything. I never liked it either, because it still takes away from what the original was going for. It doesn't cross the line in the way the other explanations do though. The other 2 leave no ambiguity.
|
|
|
|
Post by Marv on Oct 19, 2020 13:25:53 GMT
I disagree. 2018 is probably my second favorite Halloween film after the original. I enjoy Zombies Halloween...but mostly for the scenes of young Michael turning into a psycho. Once he's all grown up it loses a lot of its flavor for me. Everything about the 2018 film felt right for a sequel. I am hopeful the follow up movies will be entertaining but im not expecting them to be as good as i found 2018 to be.
|
|
|
|
Post by moviebuffbrad on Oct 19, 2020 20:37:14 GMT
Michael Myers is a character that is less effective the more you develop him and try to explain his evil. From making Laurie his sister and continuing into those whacky cult shenanigans, this franchise has been going out of its way to piss on what made him scary in the first place. So giving him a 45 minute origin story didn't do him any favors. Not that this movie, even taken on its own merits, had anything interesting to say about the makings of a killer. Every stereotype is present to almost parodic levels. He's got a mean stepdad, a stripper mom, tortures animals, and Spy Kid bullies him. Woah there Dr. Robert, is this gonna be on the MCAT?! Then we cut to a rushed remake of the first film with infinitely more annoying characters. I don't know what teens you're hanging with, but I was in high school when this came out and none of the girls sounded like 42 year old ex-heavy metalists. I'm not even a fan of Halloween 2018, but this makes that movie look like Casablanca. But nobody can explain to me (effectively) why 2018 Halloween is actually good and why 2007 Halloween is so bad. It's not that complicated. Halloween 2018: -mostly likable characters -a return to Michael's roots as a motiveless killer -feels like a Halloween movie Halloween 2007: -unlikable characters -an indulgent backstory (that is hilariously redundant and basically Psychology for 5th graders on why people become serial killers) that completely takes away what makes the character compelling, mysterious, and scary -feels like a hellbilly stool sample for edgelordy 13 year olds You may not agree with these praises and critiques, but people have made them pretty plain. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 20, 2020 13:55:19 GMT
But nobody can explain to me (effectively) why 2018 Halloween is actually good and why 2007 Halloween is so bad. It's not that complicated. Halloween 2018: -mostly likable characters -a return to Michael's roots as a motiveless killer -feels like a Halloween movie Halloween 2007: -unlikable characters -an indulgent backstory (that is hilariously redundant and basically Psychology for 5th graders on why people become serial killers) that completely takes away what makes the character compelling, mysterious, and scary -feels like a hellbilly stool sample for edgelordy 13 year olds You may not agree with these praises and critiques, but people have made them pretty plain. I don’t agree. I don’t think the characters aren’t likeable at all in the 2018 version. Her daughter is unbearable, the granddaughter is like an annoying CW character, the replacement Dr. Loomis is unnecessary and dull, and the two podcast people are pretentious and seem like parodies of people. The 2007 version has raw and real people. I felt so bad for Danny Trejo’s character “I was good to you Mikey” and I didn’t fee that way about any character in the 2018 version. |
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Oct 20, 2020 18:30:58 GMT
I strongly dislike the Rob Zombie Halloween but I think it's at least trying to do something whilst the 2018 movie has better acting. But I remember being bored instead of angry.
|
|
