Halloween III (2011)

[Lambagus]

Alright...where do we go from here? We had a reboot just 3 years ago that pissed off alot of the fans of the original series but also created a new fan base of younger people who weren't alive when most of the original Halloween films were made. Here is what we do know:

1. Rob Zombie will not return

2. The plan was to shoot Halloween III (2011) in 3D but the project was scrapped so who knows if 3D is still the plan. (I personally think if it is in 3D we will get a rushed film that uses 3D to get people to come see it)

Does Weinstein reboot the series yet again or do they continue Zombie's vision without him (which WILL be a disaster; no Zombie for people who liked what Zombie brought to the film and those who hated what Zombie did will hate it because they already hated the direction.)

I have a couple ideas...

1. Bridge Halloween II (1981) and Halloween 4 with a Myers film.

2. Talk to Clive Barker about directing Pinhead vs. Michael Myers

3. Reboot Halloween once again (if George Romero is remaking Deep Red, maybe there would be an interest in remaking Halloween...again.)

4. Sequel to Resurrection

[RedZeppelin]

Count me in with the folks who absolutely hated Zombie's Halloween reboot (and the original is my favorite horror movie of all time), but I'm also one of the few who consider Halloween III a very underrated horror film. I'd enjoy seeing a remake of that story.

[Lambagus]

Originally Posted by RedZeppelin

Count me in with the folks who absolutely hated Zombie's Halloween reboot (and the original is my favorite horror movie of all time), but I'm also one of the few who consider Halloween III a very underrated horror film. I'd enjoy seeing a remake of that story.

I was going to list a remake of Halloween III (1982) as I also am a fan. The way I could see it work is that with the recession still hitting many people, an evil corporation trying to murder their kids on Halloween with masks is an idea that may work better today than it did in 82. Big Business as the villain in a horror film will work!

[mpstjohn]

Originally Posted by Lambagus

2. The plan was to shoot Halloween III (2011) in 3D but the project was scrapped so who knows if 3D is still the plan. (I personally think if it is in 3D we will get a rushed film that uses 3D to get people to come see it)

I would've really liked to see this. I think it could've worked, assuming they ignore Zombie's own interpretation of the ending of Halloween II. Funny thought that Scout Taylor Compton turned down the role of Laurie Strode because she thought H3D seemed rushed (as if Halloween II wasn't).

Looking at Halloween II now all I can think is how much more I'd rather see what the directors of Inside would've done with it, seeing as they were working on the film before Dimension brought in Zombie to replace them. I'll never know how Dimension even managed to wrangle so much talent into making a sequel to such a bad remake in the first place. And yet still they managed to botch that too and bring back the one guy who said he didn't want a Halloween sequel.

[nolfoc]

i was born in 1984, so i was not alive when the original came out, and to this day its my favorite horror movie of all time... they didn't reboot halloween, they had Zombie create some kind of bush league movie and called it Halloween to bring money to the table, you cannot called Zombies Halloween "Halloween"

[Lambagus]

Originally Posted by nolfoc

i was born in 1984, so i was not alive when the original came out, and to this day its my favorite horror movie of all time... they didn't reboot halloween, they have Zombie create some kind of bush league movie and called it Halloween to bring money to the table, you cannot called Zombies Halloween "Halloween"

I agree with you completely, I was born in 85 and Halloween is my favorite as well. I know the remake has its fans but im not one either. But, 95% of sequels/remakes are intended to be a cash cow not just Halloween. Zombie even said on the 'Halloween: 25 years of terror' doc that horror fans will pay to go see a remake knowing its a piece of crap cause we are desperate for horror films. I like to SEE sequels to see the story continue but I honestly can't say I LIKE many sequels.

[nolfoc]

Originally Posted by Lambagus

I agree with you completely, I was born in 85 and Halloween is my favorite as well. I know the remake has its fans but im not one either. But, 95% of sequels/remakes are intended to be a cash cow not just Halloween. Zombie even said on the 'Halloween: 25 years of terror' doc that horror fans will pay to go see a remake knowing its a piece of crap cause we are desperate for horror films. I like to SEE sequels to see the story continue but I honestly can't say I LIKE many sequels.

i disagree with you on this, a few horro remakes are better then their originals i.e. Let Me In, Last House On The Left, Texas Chainsaw Massarce... probably a few others im forgetting i just think its hard to hollywood writers to come up with original ideas for horror movies.. so if a movie back in the day was considered good or great they will tackle it, most fail most dont fail or prevail and some start something great.

[Alpha Sixx]

Just bring back my beautifull and lovley scout taylor compton and sheri moon and im in!!!!!!!

[Lambagus]

Originally Posted by nolfoc

i disagree with you on this, a few horro remakes are better then their originals i.e. Let Me In, Last House On The Left, Texas Chainsaw Massarce... probably a few others im forgetting i just think its hard to hollywood writers to come up with original ideas for horror movies.. so if a movie back in the day was considered good or great they will tackle it, most fail most dont fail or prevail and some start something great.

Guess we disagree on that one..and I did say 95% of sequels were created to generate revenue, not all

[mpstjohn]

Originally Posted by nolfoc

i disagree with you on this, a few horror remakes are better then their originals i.e. Let Me In, Last House On The Left, Texas Chainsaw Massarce... probably a few others im forgetting i just think its hard to hollywood writers to come up with original ideas for horror movies.. so if a movie back in the day was considered good or great they will tackle it, most fail most dont fail or prevail and some start something great.

The biggest problem was that there was actually room for improvement with those films. Shortcomings because of budget, shortage of decent actors, special effects, or just an inexperienced director, but Halloween is Carpenter damn near the top of his game and the low budget works for the film.

Add to that the whole reason the original was scary at all was because Carpenter didn't spell everything out, he left most of it to our imagination. Zombie, on the other hand, spelled everything out, and left nothing to the imagination, giving us a film completely devoid of suspense.

[Dudley Dawson]

Originally Posted by nolfoc

i disagree with you on this, a few horro remakes are better then their originals i.e. Let Me In, Last House On The Left, Texas Chainsaw Massarce... probably a few others im forgetting i just think its hard to hollywood writers to come up with original ideas for horror movies.. so if a movie back in the day was considered good or great they will tackle it, most fail most dont fail or prevail and some start something great.

Are you joking? That remake is a piece of junk and the original is maybe the best horror movie ever made.

[mintchris]

Originally Posted by nolfoc

i was born in 1984, so i was not alive when the original came out, and to this day its my favorite horror movie of all time... they didn't reboot halloween, they have Zombie create some kind of bush league movie and called it Halloween to bring money to the table, you cannot called Zombies Halloween "Halloween"

Well said!

[EricJ]

Originally Posted by Lambagus

2. The plan was to shoot Halloween III (2011) in 3D

(Eight more months till "Halloween", "Halloween", "Halloween"... )

but the project was scrapped so who knows if 3D is still the plan. (I personally think if it is in 3D we will get a rushed film that uses 3D to get people to come see it)

And I know it's brought up every time we see a RZ3 header, but--
If they want to start shooting, there's only a little time left...And don't forget about the Big Giveaway at nine--Don't miss it! And he should remember to wear his mask! The clock is ticking...It's almost tiiiime (boop-beep-boop-beep)...

(There's no way in the world that RZ is going to get away from those fan associations no matter how many "3D" or Cool Subtitles he puts on his own third-movie sequel, so he better just learn to give in and go with it, or not bother at all. )

[HDMe]

Some random Halloween thoughts...

Rob Zombie's Halloween movies weren't horrible... but I admit, I don't think of them as fondly as I do the classics. I probably even prefer the "bad" sequels to the original to the newer remake.

That said... I tend to agree, leave the new remakes as they stand... don't keep going with them.

Once we got more into the Thorn story in later movies, I always thought that cult in Halloween III with the killer masks could have been related to the cult of Thorn. They could even have been competing cults who had different ideas on how the killing masses of people saved their own followers thing.

A remake of Halloween that fits into the old continuity and related it more to the "Shape" storyline would be welcomed. That could also even be used to integrate Myers into it and bridge the gap from 2 to 4 like some have mentioned.

I would also be interested in a 5.5... that shows what happened from the very weird ending of 5 to where we got the cult movie in Curse.

6.5 would work too... bringing us from the end of Curse to H20.

And of course, someone could pick up from Resurrection and go...

As for why Michael wouldn't have gone after his sister's son... keep in mind that in H20 they made it clear that she had been in hiding for 20 years... but he definitely was killing folk in those other movies while he couldn't find her. So it's perfectly plausible that her son went back into hiding after H20 while his mom was in the asylum (as shown in Resurrection)... and after his mom died in Resurrection, he most certainly would have been in double-secret probation hiding!

A sequel to Resurrection could go either way... It could have Michael coming after him... or him going after Michael!

And of course we have the other storyline about the baby from the end of Curse... who by now would be an adult too... so that's another direction.

A smart script could pick up at any one of a number of points and with a little backstory refresh, jump right into the action.

On a related note... the Friday the 13th reboot was interesting in that while some hated that too... it actually could effectively exist in the old Jason universe, if you ignore the actor changes... so unlike what Zombie did with Halloween, you didn't have to throw away the old stuff to take the new. That might have been the biggest mistake Zombie really made... effectively severing all connections with the old Halloween stories instead of fleshing things out and keeping the old connections intact.

[mpstjohn]

Originally Posted by EricJ

(Eight more months till "Halloween", "Halloween", "Halloween"... )



And I know it's brought up every time we see a RZ3 header, but--
If they want to start shooting, there's only a little time left...And don't forget about the Big Giveaway at nine--Don't miss it! And he should remember to wear his mask! The clock is ticking...It's almost tiiiime (boop-beep-boop-beep)...

(There's no way in the world that RZ is going to get away from those fan associations no matter how many "3D" or Cool Subtitles he puts on his own third-movie sequel, so he better just learn to give in and go with it, or not bother at all. )

Zombie had nothing to do with Halloween 3D. They turned to the filmmakers behind the My Bloody Valentine remake to handle Halloween 3D. Evidently they had already a finished script, scouted locations, scheduled the shoot and cast most of the film before Dimension pulled the plug on them. Had Dimension waited much longer to duck out, there'd already be a finished film. If I remember right they would've finished shooting the third film within the same year that Halloween II was released theatrically. (Just checked the screenwriter's blog, and it was scheduled to finish shooting on December 22nd). Boy, that was fast.

Originally Posted by HDMe

As for why Michael wouldn't have gone after his sister's son... keep in mind that in H20 they made it clear that she had been in hiding for 20 years... but he definitely was killing folk in those other movies while he couldn't find her. So it's perfectly plausible that her son went back into hiding after H20 while his mom was in the asylum (as shown in Resurrection)... and after his mom died in Resurrection, he most certainly would have been in double-secret probation hiding!

Actually, H20 was a retcon. Though they filmed a scene where Jamie Lloyd was mentioned, it was removed at Jamie Lee Curtis' request. So the events from parts 4 to 6 didn't happen. Presumably Loomis did not die at the hands of Michael and Laurie did not have a child with Billy Lloyd (the paramedic from Halloween 2). If I remember right, they do mention a father, though he was a drug addict, not a paramedic working at a hospital in Haddonfield. The age of the Myers child being the reason for Michael's return makes the most sense here, though I can't recall if the first sister Michael killed was 17, Laurie was in the first Halloween and her son had just turned 17 during the events of H20. So it would make sense that after killing Laurie, he'd come after her son (regardless of the Thorn Cult not factoring in). He waited 20 years not because he needed to hide and not because it took him that long to find Loomis' nurse, but because another Myers turned 17.

[HDMe]

Originally Posted by mpstjohn

Actually, H20 was a retcon. Though they filmed a scene where Jamie Lloyd was mentioned, it was removed at Jamie Lee Curtis' request. So the events from parts 4 to 6 didn't happen. Presumably Loomis did not die at the hands of Michael and Laurie did not have a child with Billy Lloyd (the paramedic from Halloween 2). If I remember right, they do mention a father, though he was a drug addict, not a paramedic working at a hospital in Haddonfield. The age of the Myers child being the reason for Michael's return makes the most sense here, though I can't recall if the first sister Michael killed was 17, Laurie was in the first Halloween and her son had just turned 17 during the events of H20. So it would make sense that after killing Laurie, he'd come after her son (regardless of the Thorn Cult not factoring in). He waited 20 years not because he needed to hide and not because it took him that long to find Loomis' nurse, but because another Myers turned 17.

I hadn't thought about it that way... I do remember (since I just watched those last 3 original movies the other night) Jamie saying something about Michael dying in the fire (or not)... but I didn't think about what that meant.

So... I guess we sort-of have 3 timelines here...

Halloween + II + H20 + Resurrection
Halloween + II + 4 + 5 + Curse
Rob Zombie's Halloween + Halloween 2

The first 2 Carpenter-made movies being common to two of the plot-threads... and Halloween III not necessarily fitting into any continuity at the moment.

I suppose there's nothing in Resurrection to completely eliminate it from Curse-continuity, since the flashback doesn't make reference to her son... it could be perhaps argued that Resurrection could be made to fit into either of the first two timelines depending upon how you choose to view it.

In the first continuity, he would be coming to first find her then presumably continue after her son.

In the second continuity he could be coming just to find her and then he'd be off looking for the grandchild from "Curse".

[Ator the Invincible]

Originally Posted by mpstjohn

Actually, H20 was a retcon. Though they filmed a scene where Jamie Lloyd was mentioned, it was removed at Jamie Lee Curtis' request. So the events from parts 4 to 6 didn't happen. Presumably Loomis did not die at the hands of Michael and Laurie did not have a child with Billy Lloyd (the paramedic from Halloween 2). If I remember right, they do mention a father, though he was a drug addict, not a paramedic working at a hospital in Haddonfield. The age of the Myers child being the reason for Michael's return makes the most sense here, though I can't recall if the first sister Michael killed was 17, Laurie was in the first Halloween and her son had just turned 17 during the events of H20. So it would make sense that after killing Laurie, he'd come after her son (regardless of the Thorn Cult not factoring in). He waited 20 years not because he needed to hide and not because it took him that long to find Loomis' nurse, but because another Myers turned 17.

Yes and no. H20 drops the storyline that ran in 4-6, but they didn't completely ignore them. Some of the events in H20 were clearly written with those movies in mind. Part 4 says Laurie died in a car accident, so H20 claims she faked her death. Part 4 revealed that Loomis survived the fire in Part 2, and H20 honored that revelation by having him pass away more recently. And, of course, if you're watching H20 and wondering why Michael's still alive, 4-6 gives us that story. If you simply watch 1, 2, and H20, it doesn't really flow. I mean, didn't Loomis die in the fire?

Basically, Kevin Williamson wasn't overly concerned with 4-6 when writing the script, and was more concerned with continuing Laurie Strode's story. The Jamie Lloyd story causes some problems with Laurie and John's story in H20, so they basically chose to simply not worry about it. But they did leave it open enough for fans to consolidate the movies together. I choose to view them as a continuous series, albeit with a few iffy continuity issues.

[LordCrumb]

They should turn Halloween III into a comedy, make it Ash vs Michael vs Freddy.

[OrlandoEastwood]

I think they should just make a stand alone Halloween film. It just has Michael Myers and a group of people trying to stop him for 90 minutes until they ultimately fail and die. It should ignore Laurie Strode and really try to ignore all the previous films except for the fact that Michael is here and he is pissed and he killing people. Call it Halloween 3D and boom! You got yourself a money maker.

[JamesKurtovich]

Originally Posted by Lambagus

1. Rob Zombie will not return

That's the best news of all.