Halloween (2018)

[JamesKurtovich]

Carpenter is a master musician.

[Shingster]

Originally Posted by TheSweetieMan

I'll spoiler tag the sequence.

[Show spoiler]The sequence where Michael is in Haddonfield, moving house to house. He goes into the older woman's house first as she's making a sandwich (nice call back to HII) and beats her over the head with a hammer; as he's making his way through the house, you hear ominous music, a baby crying (a really tense mood set here, seeing as the film already showed Michael being capable of killing a kid earlier in the film) and as he makes his way out of her house and briefly down the sidewalk, a woman sees him, stops and thinks to maybe say something but doesn't; he then makes his way into another woman's house, sneaks up behind her, smashes her head off the window frame, and proceeds to shove the kitchen knife through the back of her neck in one quick thrust.

None of its glorified. None of its overdone. It's tastefully shot, choreographed seamlessly, and blends technical visual storytelling with ominous, subdued sound design, that makes the sequence in a series of predictable killings, unpredictable.

I'm cool with people disliking the movie. One hundred percent. But god damn if that isn't the single best set piece in any Halloween film. Maybe in the history of slasher films, to be honest. It'll be a signature sequence that fans of this film will talk about as time goes on, IMO.

I thought you were talking about that sequence: What can I say it's a very good sequence, perhaps the technical high point of the film, but is it scary? Tense for a few seconds when he approaches the baby (which we've now learned was a last minute addition that wasn't planned) and then you have that kinda serial killer sandbox shot with the crowded street before him, but the actual kills themselves were so matter-of-fact they just sort of exist, two more forgettable kills in a film filled with relatively bland violence.

[jess1581]

Halloween 2018 was entertaining, and tried to live up to thr original. It's also kinda tonally disjointed, and narratively unfocused. It wasn't totally without tension, but it was skimpy on it along with the atmosphere. The cast works, the family drama and dynamic works, Michael's presence is at long last menacing, the franchise throwbacks were nice, the humor was effective, and the last 20 minutes were wicked. The reporters were indeed plot devices, and i agree that Dr. Sartain was totally useless in the film.

Overall, it brings back the respect to the franchise, it is well directed and acted... but the script had some problems.

3.25/5

[Member-351780]

Originally Posted by jess1581

Halloween 2018 was entertaining, and tried to live up to thr original. It's also kinda tonally disjointed, and narratively unfocused. It wasn't totally without tension, but it was skimpy on it along with the atmosphere. The cast works, the family drama and dynamic works, Michael's presence is at long last menacing, the franchise throwbacks were nice, the humor was effective, and the last 20 minutes were wicked. The reporters were indeed plot devices, and i agree that Dr. Sartain was totally useless in the film.

Overall, it brings back the respect to the franchise, it is well directed and acted... but the script had some problems.

3.25/5

[Show spoiler]i think with that twist that sartain had something to do with michael escaping they should have just revealed that he gave michael the mask. that would've saved a good twenty minutes of screen-time.

[Chaotic]

Movie would've only been 75 minutes long then.

[Worship.my.wreck]

Just got back from my 3rd viewing!
Can I have the Blu ray now?

[hamchuck1]

Originally Posted by Worship.my.wreck

Just got back from my 3rd viewing!
Can I have the Blu ray now?

Halloween in January??

[HarrisonJohn]

Originally Posted by bradnoyes

Agree that this movie was bogged down with useless characters who only wasted time and served as tools to move things ham-handedly along.

I wish we had simply moved forward 40 years and Michael's whereabouts were still unknown. I wish we could have just spent time with Laurie getting to know more about her and her current life, and that Michael's re-appearance slowly revealed itself during the movie. It could have slowly built tension, dread, and atmosphere they way it was done in the original. Laurie keeps thinking she sees him and feels like she's going crazy, only to eventually realize that he is back. The filmmakers wouldn't even need to explain where he's been--maybe he slunk back to the Myers house at the end of the original or maybe he's been in the freaking woods or something, but who really cares!

Oh that would have been perfect. They could have said he's one of those serial killers that kill over decades, moving from place to place, that never gets caught. Would have made so much more sense for Laurie to be afraid of him to the point she was, for the pod casters to be out investigating the story, all the "pure evil" talk. The way the movie is it felt like "we're going to erase 90% of what Michael's done but have everyone act like he's done it all anyway".

[cuzzin]

Saw it this afternoon. The audio is fantastic with Dolby Cinema @ AMC. It really elevated the experience. The film itself was great, and is easily the best Halloween sequel I've seen in theaters(Resurrection being the first one I saw theatrically). Minor gripes are that I think the ending of the original film is undermined by Michael being caught off-screen minutes after he amazingly vanishes into the night after being shot six times. Also, the ending could have been more firm as to Michael's fate, especially since I don't get the vibe that these guys want to churn out a bunch more sequels to continue the franchise.

[imsounoriginal]

Originally Posted by levcore

WTF that single take sequence in Terminator Salvation is awesome!

First known usage of these words in this order.

[dcx4610]

I love Blu-rays getting released almost 3 months after the theater release for most movies now. It almost makes me not want to see them in theaters though because I feel like I can get a better experience at home and not have to deal with people ruining the movie.

[jess1581]

This was supposed to be better than the Halloween II we've been acustomed to for 37 years... retconned and improved... turns out they could have easily kept HII as canon. Nothing happened in H40 that would have been ruined by HII's involvement. I enjoyed H40, but it kinda dropped the ball if it thought it could better HII. Now I don't even know how to take H40 in the grand scheme considering...

[Member-351780]

Originally Posted by jess1581

This was supposed to be better than the Halloween II we've been acustomed to for 37 years... retconned and improved... turns out they could have easily kept HII as canon. Nothing happened in H40 that would have been ruined by HII's involvement. I enjoyed H40, but it kinda dropped the ball if it thought it could better HII. Now I don't even know how to take H40 in the grand scheme considering...

laurie and michael as brother and sister? that was introduced in halloween 2. i've always hated that because it totally retcons the original's mystery as to why michael picked laurie

[jess1581]

Originally Posted by cblanchard2018

laurie and michael as brother and sister? that was introduced in halloween 2. i've always hated that because it totally retcons the original's mystery as to why michael picked laurie

Meh, I was fine with it. No worse than picking Laurie.... again, after 40 years for no reason. My point is... well in my opinion Halloween II is still a better direct sequel to the og, than this one. Alot of what works in H40 is the drama which plays to the director's strengths, and the halloween elements which is at the default of established lore.... but as a film that was toting around as the REAL sequel knocking out it's previous owner(HII)'s spot, it doesn't make that great of a case.

HII has it's flaws, but it delivers imo more as a sequel to Halloween. It was to the point, better paced, maintained focus and the atmosphere and mood that the og had along with a stronger delivery in horror and suspense.

H40 had unnecessary baggage with those reporters, and the doctor was not only a worthless character, but his arc was stupid and went nowhere. Alot of time coulda been saved by condensing the lazy plotting of Michael escaping and getting his mask as well as dropping the pointless plot twist. Not to mention Curtis was a glotified co-star. The ending was also anti-climactic. It entertained as slashers go, and Michael was terrifying... but H40's rep and confidence is a bit unwarranted. It didn't best HII, and it didn't really break any real ground or give good enough reason to jettison all of the canon films. Except now we have a franchise that is even more fragmented and tangled.

[prkchopexpress]

I'm baffled by how much people love halloween II. it's such a piece of garbage from top to bottom.

[jess1581]

Originally Posted by prkchopexpress

I'm baffled by how much people love halloween II. it's such a piece of garbage from top to bottom.

Lol, in terms of the good Halloweens?

Halloween 78
Halloween II 81
Halloween 4
H20
Halloween 2018
Halloween III

[LucasGodzilla]

Having just saw H40 tonight, I think it is a better sequel than the original H2. Although the original H2 is produced by Carpenter as well and is considered by many as a worthy sequel, I see it as a movie that simply retreads many of the same steps the first Halloween did and did very little to give itself a unique identity to the point that it's almost a little lazy. And truth be told, it is. Carpenter himself said he never quite liked it and that it was merely done as a cash-grab.

H40, however, does a lot of things that keeps itself as a Halloween movie whilst trying to do different and new things. Yes, it's not perfect, but neither was the original movie (which I've always saw as a tad overrated).

[BladeRunner2007]

Originally Posted by LucasGodzilla

Having just saw H40 tonight, I think it is a better sequel than the original H2. Although the original H2 is directed by Carpenter himself and is considered by many as a worthy sequel, I see it as a movie that simply retreads many of the same steps the first Halloween did and did very little to give itself a unique identity to the point that it's almost a little lazy. And truth be told, it is. Carpenter himself said he never quite liked it and that it was merely done as a cash-grab.

H40, however, does a lot of things that keeps itself as a Halloween movie whilst trying to do different and new things. Yes, it's not perfect, but neither was the original movie (which I've always saw as a tad overrated).

Wrong.

[flash.over]

Originally Posted by LucasGodzilla

Having just saw H40 tonight, I think it is a better sequel than the original H2. Although the original H2 is directed by Carpenter himself and is considered by many as a worthy sequel, I see it as a movie that simply retreads many of the same steps the first Halloween did and did very little to give itself a unique identity to the point that it's almost a little lazy. And truth be told, it is. Carpenter himself said he never quite liked it and that it was merely done as a cash-grab.

H40, however, does a lot of things that keeps itself as a Halloween movie whilst trying to do different and new things. Yes, it's not perfect, but neither was the original movie (which I've always saw as a tad overrated).

H2 was directed by Rick Rosenthal (who later directed...resurrection). Carpenter only directed a bunch of reshoots because Rosenthal’s cut sucked so bad. But yeah, he was sued into writing it and has gone on record to call it an abomination, and he isn’t wrong lol

[jess1581]

Originally Posted by LucasGodzilla

Having just saw H40 tonight, I think it is a better sequel than the original H2. Although the original H2 is directed by Carpenter himself and is considered by many as a worthy sequel, I see it as a movie that simply retreads many of the same steps the first Halloween did and did very little to give itself a unique identity to the point that it's almost a little lazy. And truth be told, it is. Carpenter himself said he never quite liked it and that it was merely done as a cash-grab.

H40, however, does a lot of things that keeps itself as a Halloween movie whilst trying to do different and new things. Yes, it's not perfect, but neither was the original movie (which I've always saw as a tad overrated).

Dude... H2 was set on the same night as the first... why would it stray out of "artistic" individuality? It had to match up with the first, in tone, style, etc etc... think you're a tad unfair towards H2 and incorrect about who directed it.

Also what did H40 do that hasn't been done in the other Halloween entries? There are tons of throwback scenes and references in that movie.