Halloween (2018)

[cinemaphile]

This was no better or worse than 100 other slasher flicks. Just the definition of meh. 3/5

But I will say this (hot take alert): It was at least more exciting and interesting than the 1978 original.

[theEXORCIST]

Originally Posted by cinemaphile

This was no better or worse than 100 other slasher flicks. Just the definition of meh. 3/5

But I will say this (hot take alert): It was at least more exciting and interesting than the 1978 original.

Please keep your lame opinion to yourself

[cinemaphile]

Originally Posted by theEXORCIST

Please keep your lame opinion to yourself

Please keep your lame opinion of my opinion to yourself.

[AKORIS]

Originally Posted by cinemaphile

This was no better or worse than 100 other slasher flicks. Just the definition of meh. 3/5

But I will say this (hot take alert): It was at least more exciting and interesting than the 1978 original.

Jesus, why don't you post in the unpopular opinion thread.....

[AKORIS]

Originally Posted by badfingerboogie

For a split second I thought

[Show spoiler]that when they suddenly happened to find Michael and run him over with the police cruiser so easily, that it'd end up being Ben Tramer again!

thought the same thing!

[eiknarf]

Originally Posted by AKORIS

Jesus, why don't you post in the unpopular opinion thread.....

Hey, you raise a good question-
Did they delete or lock or abandon that thread?

[bobbyh64]

Originally Posted by trans8010

No it wouldn't. Its all explained in film that Michael got up and walked away but sheriff's deputies were able to aprehend him. The movie takes place 40 years to the day, there shouldn't be any confusion on anyone's part what happened inbetween, to warrant any kind of flashback. Green and McBride do a very good job covering the history, any kind of additional visual would be tedious.

You can thank John Carpenter for that. Green and McBride wanted to recreate the ending of the original Halloween and Carpenter told them it wasn’t needed. Green planned on using doubles and CGI to create Loomis and young Laurie. I also heard on a podcast that Green planned on having Myers kill Loomis before getting caught. I’m glad Carpenter stopped all this.

https://www.indiewire.com/2018/09/ha...ed-1202004372/

[Member-351780]

Originally Posted by Jacques Souvenir

Must be true then - wouldn't be up there if it was made up.

i've just been super skeptical because when i was in 3rd grade i had to write about ladybugs and when i went on the wikipedia page it said they love justin bieber

[Himmel]

http://youtube.com/watch?v=Pg2l-KhPZGU

[Member-351780]

Originally Posted by Himmel

http://youtube.com/watch?v=Pg2l-KhPZGU

i'm hoping to be able to go see it in imax with a few friends tomorrow night

[steev210]

Watch the entire opening credits sequence from Halloween 2018. Enjoy!

Obviously if you haven't seen the movie yet, you may want to pass.

https://bloody-disgusting.com/videos...2018-entirety/

[jonmoz]

Originally Posted by steev210

Watch the entire opening credits sequence from Halloween 2018. Enjoy!

Obviously if you haven't seen the movie yet, you may want to pass.

https://bloody-disgusting.com/videos...2018-entirety/

The credits are cool,and it took me right back.

[AreaUnderTheCurve]

Originally Posted by jayman3

I don't understand. The sequels are so inconsistent, why anyone would want them to share continuity with this film is beyond me.

Think about it. You have this small town being terrorized by a maniacal psychopath on a Halloween night. He's apprehended but his "legend" lives on.

The residents spread stories about his killings. Details are exaggerated, the story misconstrued, people report false sightings, etc. In doing so Michael becomes the Boogeyman.

Not to mention that's really the only thing that makes Haddonfield famous. Again, there are real world neighborhoods that befall victim to a single serial killer and they exploit that and spread urban tales.

Disregarding canon to make the movie you want is disrespectful to those who made the original works. Example: Disney rendering all Star Wars EU novelizations prior to the acquisition moot. Those works were canon in the universe.

Hell, this direct sequel to 1978 erases the goddamned ending of the first by having him magically get caught and put into prison. What? The point of the ending is that his evil cannot be contained and that was cemented throughout all of the sequels sans HIII.

[bobbyh64]

Originally Posted by AreaUnderTheCurve

Disregarding canon to make the movie you want is disrespectful to those who made the original works. Example: Disney rendering all Star Wars EU novelizations prior to the acquisition moot. Those works were canon in the universe.

Hell, this direct sequel to 1978 erases the goddamned ending of the first by having him magically get caught and put into prison. What? The point of the ending is that his evil cannot be contained and that was cemented throughout all of the sequels sans HIII.

He was contained for a few minutes at the end of Halloween 5.

[bradnoyes]

Originally Posted by AreaUnderTheCurve

Disregarding canon to make the movie you want is disrespectful to those who made the original works. Example: Disney rendering all Star Wars EU novelizations prior to the acquisition moot. Those works were canon in the universe.

Hell, this direct sequel to 1978 erases the goddamned ending of the first by having him magically get caught and put into prison. What? The point of the ending is that his evil cannot be contained and that was cemented throughout all of the sequels sans HIII.

Agreed. I thought it was really weird that they ignored all the sequels (while also fully exploiting all of the lore and myth-building that they provided) only to make all the same mistakes. In terms of storytelling, pacing, and atmosphere this felt way more like the sequels than the original film. It also effectively ruined the great, open-ended finale of the original. For me, the Halloween series still begins and ends with the first movie.

[El_Fez]

Originally Posted by Michael24

Yup, it was announced back in February that it had been bought and would return as a more heavy duty quarterly publication, focusing on in-depth analysis and retrospectives more than upcoming news, since the latter is so readily available nowadays thanks to the internet.

Very cool indeed! Consider my subscribed.

[Hellraiserfan]

Just caught this last night. Personally I really liked it. I haven't seen the sequels other than II and III since I was a little kid but remember most of them being pretty bad or lame. H20 was alright if I think back to it.

I also don't mind the retcon. To be honest I prefer it because I always found it silly for Michael to have returned to go after his "sister" who I believe wasn't even born yet. At least not until after he killed his older sister in the beginning of the original and was sent away as a child.

I guess I need to dig deeper in this thread to find posts where people actually give reasons as to why they found this subpar or bad for a slasher film. Without legit reasons why I can't take that seriously. You can only do so much in the slasher genre as far as trying to be unique or break the mold. This was a nice and simple slasher film that gave closure to the main character that was in it from the beginning.

That's perfectly fine if people wanted more out of it but I would like to read some actual in depth comments.

Michael Myers in this was a beast. I loved that tracking shot especially but wish it was a tad longer. One more kill added to it would have been perfect.

I heavily disagree with those I've seen that claimed Jamie Lee Curtis was sleep walking in this movie. Nope, she played someone with PTSD really well and I felt she definitely took this return to her character seriously. The rest of the cast did a fine job and I didn't find any of the central characters annoying surprisingly. Not including her boyfriend or his friend of course.

[Show spoiler]I'm glad [at least one of them died.

I'm definitely buying this on home video once it's released.

[Michael11]

No atmosphere, nothing new, bad acting.

Load of tripe.

[flash.over]

Originally Posted by AreaUnderTheCurve

Disregarding canon to make the movie you want is disrespectful to those who made the original works.

Except it doesn’t. The other sequels still exist, and if you prefer to watch them, they’re there for you to do so. That being said, forcing those sequels in the first place is “disrespectful” to Carpenter’s intent, so tit-for-tat.

Hell, this direct sequel to 1978 erases the goddamned ending of the first by having him magically get caught and put into prison. What? The point of the ending is that his evil cannot be contained and that was cemented throughout all of the sequels sans HIII.

Again, wrong. The point of the original ending was that he could be anywhere, not that he couldn’t be contained. Continuing it in any form is an automatic retcon, including Halloween II.

[Himmel]

Originally Posted by Michael11

No atmosphere, nothing new, bad acting.

Load of tripe.

Be gone.