Halloween (2018)

[jonmoz]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

We don’t know for sure that the crash wasn’t manufactured.

I think we are talking about his escape in the original movie,but I do think his Doctor probably had something to do with his escape in the new movie.

[levcore]

I think removing the sister angle undermines the connection between Michael and Laurie and Laurie's response to prepare for Michaels return for the last 40 year's seems like an exaggerated one considering this movie ignores all the prior sequels. They should've kept at least Halloween 2 as part of the series.

Still it's a good slasher and very entertaining, nothing spectacular but a strong enough entry and another fun what if scenario for the series. I wish JLC had more screen time though as it felt like she was hardly in it.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by jonmoz

I think we are talking about his escape in the original movie,but I do think his Doctor probably had something to do with his escape in the new movie.

Ah, that’s what I get for not backtracking, sorry.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by levcore

I think removing the sister angle undermines the connection between Michael and Laurie and Laurie's response to prepare for Michaels return for the last 40 year's seems like an exaggerated one considering this movie ignores all the prior sequels. They should've kept at least Halloween 2 as part of the series.

Still it's a good slasher and very entertaining, nothing spectacular but a strong enough entry and another fun what if scenario for the series. I wish JLC had more screen time though as it felt like she was hardly in it.

I disagree. I thought the sister angle cheapened the series. I always took it that Michael returned to his home town to experience the same sick rush he got from killing his sister as a child. It’s controversial, but I still think that’s the case even in this new film. Laurie was just a afterthought. A triggered response if you like.

As for the PTSD, that one night would absolutely be enough for someone to be affected for 40 years. Mentally I guess you would be preparing for the return of your would-be killer. You only have to study PTSD reports and survivor accounts to see how much the mind is affected by s traumatic incident. Don’t forget she saw her friends murdered and was nearly killed herself by a terrifying man in a mask. Even the trauma of knowing his body had disappeared
Obviously, the fear of her loved ones being under threat in any possible future scenario would also plague her mind.

So, I don’t think it’s a stretch at all my friend to have her behave the way she did.

[ChainsawJedi]

Originally Posted by eternalbiz

"H Two Oh' for me

H2O? The chemical formula for water? Surely the title of the film is H20, as in the film came out twenty years after the original. Any other pronunciation is just proof of how many people weren't paying enough attention in school.

[ChainsawJedi]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

I disagree. I thought the sister angle cheapened the series. I always took it that Michael returned to his home town to experience the same sick rush he got from killing his sister as a child. It’s controversial, but I still think that’s the case even in this new film.

Weren't the writers drunk when they came up with the idea of Laurie being Michael's sister in the original sequel? I think they'd have to be. When I first saw Halloween II (which was admittedly some time after it first came out, the film never having been aired on terrestrial tv in England) I thought the brother and sister twist was too contrived and I've never liked how it informed the rest of the films thereafter (Season Of The Witch excepted, of course).

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by ChainsawJedi

Weren't the writers drunk when they came up with the idea of Laurie being Michael's sister in the original sequel? I think they'd have to be. When I first saw Halloween II (which was admittedly some time after it first came out, the film never having been aired on terrestrial tv in England) I thought the brother and sister twist was too contrived and I've never liked how it informed the rest of the films thereafter (Season Of The Witch excepted, of course).

Yes, I think Carpenter himself hated the idea and I can see why.

[levcore]

I prefer the brother/ sister angle. I also think H20 should have been kept in the chronology.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by levcore

I prefer the brother/ sister angle. I also think H20 should have been kept in the chronology.

I thought H20 was trash to be honest. The Shape alone was just all wrong. The mask looked odd for starters. The young people were way better in the new film also.

[levcore]

I disagree, I really enjoy H20. It's nothing amazing but then neither is the new movie. Both enjoyable slasher movies though.

[spanky87]

You keep Halloween II canon then the writers have to bog the film down with some ridiculously convoluted explanation about how Michael Myers survived being burnt to a crisp. Ditto for H20, explaining how he survived being decapitated.

There's three main reasons why the film is a direct sequel to the original:

1) the reason stated above. 2) it has more mass appeal since the original is a classic that everyone has seen, and anyone who hasn't seen it can easily catch up before the new one without getting caught up in the convoluted mess of the sequels 3) John Carpenter hates the sequels and the brother/sister angle.

Doesn't mean you have to like it, but it's perfectly understandable why they went this route.

[levcore]

Michael survives everything, he's the embodiment of pure evil.

[badfingerboogie]

Just got out of a screening of the original film, pretty fun little event - they had a dude dressed as Michael scaring people at the door, Halloween-themed lighting and decorations, candy and spooky-themed drinks. Seemed like it was a DCP of the same version used on the 4K UHD, so everything looked pretty darn good.

They're about to screen the new film as a double feature, but I only saw that last week so I think I'll head off. Anyone else have any special screenings they'll be going to today?

[jonmoz]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

Ah, that’s what I get for not backtracking, sorry.

I don't blame you for getting a little confused,the whole Halloween movie series is a confusing as hell,no wonder the new movie wanted to start from the original.

[Ruemorgue10]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

Yes, I think Carpenter himself hated the idea and I can see why.

Carpenter wrote it so he only has himself to blame for the siblings idea.

[jonmoz]

Originally Posted by levcore

I prefer the brother/ sister angle. I also think H20 should have been kept in the chronology.

That would not have worked out that well considering the ending,Michael would have had to do something pretty special to continue stalking babysitters after that.

[jonmoz]

Originally Posted by levcore

Michael survives everything, he's the embodiment of pure evil.

Yes the embodiment of pure evil without a head.

[levcore]

Well he apparently got burned alive at the end of this one, yet no doubt he'll be back right as rain in the next one. Slasher movies always find some contrived way to bring the antagonist back, it's a staple of the sub genre.

[avs commenter]

Halloween 2 is not good. I thought it was the first time I saw it, but recently watched it again, and it's trash. I see why Carpenter hates it and why the new film is only a sequel to the original.

[BladeRunner2007]

Originally Posted by avs commenter

Halloween 2 is not good. I thought it was the first time I saw it, but recently watched it again, and it's trash. I see why Carpenter hates it and why the new film is only a sequel to the original.

It feels like a Carpenter wanna be film. Poorly copies his style and its biggest crime: it's boring as ****.