Halloween (2006) : Rob, stop making movies.

[FendersRule]

Well, I blind purchased Halloween (2006) because I'm a big horror fan. I remember seeing this film awhile ago, but I was ready to see it and apply full thought to it this time!

The first hour of the film is dedicated to building up Michael Meyer's back story. Consequently, this also urges him to be a "human", albeit with serious problems. This is where this part falls very very flat. Michael Meyer's background should be left alone, as the audience should be in disbelief as to whether he is human or not. This movie made him out to be a normal human, even with "feelings" (reluctance to kill his baby sister nonsense). Ughh...

After that crummy half was over with, then I started to feel kinda good about the film hearing some John Carpenter music, and seeing some Carpenter scenery redone. I liked this, but that again doesn't turn the rest away from crap. Zombie seems to think the big scares come from the moment that the killing is occurring. What he doesn't know, is that scares come from the tedious, delicate moments before the actual killing. So all you see from here on out is "BOOM, BREAK THROUGH DOOR AND STAB AND KILL", which is absolutely non-suspenseful.

Other cons:

* Redneck White-trash crap that he puts in all of his films. Zombie- this is not "normal" or "gritty" or "realistic". Most people are not redneck whitetrash. I must admit, Michael's father was a prick, and I enjoyed his a-holeness.

* Way too much use of profanity. "F-this, F-that".

* Way too much sexual connotation. I don't want to hear about "cum shots" and that sort of thing, especially when I'm not watching porn. Again, this is Zombie's attempt to make stuff more realistic, but I don't feel it's necessary at all.

* Blood does not equal suspense and terror.

* Bad idea to make Michael Meyer's more human like. From the moment he started carrying Lorie, then it was over. What's up with all these crappy-ass remakes involving the slasher villain taking people into captivity? That's not how it's done at all.

* Poor job building the suspense for absolutely every kill. No one got enough screen-time to even care about their kills anyhow.

* Malcolm McDowel is cool, but he was given strictly Donald Pleasance lines. It made me wish that Donald was saying his lines instead of Malcolm.

Some Pros:

* Carpenter Music

* Good environment for Carpenter shots.

5/10

I like it more than the Friday the 13th Remake trash, but that's not saying much.

I take it I shouldn't see Halloween 2 because of this.

[blu_sharpy]

Well I changed my opinion and think that Halloween 2 is an absolutely appauling film! Why does Micheal look like a tramp? Why does Michael rarely wear his mask? Why is Laurie such an idiot? Why does Michael grunt? Why does Michael speak?Why is Dr.Loomis such a heartless SOB who tries to be funny?

The only answer to these questions must be the fact that Rob Zombie fails at attempting to make a film.

[blu_sharpy]

Originally Posted by Zero_Cool

he didnt want to make it. He had to make 2 of them. Then said he was not doing a 3rd. Thank you for not doing 3. I love little michael.

It doesnt matter whether he wanted to make it or not, the fact of the matter is the Rob took the films in the completely wrong direction. He tried to make us feel for a character that really isnt human which is proved at the end of his original Halloween when he shoots him, you dont get shot that many times to just get back up again. Also, the lack of suspense and tension is appauling. The original Halloween films worked so well because of the tension and suspense, not because of gore. Zombie seems to think that gore amounts to scares which it doesnt.

[tommyboy81]

Originally Posted by blu_sharpy

It doesnt matter whether he wanted to make it or not, the fact of the matter is the Rob took the films in the completely wrong direction. He tried to make us feel for a character that really isnt human which is proved at the end of his original Halloween when he shoots him, you dont get shot that many times to just get back up again. Also, the lack of suspense and tension is appauling. The original Halloween films worked so well because of the tension and suspense, not because of gore. Zombie seems to think that gore amounts to scares which it doesnt.

yep.

[met1128]

Right on!! and the "rape scene" pissed me off also. that crap is not what the original movies great, zombie is just an ass.

[mintchris]

Originally Posted by FendersRule

Well, I blind purchased Halloween (2006) because I'm a big horror fan. I remember seeing this film awhile ago, but I was ready to see it and apply full thought to it this time!

The first hour of the film is dedicated to building up Michael Meyer's back story. Consequently, this also urges him to be a "human", albeit with serious problems. This is where this part falls very very flat. Michael Meyer's background should be left alone, as the audience should be in disbelief as to whether he is human or not. This movie made him out to be a normal human, even with "feelings" (reluctance to kill his baby sister nonsense). Ughh...

After that crummy half was over with, then I started to feel kinda good about the film hearing some John Carpenter music, and seeing some Carpenter scenery redone. I liked this, but that again doesn't turn the rest away from crap. Zombie seems to think the big scares come from the moment that the killing is occurring. What he doesn't know, is that scares come from the tedious, delicate moments before the actual killing. So all you see from here on out is "BOOM, BREAK THROUGH DOOR AND STAB AND KILL", which is absolutely non-suspenseful.

Other cons:

* Redneck White-trash crap that he puts in all of his films. Zombie- this is not "normal" or "gritty" or "realistic". Most people are not redneck whitetrash. I must admit, Michael's father was a prick, and I enjoyed his a-holeness.

* Way too much use of profanity. "F-this, F-that".

* Way too much sexual connotation. I don't want to hear about "cum shots" and that sort of thing, especially when I'm not watching porn. Again, this is Zombie's attempt to make stuff more realistic, but I don't feel it's necessary at all.

* Blood does not equal suspense and terror.

* Bad idea to make Michael Meyer's more human like. From the moment he started carrying Lorie, then it was over. What's up with all these crappy-ass remakes involving the slasher villain taking people into captivity? That's not how it's done at all.

* Poor job building the suspense for absolutely every kill. No one got enough screen-time to even care about their kills anyhow.

* Malcolm McDowel is cool, but he was given strictly Donald Pleasance lines. It made me wish that Donald was saying his lines instead of Malcolm.

Some Pros:

* Carpenter Music

* Good environment for Carpenter shots.

5/10

I like it more than the Friday the 13th Remake trash, but that's not saying much.

I take it I shouldn't see Halloween 2 because of this.

Totally agree with alot of your points!
I also disliked the "humanizing" of Michael. I liked in the original films that we were left to wonder what the hell was up with him. Made him seems more like the boogeyman when you didnt know if he was really "human".
Also agree about the redneck/ profanity stuff, especially at the start. Just made it seem trashy.
PS I love to ****ing swear but this was just too much for me!

[drichter33]

ton of this is covered in the H2 review thread.

why even put halloween in the title of this thread. why not just call it RZ Bashing or something else as the comments here are clearly not objective, completely missed why he made the films and what he was going for, and just serves to bad mouth him.

yes i like his movies, and yes i too didnt see the point of the rape scene in the directors cut, i liked the theatrical escape that involved him killing Sgt Callahan from Police Academy.

[blu_sharpy]

Originally Posted by drichter33

ton of this is covered in the H2 review thread.

why even put halloween in the title of this thread. why not just call it RZ Bashing or something else as the comments here are clearly not objective, completely missed why he made the films and what he was going for, and just serves to bad mouth him.

yes i like his movies, and yes i too didnt see the point of the rape scene in the directors cut, i liked the theatrical escape that involved him killing Sgt Callahan from Police Academy.

No one is here to completely bad mouth a director. I realise that his versions of Halloween and Halloween II are his interpretations of the story and his own version of the concept but, I disagree with the way he made the films and I think that he took them in the wrong direction. As the director, he is the only one to blame for the films' faults.

[EricJ]

Originally Posted by blu_sharpy

No one is here to completely bad mouth a director.

Oh, darn, I'll have to go elsewhere--
Zombie's movies get back to a point I was making in the Remake thread, about the dopey fanboy director who WANTS to remake a movie, regardless of whether he, y'know, has had any experience in knowing how to remake it.

In the first Halloween's case, it was an attempt of Dimension taking two discarded ideas (the "origin" idea and the "Hey, let's give the Devil's Rejects guy a title franchise to play with!" idea), and mashing them together when neither one was able to get into development by themselves.
But when you consider that here is a niche rockstar who spent great amounts of his own money to decorate his own bedroom to recreate Disneyland's Haunted Mansion....Rob, nobody cares that you liked the same classic-overexposed horror movie as a few million other people over the last thirty years.
At least when geek-culture fans put on their own homemade costumes at fan conventions, they do it indoors, so the rest of us don't have to watch. OR pay for it.

[Idioteque...]

I don't have a problem with getting reasons of why a killer kills but there are so many things wrong with this movie. Sure it gave Michael a reason but jeeze what horrible execution.

And then in 2 he's just plain out evil wtf. No explanation of how he's alive.


I think the TCM remake was really well done. The gore was a little too much but that film was really good.

[WyldeMan45]

Originally Posted by Idioteque...

I don't have a problem with getting reasons of why a killer kills but there are so many things wrong with this movie. Sure it gave Michael a reason but jeeze what horrible execution.

And then in 2 he's just plain out evil wtf. No explanation of how he's alive.


I think the TCM remake was really well done. The gore was a little too much but that film was really good.

I liked Rob's first Halloween and looked forward to II like crazy, and nearly walked out of the theater halfway through. It was utter garbage, he just randomly killed every woman in the movie as violently as possible, he kills a dog for no damned reason and eats it's heart!?!?! **** you Rob! Oh yeah he also teleports behind trees, ummmmmmmm nooooooooooo

[FendersRule]

Originally Posted by Idioteque...

I don't have a problem with getting reasons of why a killer kills but there are so many things wrong with this movie. Sure it gave Michael a reason but jeeze what horrible execution.

And then in 2 he's just plain out evil wtf. No explanation of how he's alive.


I think the TCM remake was really well done. The gore was a little too much but that film was really good.

I haven't seen the TCM remake, but from what I've been hearing, it sounds like the best horror remake we have so far.

The original TCM of coarse, cannot be toppled. I say this without even have seen the remake yet (I will, I will!). Watched the original on Blu-ray, and I have no intentions on reliving the experience again...and I say that in a good way...effective.

Going back into the Halloween (2006) discussion:

I also must say, the rape scene was completely unneeded, but I understand that it's Zombie's style going in.

I forgot to mention that Zombie made Michael kill everything in the first one as well. Michael really only aims to kill people of his family and people that get in his way. That really made him a rampant murder in the first, and I think that urges some people the wrong way (me).

I wonder what Carpenter thinks of Zombie's Halloween films? Anyone know?

[WyldeMan45]

Originally Posted by FendersRule

I wonder what Carpenter thinks of Zombie's Halloween films? Anyone know?

I'm sure we wouldn't get his honest thoughts cause of his friendship with Rob, but here's the only quote I could find about his opinion of Rob making Halloween.

"As for Rob Zombie's Halloween remake, he's not involved. "I bailed out of that after a while. But Rob [Zombie] has been a friend of mine for years. He did a song for me way back when [for Escape from LA]. He's a real nice guy. He called me up when they were going to make it and I said, "Just make it your own. Hell. That's the most important thing. Make it yours."

[jjbsn5192]

Originally Posted by FendersRule

Well, I blind purchased Halloween (2006) because I'm a big horror fan. I remember seeing this film awhile ago, but I was ready to see it and apply full thought to it this time!

The first hour of the film is dedicated to building up Michael Meyer's back story. Consequently, this also urges him to be a "human", albeit with serious problems. This is where this part falls very very flat. Michael Meyer's background should be left alone, as the audience should be in disbelief as to whether he is human or not. This movie made him out to be a normal human, even with "feelings" (reluctance to kill his baby sister nonsense). Ughh...

After that crummy half was over with, then I started to feel kinda good about the film hearing some John Carpenter music, and seeing some Carpenter scenery redone. I liked this, but that again doesn't turn the rest away from crap. Zombie seems to think the big scares come from the moment that the killing is occurring. What he doesn't know, is that scares come from the tedious, delicate moments before the actual killing. So all you see from here on out is "BOOM, BREAK THROUGH DOOR AND STAB AND KILL", which is absolutely non-suspenseful.

Other cons:

* Redneck White-trash crap that he puts in all of his films. Zombie- this is not "normal" or "gritty" or "realistic". Most people are not redneck whitetrash. I must admit, Michael's father was a prick, and I enjoyed his a-holeness.

* Way too much use of profanity. "F-this, F-that".

* Way too much sexual connotation. I don't want to hear about "cum shots" and that sort of thing, especially when I'm not watching porn. Again, this is Zombie's attempt to make stuff more realistic, but I don't feel it's necessary at all.

* Blood does not equal suspense and terror.

* Bad idea to make Michael Meyer's more human like. From the moment he started carrying Lorie, then it was over. What's up with all these crappy-ass remakes involving the slasher villain taking people into captivity? That's not how it's done at all.

* Poor job building the suspense for absolutely every kill. No one got enough screen-time to even care about their kills anyhow.

* Malcolm McDowel is cool, but he was given strictly Donald Pleasance lines. It made me wish that Donald was saying his lines instead of Malcolm.

Some Pros:

* Carpenter Music

* Good environment for Carpenter shots.

5/10

I like it more than the Friday the 13th Remake trash, but that's not saying much.

I take it I shouldn't see Halloween 2 because of this.

you know what your getting yourself into when you pick up any Rob Zombie Product..

have you even See El World Superbeasto? thats even worse. for a Animated film
its like watching a Anime Porn..

Zombie's all about the Naked Women. and The Slaughter House Film
its been his deal for awhile now

[jadedeath]

Originally Posted by Idioteque...

And then in 2 he's just plain out evil wtf. No explanation of how he's alive.

I don't really think that horror movies need in-depth explanations as to why the antagonist is alive in the sequel.

Logan

[FendersRule]

Originally Posted by jadedeath

I don't really think that horror movies need in-depth explanations as to why the antagonist is alive in the sequel.

Logan

BUT.....

Halloween 1 (2006) set him up to be human, so it requires an explanation.

The original Halloween 2 didn't need to explain this (and it didn't) because at that point, the viewers of the 1978 film were convinced of the "unnatural" boogieman.

[FendersRule]

You're going to be working a hard uphill battle to convince people that Zombie's Meyers has the same amount of humanity displayed as Carpenter's Meyers....a very hard uphill battle.

Nothing in the 1978 or 1981 version shows that he's human. You see a brief glimpse of him as a child and the rest is up to the viewer's interpretation.

Zombie's version did everything it could to put a human in the shell, almost scene by scene by building up a more "humane" side of Meyers. This is a huge fault on everyone's list.

You finish watching the originals thinking "Wow, that is the boogieman...I have no clue who that "person" really is..."

You finish watching Zombie's version thinking "Wow, that's a normal person that has been treated like dirt all his life, and that he has certain feelings for his baby sister".

Just sayin.

[Ator the Invincible]

Re: the title of this thread. No, Rob, don't stop making movies.

IMO, the man is a talented director regardless of what you think of his scripting abilities. I consider The Devil's Rejects to be a modern horror classic. Personally, I've enjoyed every movie he's made so far, even Halloween 2 (Don't get the hatred for that one). Zombie's Myers is supposed to be different than the original. That's the whole point. Otherwise, they could have just kept making sequels. Look at all the various takes on Dracula over the years. It's the same idea here, a different take on Myers. And I appreciate him for it. If I want classic Myers, I'll watch one of the old movies. There's more than enough of them.

[Lord_Stewie]

I think Rob should stop making movies in General. Haven't seen a single thing directed by him that I did enjoy.

[Ator the Invincible]

Originally Posted by Lord_Stewie

I think Rob should stop making movies in General. Haven't seen a single thing directed by him that I did enjoy.

Then don't watch his movies. The man has fans. There's no reason why he should stop making movies. Nobody's forcing anybody to watch anything they don't want to.