Legion World Forums LEGION COMPANION The Anywhere Machine halloween films !!

so anyone going to see the latest halloween films:

SAW 2 and THE FOG !!??

'Saw 2' is out in the UK this weekend, but 'The Fog' isn't out till next year !!

i really enjoyed the first 'Saw' not sure how this one will measure up !!??

and 'The Fog' was the 2nd HORROR film [ after the first 'HALLOWEEN' ] that i saw, and that [ at the time ] scared the hell out of me !!

again, not sure what the remake will be like, but i'll still go and see it, and it has TOM WELLING in it [ so that's an added bonus .....

Matthew.

I liked the original Fog. I haven't seen the
new one yet.

One of my favorite movies is Prince of
Darkness...

i will be checking out Saw 2, first one kicked ass. Hopefully i can talk my brother into going to it on halloween, he isnt really interested in seeing it, i'm waiting for him to say he hasnt seen the first one, which he has.

I want to see Saw 2, enjoyed the first one, but I have to wait until Caroline can't go with me since she is in no way interested in those types of horror films.

She has agreed to see the remake of the Fog and we just recently caught the original again on TV. I'm not expecting much out of it but hopefully it'll at least be fun.

As for what I like the most, give me the zombies any day. I grew up on horror films, my mom loved them. Late night triple feature at the drive-in in Pheonix seeing shows like The Devil's Rain, 2000 Maniacs, Blood Farmers. I don't watch them as much as I did growing up though. But I have been able to get Caroline to watch two zombie flicks and she's admitted to liking them, the remake of Dawn of the Dead and Romero's recent Land of the Dead.

boogeyman was a good movie, saw that in the summer and i was surprised at good i thought it was.
Some of the movies i remember from my younger years
Dawn of the Dead
Mothers Day
The Fog
The Thing-remake
boogeyman, i saw a movie in the early 80's, i dont remember anything about it but i know i liked it. I dont think the new boogeyman is a remake of it
Evil Dead
Dead Alive- i think thats what its called, really really good movie, at least when i was younger.

Quick little Hallowe'en video (ghost):

http://www.dvorak.org/blog/?p=3008

LAB., Sorry, I don't agree with you about Boogeyman. I expected it to be a lot better than it was. I coulda/shoulda been a psychological thriller, but it ended up just being another cgi special effects yawn.

Bravo has been showing it's top 100 scariest movie moments show recently. Jaws is the #1 scariest movie. There are lots of great ones listed, of course. I have always been scared by The Exorcist.

I like scary movies but my wife does not. My kids are at the age where we are not sure if we should let them see certain movies, some we don't mind. None of us have seen Saw yet, but I want to. I think The Fog looks dumb.

Fiiiiiiinally...A thread about Horror Movies! I was going to start one myself but never got around to it.
I think Ive mentioned it elsewhere, but Im a tad obsessed with movies. I draw a fine line between Art and Trash. But I love trash...and Im generally not satisfied if I dont see a violent death within the first 15 minutes or at the very least some Boobies.
I agree with Sketch though. Boogeyman Sucked. Damn you Barry Watson! DAMN YOU!!! the "Boogyman" that Labradorian is talking about is most likely either "Stephen Kings' the Boogeyman" (1982) or 1980's "the Boogeyman", which is basically a bad "Halloween" Knockoff ((it also had 2 sequels, the last released in 94'...they didnt get any better))
Oddly enough "Halloween" is also known as "Boogeyman"

Now...on the Subject of Halloween. "Season of the Witch" ((#3)) aside, "Halloween" is one of my favoritest things in the World. fair enough, "Reserection" ((#9) was kinda Lame...But "Halloween : Retribution" , to be realesed in 2006 should be better. oh...and Something else else cool that I found out yesterday? Danielle Harris aka Jamie Lloyd does the Voice of Debbie in the "Wild Thornberries".

theres also Rumours of a "Freddy vs Jason vs Michael (Myers)" floating about. Which would be super-cooooool

ummmm....I have more to say on this subject...but I dont really have time to write any more. I might start a new thread.

Ah Hell....Ive got another couple of minutes.

"Saw" In my opinion, was a damn good movie. I took my sister to see it , knowing what it was, but not the Twist (thankfully) and I thouroughly enjoyed it. I mean C'MON! Dinah "Batgirl" Myer?!? Shawnee Smith?!? Frigging Cary "Westley" Elwes!?!? loved loved loved it. My Sister and I were the only other people in the theatre other then another couple. after it was over the guy in the couple...visibly shaken....told us that they didnt know what they were going to see as they'd just bought a Ticket for the first movie they could see. he then asked us if we were as "Freaked out" as they were...and Kate (my Sister) just sneered at him. heh.

Despite the American Cast, Saw is Actually an Australian Film, and the fact that it was so good pleases me as prior to the release of Saw, the only notable Horror releases from Australia over the past couple of years were the So-So "Cut" starring Molly Ringwald (uh-huh_ and Kylie Minogue (look! how sweet! she thinks she can act!) - A "Scream" alike about a Cursed Movie that a group of Uni Students attempt to finish 20 years after the death of its director. The Monster comes alive, Molly Ringwald wears bad clothes, Hijinks ensue - AND "CubbyHouse" Staring Josh "Blair Witch" Leonard...about a demonic Cubbyhouse. uh-huh. ((Im not sure if Cubbyhouse is a purely Australian Term...but its basically a childs Fort..or playhouse))...if you get thet chance to see it, Dont.

Wait...Im forgetting "Undead". If you get a chance to see Undead...Do. It trails off abit towards the end but its pretty good....and it has Zombies. So yay.

just a quick sidenote...Leigh Whanell, Who stared in "Saw" as Adam and also Co-Wrote it, has been the Grunge Generations' Movie Review Guy...he was originally a part of the Saturday morning youth-orientated "Recovery" and then as Movie Review guy on various shows, magazines etc over the years. Its good to see him actually making the movies these days.


oh yeah..."Wolf Creek"

Now thats what I call good Australian Horror.

Try not to throw up/leave the cinema.

In that scariest movie moments show, they list "The Audition" as a super freaky movie. I guess this adorably sweet young woman tortures a guy in utterly ghastly ways. Just hearing about the things she does makes me uncomfortable. In fact, I don't think I even want to rent it. Maybe I do? I dunno. Heh...

I wonder if Bravo actually lists all the movies on their website? They seem like a bunch of "must sees."

Here's the list....
100. 28 Days Later
99. Creepshow
98. Zombie
97. Cat People
96. The Birds
95. Jurassic Park
94. Child's Play
93. Pacific Heights
92. Village of the Damned
91. Shallow Grave
90. Night of the Hunter
89. Alice Sweet Alice
88. Invasion of the Body Snatchers
87. Black Christmas
86. Wizard of Oz
85. Blood & Black Lace
84. Blue Velvet
83. The Others
82. Terminator
81. The Howling
80. Poltergeist
79. Dracula
78. The Brood
77. Signs
76. Evil Dead
75. Candyman
74. Willy Wonka & The Chocolate Factory
73. Blood Simple
72. Them!
71. The Sixth Sense
70. The Stepfather
69. Re-Animator
68. The Black Cat
67. Duel
66. The Tenant
65. Marathon Man
64. Near Dark
63. Deliverance
62. The Wolf Man
61. The Devil's Backbone
60. The Beyond
59. Fatal Attraction
58. Cujo
57. House of Wax
56. Single White Female
55. The Vanishing
54. The Changeling
53. Demons
52. The Phantom of the Opera
51. The Dead Zone
50. The Last House on the Left
49. Diabolique
48. The Thing
47. Nosferatu
46. The Sentinel
45. The Wicker Man
44. The Game
43. It's Alive!
42. An American Werewolf in London
41. The Hills Have Eyes
40. Black Sunday
39. Dawn of the Dead
38. Peeping Tom
37. House on Haunted Hill
36. Cape Fear
35. Aliens
34. The Hitcher
33. The Fly
32. Pet Sematary
31. Friday the 13th
30. Blair Witch Project
29. Serpent and the Rainbow
28. When a Stranger Calls
27. Frankenstein
26. Seven
25. Phantasm
24. Suspiria
23. Rosemary's Baby
22. Don't Look Now
21. Jacob's Ladder
20. The Ring
19. Hellraiser
18. The Haunting
17. A Nightmare on Elm Street
16. The Omen
15. Freaks
14. Halloween
13. Scream
12. Misery
11. Audition
10. Wait Until Dark
9. Night of the Living Dead
8. Carrie
7. Silence of the Lambs
6. Shining
5. Texas Chainsaw Massacre
4. Psycho
3. Exorcist
2. Alien
1. Jaws

i just rented out UNDEAD, i was also going to get DOMINION, which is i guess, the original remake of the exorcist but was scrapped.
Gotta get LAND OF THE DEAD too!
and the new HELLRAISER AND PROPHECY SEQUALS

I saw that special twice and have been enjoying it. I, of course, don't necessarily agree with the order, but I love seeing these types of horror lists.

Audition looks terrifying and now I'm interested. I never heard of it before but holy moley, the two second preview itself creeped me out!

JoeBoy, I've posted this before, but the "Halloween" movies have been a major favorite of mine since I was about 8 and snucked my friend's copy of Halloween 5 into my house and watched it. I've been loving them ever since, no matter how bad they get (the latest ones have actually been the weakest IMO).

I love cheap B-grade Horror. Love, love, love it. The Phantasm films are big favorites.

I've gotten my brother and g/f into horror too, and actually just borrowed Saw and the Ring from her (great Valentine's day gifts ) so my bro can watch them, since he's never seen either. Ring was a great movie, though not necessarily scary, and Saw was very creepy and good. I also might watch the original "Night of the Living Dead" in honor of Halloween weekend.

What I try to do when I have a horror movie night (which I don't do nearly as much as my roomates and I did in college) is try to mix an older movie with a gory 60/70's movie, and an 80's slasher/modern horror movie. Currently, I'm trying to watch the Hammer Horror films of the late 50's/60's, most of which I've never seen. The more Christopher Lee (now my favorite Dracula of all time) the better.

Oh I dont know...I kinda liked H20.

but Jaws...meh. does nothing for me.

"KIRI!KIRI!KIRI!"...yes...Auditon is pretty creepy.

Im surprised "Battle Royale" didnt make the list...or "Cube"...or "Catwoman"

I think everything from H20 forward has been lame

My favorite is Halloween 4

C'moooooon....H20 is great if you like that 90's teen post-modern horror kinda thing. It stuck to the formula perfectly...even had the "Big Name Star" death in the first 15 minutes. though Im not sure Joseph Gordon-Levitt qualifies as a Big Name anymore....though he was in 98'.

Has anyone seen the rare-bootleg "Directors Cut" of Halloween 6? its a completely different movie..makes abit more sense even

And Joy of Joys H20 is on TV tonight. Taste the Radness.

wouldnt that make it only one movie past H2O, halloween resurrection( i think)

yep. which in a sense is true. Resurrection was Lame. Silly Silly Tyra Banks.

they're working on #9 now....Halloween : Retribution

I do however have Tyra Banks' Single on my Ipod. But I also have Paris Hilton's "Screwed" Single. So thats saying something (though Im not sure what)

Matt, my favorites are 4, 5 & 6. Despite any cheesiness, these are the most fun and creepiest IMO. I can't stress how much I LOVE these films.

H2O didn't really do it for me and the last one was crap. No way Busta Rhymes should be talking smack to Michael Myers...they should have had him get decapitated or something awful.

The late 90's post-modern bit was cool in Scream I thought, but damn that got really tired after awhile. I don't even mind "I know what you did last summer" or "Urban Legend", but I'm glad that formula is done with for the time being.

Directors Cut for Halloween 6? What in the name of all that's gory...? I have *got* to find this! Tell me more!

"The more Christopher Lee (now my favorite Dracula of all time) the better."

I have all of these on tape. Love some of 'em, enjoy others despite themselves (heehee). One unfortunate problem there seems to have been at Hammer was, they had several well-written vampire films, but most of Chris Lee's Dracula films are not among them. It makes me think they had a budget for a good script-- OR Chris Lee-- but not both!

When I saw Lee's cameo in SLEEPY HOLLOW, it made me dearly WISH he could be in a Dracula movie with that level of production, and that intelligent of a script! (My favorite recent STAR WARS moment was in Episode 2, where you got to see the sword-fight-- between "Miss Piggy" and "Count Dracula"!)

I'm a little partial to the original Halloween movie. It was the first horror movie I ever watched. I was 12 to 14 years old, at home, alone, on Halloween night (my step mother wouldn't let us kids go trick or treating... something about not recognizing the devil's holiday, I think my sisters snuck out anyway which is why I was home alone).

I watched that movie by myself and it scared the crap out of me. After the movie, but before I went upstairs to bed... I had to check the patio door to make sure it was locked. Pulling the drapes back was probably the bravest thing I've ever done in my life. Some twenty years later, I look back on the viewing experience for the great atmosphere that it was (If only I had grown up in Haddonfield, Illinois instead of Fort Wayne, Indiana), but I was scared to death when I watched it as a kid. No movie compares to how scary that movie in that setting was... no movie. Although Showgirls is pretty scary too.

Theres other Sites out there that go into more detail but this is just the first One I clicked on.

Ive always wanted to see that Director's Cut for H6...

Like I said, I loved halloween 4, the scene in little Jaime's bedroom still creeps me out...

Plus, as gay as I am ( ), I had a crush on the girl who played Rachel. I was so mad she died in the next movie...

I got a very very dodgy copy from some rogue trader at a convention in San Francisco back in '99...Im sure you can find it if you look....probably next to the original-lets only make it to reatain the rights-Roger Corman "Fantastic Four" movie (on DVD in December?
), "Legends of the Superheroes" and "Return to Riverdale". (I passed on "Return to Riverdale" but damn if "Legends.... isnt sweet as'. Expecially drunk.)

Unfortunately the recent bombings in Amman has taken the life of the executive producer of the Halloween films as well as that of his daughter. Moustapha Akkad, who financed the original Halloween and produced all the other films, died of injuries he sustained when a bomb went off in the lobby of the Grand Hyatt. His daughter was killed in the blast and Akkad was critically injured. I understand that a heart attack resulted in him not making it.

RIP

Oh My God. I didn't hear about this. I remember wondering who he was for years as a kid, believing him to be some sinister guy who created these scary movies. I later saw tons of interviews with him and he was such a cool guy, who promised to keep making Halloween movies for the die-hard fans if we kept watching them. As a producer, one can't argue that he went his own way and did his own thing, which I feel is the most important characterisic for anyone producing any form of art. I can't believe he died in the bombings. He'll be missed.

RIP.

Well God Damn.

Damn. This is a bit of a shock. A good friend of mine absolutely ADORES the Halloween films (particularly the 1st and 4th), and we've talked about them extensively. We even tend to agree about the "bad" parts of them, though I went him much further and told him just a few weeks ago how I felt the exec. producer of them must be a really depraved sicko for some of the unspeakably vile things done in some of the films (speaking as a writer as well as a movie fan).


HEY! I didn't put the evil eye on him!!!!! HONEST!!!!!

I dont know if this is news to anyone but Rob Zombie to Write and Direct new Halloween Film. Taste the radness!

This will be awesome! I hope Zombie comes in and gets back to the grittiness of the first film (and 4-6, which despite their flaws were horrifying), instead of that awful late 90's 'hipper than hip good guys'/Busta Rhymes/LL Cool J nonsense. Michael Myers should be ripping people like them apart, and we (the audience) should be barely surviving each viewing!

I found HALLOWEEN 8 (so to speak) surprisingly entertaining... apart from the first 20 minutes, which was an INSULT to everyone involved, and the fact that the only character I actually liked in the film got DECAPITATED halfway into it. As a writer, I look at stuff like this and wonder what the hell is the point in even making crap like that?

I don't understand why Halloween 4, 5 and 6 are getting so much love here! I think Halloween 4 was pretty good overall for creepiness and character, but 5 and 6 absolutley blew chunks comparatively to the prior 3 Myers films. The bad acting and the stupidity of the situations in them were laughable. I know the appeal of cult horror movies is often how they are "so bad, they're good", but with some quality established in 1, 2 and 4, they should not have let the standards drop so low! It's a shame how Donald Pleasance's Loomis character was wasted with such crap writing in those movies.

I personally find 'H20' and 'Resurrection' major improvements over 5 and 6. For one thing, they both featured Jamie Lee Curtis in their casts. H20 did borrow from the trend of the time in horror movies, but the suspense and acting were a big improvement.

Resurrection was at least an attempt to put a new idea into the old formula. The webcast thing was certainly a modern and inventive thing to do with the movie. Yes, some of the characters and situations were absurd, but not really moreso than typical slasher films. To me, the main thing it lacked was a motivation for Michael. He was always after relatives in the other films, but none was to be found in this one. I kept waiting for the main girl character to be revealed as a cousin or something, but that never happened. Yeah, it sucked that Laurie died in the opening, but could it really end up any other way for her? And doesn't it make sense that she was in the loony bin?

My 2 cents, anyway.

For me, its a variety of things, all of which are more about 'me' than the film. Actually, I find that's a common theme about how I rank my favorite horror movies, something I try not to do with other genres. When I was 10 (in sixth grade), my friends older sister rented 4 and 5 for us to watch at a sleepover, and it scared the crap out of me so bad that I was a die-hard fan for life. When I was fourteen, Halloween 6 came out, and it was the first 'R' movie I ever snuck in to see--and was horrified and thrilled again.

I've re-watched them all since many times, and I still love 4-6. Its the idea that Jamie Lee wanted no part anymore and they took a pretty much dead franchise and reinvigorated it with a whole new storyline/set of characters, eventually getting closer and closer to what Michael Myers was really all about (of course, H20 and Ressurection ignored it mostly). Also, the little girl Jamie (in 4 and 5) was really great too and I liked her early fear of Michael and later interactions with him. Probably the fact that I was her age when I first saw them terrified me, but I still love her scenes today, even if she could barely act . The scene in 5 where Michael is chasing the little boy and her in the car through the woods hit levels of terror in me that I didn't know where there!

But I also like my horror movies slightly b-grade sometimes, because I get the sense that anything goes. In H2O, I knew Hartnett and the girl from Dawson's Creek would live, and I groaned when LL Cool J somehow survived. I like it better when I feel like no one might actually make it out alive--which is how Halloween 4-6 felt.

I love 1 & 2 as well, don't get me wrong--there's no arguement about how great they are. But 4-6 have a soft spot in my heart, similar to well, probably Phantasm 1-3. I know the Phantasm movies (to a much, much greater degree) are nothing more than b-grade horror at its 'b-est', but man, those movies kick ass!

H2O felt like a way to capitalize on the Scream movement in horror in the late 90's, and Resurrection, with its Busta Rhymes/reality show stuff felt so forced. That being said, I didn't find either terrible, since both had some great scares. Resurrection had the greatest scream moment I've ever been a part of in the theator, when they get the message 'still inside', and turn to see Michael--the people around me went absolutely INSANE. It was a total adrenaline rush. But I don't think the last two can measure up.

Now, though, I'm actually quite pleased Rob Zombie is taking over. I think this one will be something completely different, which is what Michael and the franchise need.

(I can talk about this stuff all day )

Don't get me wrong, Halloween's 5 & 6 were better than most slasher films. (Hell, only parts 1 and 4 of Friday the 13th are really worth watching!) But relative to the other movies about Michael Myers, I felt they were substandard. One problem I have is that I've watched horror flicks so much in my life, that they stopped scaring me at all by age 9 or 10, so story and character are all that've impressed me since then!

One thing though, Jamie (the little girl) wasn't in Halloween 6? I only saw that one once many years ago, but I thought she was in all 3 movies as I recall. For some reason the cable stations like AMC play the other films a lot, but not 6. All I really remember was being unimpressed. Can't even remember what became of the mysterious "guy with the cane" from 5! If Jamie wasn't in that one, what was it about? Wasn't Loomis in it, too--Pleasance's last film before he died? Inform me, oh knowledgeable one!

Like I said, H20 was great mostly because of Jamie Lee Curtis and some other notable actors like Adam Arkin. It felt like a really personal horror for Laurie.

Resurrection had a lot of problems as I said, but it was different from all the others because of its gimmick. It was kinda surreal and funny having the geek kid remotelyviewing and helping out. And Busta Rhymes was over the top, but how often do you get to see a black character have a heroic moment in a horror flick? They're usually just there to smoke weed, get some and get kakked (if they're even in it at all)! Give the movie some props for going against sterotype at least!

I can't . Really, I tried, but just can't. I feel many hip-hop artists do the African American youth of this generation a great disservice, and Busta Rhymes really just played Busta Rhymes, who is a whole other stereotype. (One hip-hop artist who goes against the grain and really shows how to act IMO, is Mos Def--I love seeing him on film).

But I think you have a great point, I wish it could be done right more often, like it was done most famously, in 'Night of the Living Dead'.

For Halloween 666, there are a few people on this board with much better knowledge than me on the subject (JoeBoy, Mattropolis, Lightning Lad, just to name a few), that could really give a better summary. But its a very intricate plot with some twists.

Jamie, the girl from 4 & 5 is in the first few minutes, but by this time she's in her late teens and has just had a baby. She escapes with the baby and is on her way back to Haddenfield, looking for Dr. Loomis, when 'they' unleash Michael on her, and he kills her once and for all. The rest of the film centers around 'them', the baby and Loomis, among others.

Funny that some people didn't like Jamie Lee's death in the opening of Ressurection. I thought it was the best part of the movie

See... I CHEERED-- LOUDLY-- in the theatre at the end of HALLOWEEN 7. So, it was more than stupid for Jamie Lee Curtis to come back for HALLOWEEN 8 just to get killed off in the first sequence.

I relate it to ALIENS and ALIEN 3. Ripley went thru SO DAMN MUCH in the 2nd movie, and came out utterly TRIUMPHANT. There should NEVER have been a 3rd movie, unless it could have come up to that level of quality and storytelling. Instead, they killed EVERYONE who survived the previous film, OFF-CAMERA, in the first 5 minutes... except Ripley, who had a fate-worse-than-death waiting for her for the whole film. And then she killed herself at the end-- JUST so "there would never be another sequel". YEAH-- RIGHT.

This is almost the exact same S*** Charlton Heston pulled back in 1970 with BENEATH THE PLANET OF THE APES. He just DID NOT WANNA do that movie! And he agreed to appear in it... ONLY if they killed him off at the end. WTF??? Then, while they were getting close to finishing the film, HE suggested... WHY NOT BLOW UP THE EARTH? Then, there would "never be another sequel". YEAH-- RIGHT.


The HALLOWEEN sequels went off-course the INSTANT they killed Rachel. BASTARDS!!!!!

Do---Joeboy, Mattropolis and/or Lightning Lad: "Tell me more, tell me more!"

Halloween videos! <3

...

There should be a lot for me to comment on here, but I can't think of anything.

Strange.

Eh...Im to tired to get into it right now but I will when Im a bit more cognitive ...for now Im going to bed.

before I do though, here's a mini interview With RZ from Halloweenmovies.com :

QUESTION: Why do you feel that you are the person to take on this project? (from Anna in Florida)
RZ: Because I have a vision that I believe can work. If I didn't I would go near it.

QUESTION: Can you please clarify what you mean when you say you are "not making a sequel" and that your Halloween will be a "re-imagining" of the series? Isn't that just another word for "remake"? (from Cole in Chicago)
RZ: Well, sort of. I am basically making a prequel and a semi-remake of the first film all in one. So really in theory there will be more original content than remake content. That's why I don't like the word "remake."

QUESTION: What is the title of the next movie, and are you finished with the script yet? What can you reveal about the storyline of the new movie? (from Eric in Canada)
RZ: HALLOWEEN, no and not much.

QUESTION: For the next film, are you planning to maybe go into what Michael's childhood was like and how and why he became the serial killer he is? Is it at least going to take place in 1978? (from Sylvain)
RZ: Yes, I think this aspect of the story is very important in order to bring new life to the character of Michael Myers. The film begins in 1978.

QUESTION: Halloween is the most influential horror movie ever made and I for one am not happy about a remake. All of the remakes to hit theaters - from Texas Chainsaw to The Omen - were total crap. Why touch a classic like Halloween? Why would you even risk this? (from Mike in New York)
RZ: Like I said in Question 1, I wouldn't even go near this project if I didn't feel like a had a fresh, worthwhile approach to the material. Besides, I'm not touching one single frame of Carpenter's classic. That film will remain as it always has.

QUESTION: The masks in the past 4 Halloween films were all different, and some of them weren't scary. Are you going to re-design the mask, or will you stick to the Captain Kirk version that was used in the original film? (from Todd)
RZ: I want to keep the mask classic.

QUESTION: Are you you planning on using any previous characters from the first 8 films (like Laurie Strode and Dr. Loomis) or are you planning something entirely new with no old characters? (from Jamie in Scotland)
RZ: Both, but I won't tell you which just yet.

QUESTION: Since you are a musician, will you be doing the entire music score for the film, or will you be collaborating with anyone else? And will you integrate any of John Carpenter's classic themes into the score? (from Craig)
RZ: I do not plan on doing the score for this film myself other than in a supervisor position. I have already done some work with the composer and we both feel that Carpenter's themes are classic and will play an important role.

QUESTION: Your films are known for their gore, but the Halloween films haven't been very gory, they have been more suspensful. Do you plan to focus on gore or suspense in your version of Halloween? (from Paula)
RZ: I plan to focus on character, mood and terror.

QUESTION: How does John Carpenter feel about your involvement in the new Halloween? (from Zack in Georgia)
RZ: I talked to John about it and he was vey supportive. He basically said, "That's great Rob, go for it and make it your own." What more do I need?

Without going into too much detail (I've probably read more about these films in the last year than in all the preceding years they've existed combined)... HALLOWEEN 6 went thru about a dozen script drafts... sorta like the original, unfilmed THUNDERBALL (1959). They actually came up with something interesting... in light of the fact that they had stupidly let 5 or 6 YEARS go by since the abomination of HALLOWEEN 5. I've read one of the unfilmed script drafts, and it had some INCREDIBLE stuff in it-- which did NOT make it into the finished film.

Before shooting, the producers decided to CUT the budget... and PIECED together a final shooting script from parts of the earlier drafts, all based on what would allow them the CHEAPEST budgut. NO S***!!! Is this any F****** way to make a movie?

I've read TONS about the (originally) unreleased, "producer's cut". They say it's a better, more interesting, etc... it's STILL crap. The ending makes NO F****** sense at all.

And yet, before this piece of S*** was released... Donald Pleasence died, and the director-- a Total F****** A**H*** (you can tell how much I like him, can't you?) who apparently HATED Donald Pleasence and thought he and his character were "boring" (so what the F*** was he doing directing this film in the first place for???) --well, this guy decided that without Pleasence, he "needed" to rewrite and reshoot a few scenes.

But instead of doing THAT, he GUTTED the film, tore HALF of what was there out, and EXTENSIVELY reshot scenes and shot entirely NEW scenes. (And what was that about them NOT having a budget to begin with?????) The version released to theatres has MUCH more violence onscreen than it would have... and make MUCH less sense. Instead of sticking with the supernatural, he introduces hints of scientific stuff going on... and NEVER EXPLAINS any of it. There's all kinds of references to previous films... NONE of which are developed. Everything in the film goes nowhere... including at least one chase scene, which I SWEAR was over 10 minutes long (and I believe about 75% of that was cut on TV).

So what you have was, in the words of a friend of mine who may be HALLOWEEN's #1 fan... "a bastardization of an abortion". They had a potentially GREAT film... instead, made a VERY BAD film... and then the director turned it into an EVEN WORSE film!!! Good grief.


It's no wonder Jamie Lee Curtis, in hyping HALLOWEEN 7 (I know... actual title: HALLOWEEN: TWENTY YEARS LATER) did her best to ignore or denigrate 3, 4, 5, & 6, and try to pretend they never happened. (There was supposed to be a news report about Jamie Lloyd's murder early on in HALLOWEEN 7... but they cut it, preferring not to connect the new film with the previous one.)


Meanwhile, I'm writing a brand-new story about my longtime vigilante-detective hero... and in this one, he just happens to run into an indestructible serial-killer. Heh. Of course, "bad guys" have a habit of not surviving the endings of MY stories, so... (heh heh heh)

Prof, I'd like to read some more on H6 and how it came to be. I've been able to score a copy of the Producer's Cut (thanks buddy --you know who you are!), but I'm always curious to learn more about the behind the scenes stuff. Got any links?

Do they ever explain behind the scenes in more depth how the film was supposed to work?

(I'm still a firm supporter of 4-6! Those films made me love horror movie sequels!)

BTW, here is a good site detailing the differences in the Producer's Cut vs. the Theatrical Cut.

Oh yeah, three other things, since we're not just talking about the Halloween series but all halloween/horror films in general:

Suspiria - Just watched this again the other day. I love this movie! Its so *out there*! Italian 'beauty-horror' at its best!

Prom Night - I might watch this one again too. This is a guilty pleasure movie for me. I love every bit of it, no matter how derivitive, corny or obvious it might be!

The Sentinel - I've never actually seen this movie, but my parents both just told me its possibly the scariest movie they've ever seen. I know the basic jist of it from being a horror fan for so long, but anyone ever see it? Thoughts?

One recent scary movie I'm really wanting to see is THE DESCENT.

Cobalt, what you can do is what I did... use Google Search. You never know what you'll find!

SOMEWHERE out there, I actually found posted an ENTIRE SHOOTING SCRIPT for HALLOWEEN 6-- one of those dozen or so that WASN'T used. I skimmed most of it, but when I got to the last 1/3rd, I read it intensely. There were scenes in there between Donald Pleasense and Mitchell Ryan that were BRILLIANT. Astonishingly good!

Best line: "I even taught him how to drive!"

I got so PISSED OFF when I read it! How-- HOW could they NOT have used this material???

If I hadn't come to the conclusion before then, that made me sure the people involved in making the films were utterly depraved degenerates.


MEANWHILE... saw a really FUN serial-killer film over the weekend: SANTA'S SLAY. James Caan, Fran Drescher and "Chester" (!!!) all have uncredited cameos in the opening sequence. It's a blast! Definitely my kinda movie. (It was Chester that caught my attention-- I actually recognized him BEFORE I saw Fran!)

The shooting Script can be found Here . theres alot of good stuff in it like Prof said - including more of Jamie Loyd.
Also check out Halloween : A new Season A pretty kick arse Fan film

The Saw 3 trailer is up on youtube. Looks like Dinah Meyer is going to be a victim this time around

At FYE this past weekend horror films were $7.99 each on DVD, a lil' Halloween Special. While I spent most of my money getting Veronica Mars Season Two, I did pick up a couple of DVDs that I've wanted to get for awhile:

Texas Chainsaw Massacre (original)
Wicker Man (original)
Halloween II (my college roomate still has my old one).

Not sure who lives near an FYE, but they actually had a pretty good selection and you can't beat the pricing!

(PS - I never buy a DVD unless I've seen it before)

One more thing--A year or two ago, Bravo aired its 'Top 100 Scariest Film Moments of all Time' or something, and it was a pretty kick-ass special. In fact, that have spurned this thread, but I'm far too lazy to click on the page one link and check. Anyone know if this will be re-airing anytime soon? The special was pretty awesome for a TV special.

Can't wait to see what Brewvies does for the Halloween festival they promised. From their short list, these were the five movies I suggested:

Dawn of the Dead (the remake)
28 Days Later
An American Werewolf in London
Shaun of the Dead
The Lost Boys

It's that time of year again!!

I watched the last hour or so of Halloween 5 last night on AMC. Question for Cobie and the rest of the "experts": Did or didn't the character Tina die in the scene out in the forest after Michael tried to run down Jamie? It's heavily implied that she did, especially by Jamie's reaction. But to me, it looked like a survivable wound, and it showed Tina on a gurney moments later with ot any covers over her.

I dunno. To me it looks like they're leaving her fate up in the air in case they want to use her in a sequel, but I could be wrong. I swear it bothers me every time I see that movie because I think she lived!

Of course, I'm sure no one planned for part 6 to come out six years later, so that has to be taken into consideration!

Yeah, I liked the Tina character in that film, especially after she tried to shield Jamie from Michael. But I never thought that she might have survived.

Snce I made that post, Sarky, I've looked at various Wikipedia articles on the movie and the characters, and they all list Tina as having been stabbed to death. I dunno. I've only ever seen the edited-for-television version of that movie. Maybe her death's more explicit in the uncut version?

I mean, hell, you can even argue that Loomis died in H5 after subduing Michael. Obviously, he appeared again in H6, though.

I've always considered her dead but the case can definitely be made for her living. I suspect it was left open 'if needed' for a possible sequel which was originally intended to happen pretty soon after.

I'd love to find a decent image of Tina in her costume for a commission at some point.

I haven't really sat down to watch the Halloween movies in a while, but I did like parts 4, 5, and 6.

I read there was a deleted scene in H2O where Laurie Strode, under her new identity, learns from one of her students that Michael managed to kill Jamie Lloyd a couple of years ago, and she then excuses herself from the classroom to go vomit in one of the bathrooms.

So I've been watching most ("most" because the kids kept walking in ) of Halloweens 4-6 today on AMC, and I must say that my opinion on them has changed overall since 3 pages ago when I denigrated the trilogy overall compared to H20 and resurrection. Anyhow, seeing parts of 6 again reminded me of the Producer's Cut, and a little internet research shows it has actually gotten a standalone Blu-ray release this year after having finally gotten a release last year as part of a massive complete series set. I'm weighing whether or not I may actually want to obtain this version in the near future.

I guess the question is: Is it worth owning?

It's an interesting question because a fair number of reviews posted on Amazon characterize the cut as "boring" compared to the theatrical version. I also noticed that while Cobie states he'd eventually obtained it in the course of this thread, he never reviews it or compares it to the main version. Prof doesn't speak well of it, either. So I'd be curious if Cobie or any others with an opinion on the subject could speak up!

(BTW, I STILL think Tina should have survived 5 from what we were shown! )

My feelings on Halloween 6 are those of most of the general public: it just doesn't work. The fundamental problem behind the movie is that tries to explore something that shouldn't be explored: Michael's origin and motives. John Carpenter's original Halloween was so successful in enveloping the audience in a sense of dread and suspense was because Michael Meyers was an enigma, a force of nature that could not be reasoned with or stopped.

The whole business with the "Thorn curse" makes Michael less threatening as a character because he's simply the pawn of some cult leader who we have no investment in and don't know about until the reveal, undermining Michael's autonomy as a character. I don't feel the producer's cut really helps all that much except for a few scenes with the great Donald Pleasence, who unfortunately passed away shortly after the movie finished.

I kind of liked the expansion of the mythology beyond Michael just being a supernatural murderer. Carpenter himself even laid the groundwork somewhat by working in a reference to samhain in his script for Halloween 2. I dunno, I think it was better than the Jason Voorhees series that was mostly stagnant after the first film. To me, Halloweens 4-6 at least have some re-watchability, whereas the Fridays have very little, imo.

Lardy, I agree with you that the Friday the 13th films have very little rewatchability, though I attribute that less to Vorhees himself being an uninteresting villain and more to the fact that the entire cast in every installment serves as canon fodder with little actual character development.

I actually think the Halloween series should have followed through on the original plan of the studio and become an anthology series after Halloween III. That would been much more interesting and led to more creative movies year after year, almost a cinematic Tales from the Darkside if you will. Unfortunately, the public hated the idea and kept demanding more Michael Meyers movies, which is how we eventually got Halloween 6 where Michael somehow impregnated his niece and Halloween: Resurrection where Michael meets his end at the hands of Busta Rhymes' martial arts skills.

Halloween was the first horror movie I ever watched, at the tender age of 8. The truth is, the movie didn't actually scare me that much. Neither did The Wolf Man, which I'd watched at around the same time I'd seen Halloween.

My sibling and I used to be big fans of the Halloween movies, even the third one long before we found out about Carpenter originally planned for the franchise. I remember how badly we used to want one of the Silver Shamrock masks.

I've rewatched 5 and 6 a couple of times in the last few years. I actually own a bootleg of the director's cut of 6 but I've never watched it from beginning to end. That said, I...

I know the movies aren't perfect and have problems, especially the whole "Man in Black" thing and the ending of 6. But I liked Jamie Lloyd's character and a few others. Tina from 5 and Kara Strode from 6. I especially liked the bond Jamie developed with that nurse from the fifth movie, if only because it was nice seeing her receive some consistent emotional support and nurturing after everything she went through. Tina sacrificing herself to help Jamie, and Kara trying to protect her son from Michael in 6 were also parts I enjoyed.

I'm also rather fond of the opening to the fifth movie when they do the recap of 4's ending, the music is awesome. Same said for the theme remix used in 6 and the song they played at the end.

But that's just me.

It's been many years since I posted in this thread but my love of the Halloween films had continued and grown unabated. A look at earlier posts in the thread show how I came to love the franchise.

A few things have crystallized even more for me (and I'll make my way to 4-6 here):

The first film continues to age like a fine wine. It is iconic and deservedly so. Not only is it hands down the best Halloween film, it's probably the greatest slasher film and one of the top few horror films ever. I've seen it like 40 times now and can't get enough.

The 2nd one is also great though not on the level of the first. If the first creates a hunger for the viewer for this kind of movie, the second one really satisfied that hunger you in spades. IMO, it's the perfect sequel.

Meanwhile, jumping ahead, by dissatisfaction with H20 and Resurrection (7 & 8) has only grown over the years. All my complaints about both are earlier in the thread ad nauseam. They have only intensified: the "Scream-ing" / youth hippiness of H2O and the cutesy pandering with Busta Rhymes and reality TV make me react to them as if they're campy and comedic like the current TV show Scream Queens.

Meanwhile, the recent Rob Zombie reimaginings haven't been my favorites for some reason. I watched, I enjoyed, but I never find an urge to rewatch when they're on. Perhaps they're too dark and grimy (literally--not the plot or tone but the lighting and the sets) or perhaps they have that purposeful element of cruelty that Zombie infuses in his work that isn't my favorite, where he's trying to hurt the viewer. The originals scared the shit out of me; the reimaginings, like much of modern horror, feels like a personal attack. I'm not scared, I'm defensive and taken out of the movie when I see what the director is trying to get me to feel.

And this circles back to my beloved 4-6, which still indeed are beloved. Upon numerous rewatches (at least 1 each every 2 years or so), I continue to love these films. Yes, the are B-quality when compared to the original, but that only enhances the feeling (see my original comments).

On the 6th one, one complaint I share is that I dislike that Jaime dies in the beginning too. I'm probably more invested in her than any other character in series, including Loomis and Laurie. So I agree on that.

I do love the added mythology to Michael and the Cult of Thorne. Part of it is because as a kid, the end of 5 intrigued me to no end, and then 6 was such a big moment in my cinema viewing experience. Part of it is also how the Son of Sam and other serial killers have strange ties to satanic cults that aren't really ever reported on but have a whole genre of literature that I find fascinating. But mostly it's because the concept of Michael being the lone, silent killer was already done, and done very well, in the first two films, as Lardy alludes to. They couldn't just keep making the same movie over and over again, and needed to add something to it. By doing so, they don't detract from the first film because that still exists and can be enjoyed on its own with the viewer none the wiser. But they can give a little something extra if you're invested and want to keep living in this world.

The first film is the ultimate slasher movie. The second one is the ultimate follow up where the mystery is gone, and the lead characters know what they're up against with the mayhem turned up to 10. The fourth one, 10 years later, reestablishes it for the viewer with the additional element of a young girl connected to Michael. The 5 serves to enhance Jamie's story, give hints to a larger plot, and mirror 2 as 4 mirrors 1. And then 6 brings the cult plot to a culmination.

Obviously when the franchise was considered B-grade and the genre was shit on, they could get away with it, so why not go in a totally different direction? And with 6, they had no real blueprint on how to proceed, if you consider 4 & 5 followed the road map of 1 & 2.

So yeah, I love the Cult stuff. I also love that it serves as a moment in time before Scream made horror cool again and the Halloween movies were forced to try to be cool and what the standards of the decade considered "good".

Getting to 6 specifically, I did finally watch the Producer's Cut years ago. For some reason I was vague then because I received a burned copy, but the awesome Lightning Lad sent me a copy. My thoughts boil down to: yes, it was a little better as more of it made sense; however--and this is big--considering all I've read online, including links earlier in the thread--it didn't totally satisfy my craving for a proper Cut and proper resolution to the plots / ending. It's like we get a step in the right direction, but there should be yet another "super producers cut" that should exist that truly makes it work.

Part the mystique of 666 is this of course. Hell, I can't watch 6 without rereading the article about what we could, or should, have gotten. But with Mustapha Akkad deceased, we probably never will have any true resolution.

Hope that answers the question. To be totally honest, my memory isn't fresh enough to get into specifics on the differences in the cuts.

Lastly, I'm thrilled they didn't turn it into an anthology series after 3! Movies don't really need anthologies, they just need to be good movies made by the same people. And Carpenter in recent years has been very happy and positive about how the franchise has lasted. The Halloween franchise, IMO, is a good example of how a franchise can continue on open-ended if the film makers are creative and take some risks. Horror lends itself very well to serial art because the innate fears and anxieties they exploit will never go away; like superheroes and detectives, the genre and characters can tell great one-off stories but are perfectly poised to establish a dedicated audience and then take them for a long ride.

I despise remakes and I tend to write off sequels, but in certain cases they make sense and can serve a purpose. Michael Myers, like Dracula and others before him, is a character worth seeing again and again.

Kind of. I guess what I was looking for, more than what the differences were, is which of the two versions you prefer. I know that you kind of answer this by saying it needs a third "super" version, but my hunch is that you ultimately prefer the theatrical version. Ultimately, I'm just wondering whether I need to see the Producer's Cut or not.

I see what you mean there, and that may very well be why those films weren't discussed much here after they were released, even though anticipation expressed for them was high prior to their release. I think you kind of nailed it there by alluding to the basic cruelty in the feel of them.

*spoilers follow*

I think this is most exemplified by the Annie character who is played by Danielle Harris this time. Danielle, of course, played Jamie Lloyd in 4 and 5. And Annie is easily the victim in the original film that we care about the most. So we have double the investment with the character this time. We are elated to see her survive Zombie's first film this time, but in the second.....

I guess it's more than just that, though. Zombie invests a lot in the characters and especially Michael's backstory, so the deaths and the carnage hurt a lot more than any other Halloween film for the most part. Plus, it feels more real because, IIRC, Zombie completely eschews the supernatural elements that were present in all of the originals, specifically Michael's inability to die. Basically, Halloween is now a story of a serial killing spree that is bereft of any escapism with the supernatural taken out.

So, like you, I kind of enjoyed and appreciated them when I first saw them but have not been keen to re-watch at all.

Thinking about it some more, I would say, yes, I enjoyed the theatrical version better. The overall experience was more pleasing.

You definitely don't need to see the producers cut. It's worth watching if you have easy access to and can get on the cheap. But you're definitely not missing out.

I think somewhere on this thread someone (Prof?) said that it was the original script that was so awesome, IIRC, rather than any filmed version.

I grew up on '80s horror movies, and the first two Halloweens were a big part of that. The first one seems absolutely tame by later slasher standards, but it's just so iconic and simple and just well-done. And there's several images that just stay with you: Michael with the sheet over him and wearing Bob's glasses, the tombstone and jack o'lantern used to pose the bodies, the light coming thru the slatted closed door as Laurie hides for her life--those are just a few that come to mind.

The second one has its iconic moments but doesn't hold up as well as the first over time. The escalated violence, body count and nudity seem more like an attempt to be like other slashers that have arisen since the first film. But you pretty much had to bring things to another level to have a satisfying sequel. There's also some ambiguity as to whether Jimmy survives, though there's a version that clearly shows he did. However, given the explosion we see, there's no friggin' way Loomis survives! Michael, you can excuse because of his supernatural aspects. Loomis, not so much. It's nice, though, to have Loomis in the sequels, but his survival is still ridiculous.

This was something I was thinking abut when this thread was bumped a few weeks ago, but forgot to post about: How did Michael learn to drive and follow traffic laws after he stole the car in the first movie?

Was that ever addressed in any of the sequels or is it just a huge plot hole?

I seem to recall it being mentioned by Loomis, but I can't remember exactly what was said.

There's a hilarious spoof on YouTube somewhere about Loomis teaching Michael how to drive. It's one of the great Wtf elements of the franchise.

Looks like Carpenter himself has confirmed his involvement in new Halloween movies, which has my interest piqued for both good and bad reasons.

https://twitter.com/TheHorrorMaster/status/734973168469692416

Aren't they saying they're planning another reboot with a movie that's supposed to be like a direct sequel to the original that ignores everything else?

Which is kind of what they did with the Texas Chainsaw Massacre franchise?

I know they're rebooting it, but I don't think they've revealed any of the "continuity logistics" yet. It would be weird for them to do that again since that's basically what H20 was.

Carpenter not a fan of Rob Zombie's version:

http://ihorror.com/john-carpenter-finally-comments-rob-zombies-halloween/

I'm not surprised to hear Zombie can be a bit of an egotistical jerk. This is the guy who blamed horror fans themselves for his movies failing critically every time after all.

My 13-year-old granddaughter, whom I have called 'Sapphire' elsewhere (because that is not her name) has been involved in musical theater here for a few years.

What she would really like to do for Halloween one year, is for Disney to release a stage version of Nightmare Before Christmas, or Neil Gaiman to write Coraline: The Musical.

And then let her Theater group do it.

Sorry... silly me. Y'all meant "Halloween" films, not Hallowe'en films.

So...yeah, it's October, and the 4-5-6 Halloween trilogy just got played again on AMC. Seeing 5 ALWAYS makes me think again about whether the intent was or was not for the character of Tina to have been killed off. We see her writhing just after suffering the wound and weakly imploring Jamie to run. The exact location of her single stab wound is ambiguous. It was somewhere in the chest or possibly in the shoulder. And we later see her on a gurney, not in, or being put in, a body bag.

It just seems that Tina is set up to basically take up the role that Rachel served as Jamie's protector. Rachel falls early in the film, and Tina is there to step into the void. By horror movie logic, this means she should survive to the end of the film. I guess this is why Tina apparently dying just nags at me so, with the vague circumstances of her demise backing that feeling up. I suppose I should applaud the filmmakers for not making their plot quite so predictable, but it bugs me that Tina dying may not have been the intent.

Meanwhile, another cool character from 4 & 5's fate seems ambiguous, as well. I speak of Sheriff Meeker. He apparently dies in the finale of 5 as the mysterious Man in Black shoots up the police station and frees Michael. We see a number of bodies but no lingering camera shot on Meeker. More than one of them looks like they could be him, but I don't get the confirmation I need. Plus, who's to say that all the officers are dead, though it doesn't look particularly good? *sigh* I can drive myself crazy with this sort of thing! In any case, I enjoyed the character and what the actor's presence added to those two movies.

As for 6, a young Paul Rudd's performance as grown up Tommy Doyle is...bizarre, to put it kindly. I guess we're lucky this role didn't kill Rudd's career because we would have been all the poorer without his gift for comedic roles.

Watched the first one last night. Despite seeing 4, 5, H20, and parts of the others, I realised I've never sat down and watched the first one. Some thoughts:

Loomis is much more of a non-entity than I thought he'd be. He's exposition machine and little else until the last frame. I did find it funny how he spooked the kids, showing a bit of a mean streak in him.

Michael isn't that big. In later movies they really beef him up (ala Jason) to increase his intimidation factor, but in the kitchen scene he's no bigger than Ben.

P.J. Soles! The immortal Riff Randall! (Well, maybe not so immortal in this one).

Funny to see the kids watching "The Thing".

Pacing was interesting. I had to check the time on the PVR and was surprised to find only 15 minutes left and the main action really hadn't even started yet. They packed a lot into the final frame.

The supernatural aspects of Michael's recovery similarly came out of left field and would be a little jarring if you didn't already know the story.

I know it's a horror movie, but Laurie drops the knife TWICE next to Michael's body. C'mon!

I wasn't aware there was a face reveal. Interesting he couldn't kill until the mask was on (similar to his sister). But if that's his hang-up, how could he kill that guy in the pick-up?

So was a sequel always planned or was it just one of those open endings?