Halloween (2018)

[shellshell47]

The movie had many letdowns. Why would the justice department allow the journalist to possess Michaels mask and use it for an interview with someone already prosecuted and sentenced? Makes no sense. Why would you make Laurie Strode tough as nails and fully prepared only to make her weak as hell and make many stupid mistakes in the final confrontation? Why would they have Laurie Strode have a son in H20 only to switch to a daughter? Stupid. Stop rewriting history. It's like they have the financial backing so they can use their creativity the way they want without them taking into consideration of how the audience will react to their ridiculous changes. Talented actors, but bad creative concepts and writing. The problem with sequels and remakes is that those in the creative process are not getting any genuine feedback and just allowed to run amok at our expense when we pay to watch these movies after hyping it up, only to be let down.

[cheebacheeba]

LOL the events you refer to were just as much a retcon/addition in their own right as anything in this film.

Why would the justice department allow the journalist to possess Michaels mask and use it for an interview with someone already prosecuted and sentenced

Because it's been since 1978, the Michael story is still not completely understood and explained, and therefore worthy of attention, just like unsolved murders etc.
As to why it was "allowed", I would imagine the proper channels were followed and that it was not deemed to be a risk factor that they attempted to interview him.
I personally wonder more HOW they had the mask.

Why would you make Laurie Strode tough as nails and fully prepared only to make her weak as hell and make many stupid mistakes in the final confrontation

Because she's old? She's human? She thought she had it all locked down and the sudden reappearance of Michael plus the threat to her actual family threw her a bit, I'd say.
I mean hell...she did ok?

Why would they have Laurie Strode have a son in H20 only to switch to a daughter

Because that's H20. This is Halloween 2018 - the only thing this movie needed to worry about fitting into was the original title, not any of the sequels/reboots.

The problem with sequels and remakes is that those in the creative process are not getting any genuine feedback and just allowed to run amok at our expense when we pay to watch these movies after hyping it up, only to be let down.

I dunno...I feel like they'd have got inundated with feedback...and I have to say you do seem to be somewhat A minority with how you feel about this movie. The vast majority of people I've encountered loved it...because it stayed true to the theme, atmosphere and style of the original. Aside from the original Halloween 2, I don't think much of the series has come close to attaining that status.

Just me, I liked it fine.

[knoopers21]

I don't really like this film. The story didn't attracted me, kinda boring imo.

[Sculpt]

Originally Posted by cheebacheeba

Because it's been since 1978, the Michael story is still not completely understood and explained, and therefore worthy of attention, just like unsolved murders etc.
As to why it was "allowed", I would imagine the proper channels were followed and that it was not deemed to be a risk factor that they attempted to interview him.
I personally wonder more HOW they had the mask.

It didn't bother me that the podcast/reporters had the mask. Probably because we have no idea how they captured MM. It could have fell off during a chase and purchased later off ebay some time after the trial. If the state had the mask, I don't see how the reporters would get it. Did Illinois state sell John Wayne Gacy's underwear stuffers, or let anyone grab one if they wanted? I don't think so.

Anywho, I think a great question is how did the police capture MM? He's in one piece. They must of shot and cuffed him while he was 'out'. MM demonstrated super strength, how did they cuff and keep him from getting away, like when he was in the hospital under guard? He could have "shutdown" again, I mean, like he was in the institution from the first film, but the film just doesn't say. He wouldve been unfit to stand trial.

I'm just saying, when the reporters interview Laurie, the film could have laid down a viable plot exposition there explaining some of these things. I could have composed an easy entertaining explanation that would have added to the fun and setup a few punches for the rest of the film.

Like I said before, in the Laurie interview they could have revealed MM's psychiatrist was asking Laurie a lot of obsessive questions; how they captured MM; Laurie could say she tried to get him killed in prison, but it didn't succeed, instead getting her friend, a guard, killed... and setting up another character who's helping her.

Lastly, I was disappointed I didn't really get to know who Laurie 2020 was. Not enough there. The interview should have been a more useful catalyst to really make her alive, believable, likeable, setup of the psychiatrist, etc.

[Lumber]

I've watched it twice now and although I enjoyed it more the second time around I still don't think it was great. I can't remember now if they explicitly said Laurie was Michael's sister or if it was just implied but neither make sense going back to the original there was never any mention of another sister nor that Laurie was adopted. That's not a deal breaker for me but as a couple of people have commented, it's much better to have Michael just going after her because he needs to, nothing else. An unstoppable evil force. That's all the reason that we really need. This is definitely a situation where less is more in the story line.

I liked the idea and structure for Laurie's character, I just didn't like the "Home Alone" vibe of her house with all of the traps. I would have liked to see a more direct confrontation where she ambushed him or something rather than trapping him in a rigged basement.

As for the other inconsistencies in the Halloween story line, this is just Halloween 2. The only real question (as others have mentioned) is how they captured Michael although that's a forgivable plot sin I think as the details of that aren't terribly important to the current plot. Michael needs to escape so he can kill Laurie. End of plot.

Overall, meh. It was better than most of the previous sequels but that's not a high bar.