View Full Version : How bout Halloween 3....
RoLLiNLiGhTs
07-25-2005, 04:24 PM
What did you guys/girls think of this movie?
I thought it sucked just because of the fact it was called Halloween....I mean, no Michael Meyers????
RoLLiNLiGhTs
07-25-2005, 04:51 PM
...I've been to a lot of different horror sites, and there's been mixed reviews.....humor me, what do you think of this movie......¿
filmmaker2
07-25-2005, 07:23 PM
Personally I thought it was very imaginative, and a lot of fun. But I like just about anything written by Nigel Kneale.
In 1990 I spent about 2 months working at Don Post Studios where the masks were created, and saw the original molds for those things. It was a cool thing! What was it again? A pumpkin, a witch and a skull...I think the skull was already a part of their line of masks, and the other two were designed for the film.
When I first saw the film (on cable TV) it seriously freaked me and my friend out...we couldn't believe what we were seeing. In my mind I amplified the gory images, and had exaggerated memories of them for years. When I saw the film again in the mid-90's, I was surprised at how tame it had become. But it was still fun, and Stacey Nelkin was seriously cutie-cutie.
alkytrio666
07-26-2005, 11:07 AM
I'll tell you one thing, it definately doesn't belong in the "classic" section.
zwoti
07-26-2005, 11:47 AM
Originally posted by alkytrio666
I'll tell you one thing, it definately doesn't belong in the "classic" section.
damn right
slasherman
07-26-2005, 11:55 AM
Originally posted by RoLLiNLiGhTs
no Michael Meyers
I guess the movie was ok but no Myers.. no Halloween movie...
zomb5150
07-26-2005, 12:00 PM
I've seen it, I didn't think it was too bad.It was definitely different.
The scene where the boy is in front of the T.V. watching the commercial for the Shamrock mask company is kinda weird, especially when his head melts and the bugs and snakes come pouring out of his head.
g star
07-26-2005, 12:15 PM
supposedly the franchise had intended to release a new "halloween" film every year at halloween. the idea was that each film would be an original idea, having nothing to do with the prequels. however, fan reaction to the lack of myers in III was so overwhelmingly negative that the studio ditched the idea and went back to MM. or so i've heard.
slasherman
07-26-2005, 12:22 PM
Originally posted by g star
supposedly the franchise had intended to release a new "halloween" film every year at halloween. the idea was that each film would be an original idea, having nothing to do with the prequels. .
could have worked...but as you know "Halloween 2" had allready established Myers as the ultimate slasher guy...
RoLLiNLiGhTs
07-26-2005, 04:26 PM
Originally posted by slasherman
could have worked...but as you know "Halloween 2" had allready established Myers as the ultimate slasher guy...
No doubt...Slasherman...
I might have liked it, if I wasn't waiting to see Meyers drive a butcher knife through someone's skull.....
bwind22
07-26-2005, 11:53 PM
Originally posted by g star
supposedly the franchise had intended to release a new "halloween" film every year at halloween. the idea was that each film would be an original idea, having nothing to do with the prequels. however, fan reaction to the lack of myers in III was so overwhelmingly negative that the studio ditched the idea and went back to MM. or so i've heard.
Yep, that's exactly what happened.
Personally I liked H3 as a seperate movie from the rest of them, but with the lack of Michael Myers, it just seems out of place in the Halloween franchise. I think if it had been released under it's own name altogether, it'd have been a bit better received.
42ndStreetFreak
07-27-2005, 01:13 AM
DEFENDING TIME!
Yes it was a grerat idea to have a lot of different tales set around Halloween. But it wasd a bad move on a practical level because Myers was so recognised as being the main opart of "Halloween"
BUT COME ON!!! It's been years now! You know Myers is not in it! GET OVER IT!
It's no longer the possibly valid arguement it was when the film was released.
As for the film...it's does not deserve the almost religious (SPIT) hate directed towards it by Myers groupies.
Plot wise it's got holes I agree...
But, the rest is so good these annoyances are pushed away and leave us with a very entertaining an satisfying movie.
A great opening sequence..with the superb Carpenter/Howarth score pounding away nicely.
A REALLY NASTY death via eye poking and skull snapping (the sight of the inner bone pushing up againat the nose is wonderfully icky.
Some great Halloween atmosphere as well..especially with the excellent montage of the kid going home to watch the 'give away'.
The Los Angeles (against the City lights) and the Phoenix (a line of kids against the red light of the setting sun) segments are highly effective.
And the ad's (another love or loathe feature) are wonderfully annoying!!
The gore is also expertly done.
Burman does a great job with the blood spraying, very painful looking head pulling and the ever so gruesome aftermath of the lasered mouth..all rictus teeth and blood soaked eyes.
the drill death is also very nasty without actually showing anything.
Performances are ok..I always like Atkin and he deserved a bigger career. His acting while he tries to persuade his Wife (Nancy Loomis from "Halloween") to get rid of the masks is excellent..as is his deflated shock after ripping the robots wire innards out.
Top bit of mad screaming at the end as well...An ending that is delightfully evil.
O'Herlihy is a bit hammy (he was in "Twin Peaks" as well) but he's a good villian and his speech about the real meaning of Halloween is nicely dark and creepy.
The nods to Carpenter are fun to.....
It's a cheekily wicked idea to have "Halloween" itself as the film that will lead into the 'killer ad's'....
The classical music that is playing when the lady gets lasered is the same music that Adrienne Barbeau pays as she drive to the lighthouse in "The Fog"....
The framing of the shots where Atkins and Nelkin are walking around while being watched are the same as "Halloween", with the half back and shoulders of the robot set up exactly like the scenes of Myers watching Jamie Lee Curtis.
The film also has ideas that now seem very insightful........
The mass coverage of your every move by CCTV is now a welcome and not so welcome reality in every town and city.
And if made now the whole idea of a specific brand name being wanted over 'lesser' makes would be very topical.
The fact is "Silver Shamrock" is 'Adidas' and 'Nike'....Atkin's kids do not want his 'other brand', cheap masks..they want the "Silver Shamrock", masks that are the hip and cool make to have...Oh dear....if only they had gone for Atkin's non brand masks they wouldn't have spiders crawling out their noses!!
TOP Halloween viewing.
And seeing as entries WITH Myers (aside from #4) have been so fucking awful...perhaps they should indeed have stuck to their guns and stuck with the fact he was kileld off in #2!
I honestly think that if it hadn't been given the Halloween title that a lot more people would dig the movie. As a whole it's a fun movie in my opinion. If anyone really wants to make it fit with the series all you have to do is say that The Thorn was behind the Silver Shamrock masks ;)
filmmaker2
07-27-2005, 06:09 AM
Great comments, 42nd. Word 'em up.
C'mon guys, Nigel Kneale? Quatermass? It kicks ass.
zwoti
07-27-2005, 07:48 AM
Originally posted by filmmaker2
C'mon guys, Nigel Kneale? Quatermass? It kicks ass.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v292/zwoti/worship.gif
filmmaker2
07-27-2005, 08:55 AM
i'm not wortheeeeeeeeeee
crippler666
07-29-2005, 05:54 PM
I liked the movie
Yes far from perfect, but where it lacked MM it had imagination
When I watched recently I found it better than when I first watched it, also noticing that the bloke at the beginning had his nose bone ripped from his skull
knife_fight
07-29-2005, 06:19 PM
Originally posted by 42ndStreetFreak
DEFENDING TIME!
Yes it was a grerat idea to have a lot of different tales set around Halloween. But it wasd a bad move on a practical level because Myers was so recognised as being the main opart of "Halloween"
BUT COME ON!!! It's been years now! You know Myers is not in it! GET OVER IT!
It's no longer the possibly valid arguement it was when the film was released.
As for the film...it's does not deserve the almost religious (SPIT) hate directed towards it by Myers groupies.
Plot wise it's got holes I agree...
But, the rest is so good these annoyances are pushed away and leave us with a very entertaining an satisfying movie.
A great opening sequence..with the superb Carpenter/Howarth score pounding away nicely.
A REALLY NASTY death via eye poking and skull snapping (the sight of the inner bone pushing up againat the nose is wonderfully icky.
Some great Halloween atmosphere as well..especially with the excellent montage of the kid going home to watch the 'give away'.
The Los Angeles (against the City lights) and the Phoenix (a line of kids against the red light of the setting sun) segments are highly effective.
And the ad's (another love or loathe feature) are wonderfully annoying!!
The gore is also expertly done.
Burman does a great job with the blood spraying, very painful looking head pulling and the ever so gruesome aftermath of the lasered mouth..all rictus teeth and blood soaked eyes.
the drill death is also very nasty without actually showing anything.
Performances are ok..I always like Atkin and he deserved a bigger career. His acting while he tries to persuade his Wife (Nancy Loomis from "Halloween") to get rid of the masks is excellent..as is his deflated shock after ripping the robots wire innards out.
Top bit of mad screaming at the end as well...An ending that is delightfully evil.
O'Herlihy is a bit hammy (he was in "Twin Peaks" as well) but he's a good villian and his speech about the real meaning of Halloween is nicely dark and creepy.
The nods to Carpenter are fun to.....
It's a cheekily wicked idea to have "Halloween" itself as the film that will lead into the 'killer ad's'....
The classical music that is playing when the lady gets lasered is the same music that Adrienne Barbeau pays as she drive to the lighthouse in "The Fog"....
The framing of the shots where Atkins and Nelkin are walking around while being watched are the same as "Halloween", with the half back and shoulders of the robot set up exactly like the scenes of Myers watching Jamie Lee Curtis.
The film also has ideas that now seem very insightful........
The mass coverage of your every move by CCTV is now a welcome and not so welcome reality in every town and city.
And if made now the whole idea of a specific brand name being wanted over 'lesser' makes would be very topical.
The fact is "Silver Shamrock" is 'Adidas' and 'Nike'....Atkin's kids do not want his 'other brand', cheap masks..they want the "Silver Shamrock", masks that are the hip and cool make to have...Oh dear....if only they had gone for Atkin's non brand masks they wouldn't have spiders crawling out their noses!!
TOP Halloween viewing.
And seeing as entries WITH Myers (aside from #4) have been so fucking awful...perhaps they should indeed have stuck to their guns and stuck with the fact he was kileld off in #2!
RIGHT ON!!!!!!!
filmmaker2
07-29-2005, 06:46 PM
Yeah, you see, that scene near the beginning with the nose bone and the "CRACK POP" sound effect, that is some SICK MOTHERFUCKING SHIT. Not outrageously gory, but graphic enough, and effective. That urethane fake head that the Burmans built did the job very nicely for a couple of shots there. That's what I'm talkin' about, yo
(takes a swig a beer)
jenna26
07-29-2005, 07:30 PM
I do believe people are way too hard on this movie. It definitely has its moments and it is a fun film, if not a great film. I keep meaning to rewatch it because I have only seen it the one time. But it is not nearly as bad as I had heard it was in the years before I watched it. Better than a lot of the shit they are releasing these days, that's for sure.
filmmaker2
07-29-2005, 10:50 PM
Yeah, well, I sure don't mean to appear as though I think it's a great film either--it's cheesy if it's anything. Cheap and tawdry, even somewhat sleazy at moments (yeah!). But there is an imaginative quality, and yes, it's better in terms of being linear/competent than most of the trash that's made nowadays.
It gets bashed a lot, and, just like a mutant cat with eight toes, it needs someone to love it. It's true, guys!
So I agree that there are worse ways of spending one's time. And better ways too. This movie is the patron saint of mediocrity!
Hellraiser1124
07-30-2005, 08:02 PM
Original Idea yes, but it should not be a part of the Halloween series. They should have just used it's secondary title "Season of the Witch" and left it at that. To mee Michael Myers is the Hallween series and he's not in this one so the movie shouldn't be considered the 3rd one of the series.
RavageRitual
07-30-2005, 08:57 PM
Originally posted by Hellraiser1124
Original Idea yes, but it should not be a part of the Halloween series. They should have just used it's secondary title "Season of the Witch" and left it at that. To mee Michael Myers is the Hallween series and he's not in this one so the movie shouldn't be considered the 3rd one of the series.
You took the exact words i was gonna say right out of my mouth i swear...jeez
I hated this movie. Even when removing Michael Myers from the equasion. That fucking musical jingle stuck in my head for years and it was teeth grinding when I seen it the first time..."three more days till Holloween..." Arrrrgggggg!
no mulier
08-03-2005, 04:08 AM
Disappointed was my reaction upon first seeing Season of the Witch. Just as everyone says: no Michael Myers.
As part of the Halloween series, it certainly sticks out like a sore thumb. I could agree that it doesn't really belong there. Michael Myers is what the series has established after the first Halloween. And this is what the audience expects...no, demands.
As a stand-alone with a title completely far away from Halloween, it could have stood a better chance. From what I can remember, it wasn't that bad. People were just too busy bickering about where Michael Myers is to give the film a chance.
John Carpenter once said in an interview that he'd never consumed that many beers when he had to write Halloween 2. He didn't think there was anything else to add to it. On that note, I don't know what all the commotion is about Michael Myers this or that. As far as "Halloween" goes, there is nothing left.
There is only the first. Halloween.
Yellow Jacket
08-03-2005, 11:19 AM
Originally posted by g star
supposedly the franchise had intended to release a new "halloween" film every year at halloween. the idea was that each film would be an original idea, having nothing to do with the prequels. however, fan reaction to the lack of myers in III was so overwhelmingly negative that the studio ditched the idea and went back to MM. or so i've heard.
I actually heard that Carpenter didn't want Michael Myers to have too many sequels cuz it would ruin the series (which most of the sequels did.) So, he thought up of this idea hoping that they wouldn't make anymore Halloween flicks. Didn't seem to work out though, now did it? But this is just what I heard. Could be false.
Now, I thought it sucked. Yes, one reason was because there was no Micheal *sob* But my main problem (besides that damn Shamrock song) was the whole mask bit. Don't get me wrong, I love cheesy stuff like this. But, the whole idea sucked in my opinion. Hufe flaw for the Halloween series.
AUSTIN316426808
08-03-2005, 01:05 PM
I thought it was a good movie...
As far as Myers not being in it I was a bit bothered by it at first because I hadn't seen or heard anything about it and naturally thought Myers was in it but after I got about 15 minutes or so into it and realized he wasn't involved I forgot about it and enjoyed the movie.
If it were just called Season of the Witch then people might not have a problem with it because that's the only complaint I've really ever heard is that it's a Halloween film without Michael Myers.
No Face
08-05-2005, 01:58 PM
imaginative yes good hell no. all i wanted to see was mikey hack up some sluts and druggys. it should've been a seperate movie.