Rob Zombie's Halloween

[ferretchucker]

For one thing: EVERYONE knows that michael myers is the killer already from the first 3 movies,

I believe there was no sign of him in the 3rd movie. Shows what a fan you are.

[Despare]

Alright, I have to admit I liked this one. Maybe I was just looking at it from a different angle than you V. What I saw was almost what boiled down to two very different parts of the same movie. The first part was a forgettable prequel that didn't really leave a bad taste in my mouth but didn't thrill me either. After the first part is over (which could have just been a Rob Zombie movie about some little boy serial killer) we get the second helping which turns out to be a pretty decent remake of Halloween. I was actually surprised that Zombie could build suspense (there was SOME even if it didn't come close to the original's), I thought Mike would be faster and crazier in this one. The ending was good too and I was surprised once again as I thought Zombie would leave nothing in this movie to the imagination. Anyway, I thought Zombie did a good job... even if he did use too many tits.

[_____V_____]

I watched the theatrical one earlier this week and compared to the workprint, the last minute changes do add a certain amount of credibility to the finished product. The ending was better IMO (compared to the workprint at least) and some of the subtle changes are an improvement. They didnt need the added deaths though...all it did was add more Devil's Rejects-dash into the Halloween flavor.

But it still doesnt deter from the fact that the "prequel" of the first 30-odd minutes makes Michael a sympathetic character and gives an "explanation" of his behaviourial pattern. This was one of the biggest drawbacks of Zombie's remake IMO. You know what, if Zombie had pursued that part and made an entire movie devoted to the "prequel", it would have actually worked (and would have been a better movie)...but what we are left with is an empty tale of half-prequel/half-remake involving a sympathetic 8 foot tall Michael Myers who isnt remotely scary and resembles Michael Clarke Duncan's character of The Green Mile.

I ll be gracious and grant it a 05/10, just for Zombie's improvement on the workprint. As for being a part of the franchise, it stands behind pt. IV and VI for me.

It certainly beats Resurrection by a mile. I ll give it that much credit.

[Despare]

I think the prequel showed that he only cared for one person.


SPOILERS


Look at Trejo's character, if Michael was sympathetic he wouldn't have killed him. Michael was taken over by the evil that was inside him and destroyed every man and woman that was in his path. It was fun, I'd put it in the top 4 Halloween movies.


Anyway, it was better than I expected with some good gore and fun scenes ruined by some poor plot choices and sketchy dialogue (especially from the girls at some points, holy crap was that bad).

[_____V_____]

***SPOILER ALERT***

Trejo's death was added later (it isnt there in the workprint). Maybe when Zombie decided the final version needed a bit more gore and Michael was to look scary (and do a bit more justice to the original), he added it. In the workprint we can see him actually control Michael...

And another part which didnt make sense. If young Michael loved his baby sister even a wee bit so as to spare her life...why grow up and go after her? In the workprint its shown that he merely wanted to meet her, and wouldnt have stalked and attacked her unless provoked first. In the final version, he has murderous intent because he is evil (according to Loomis in the briefing of his book), and then proceeds to Haddonfield to kill her?

What happened in-between...he "outgrew" his love for Laurie? Huge plothole, indeed.

[Despare]

***SPOILER ALERT***

Trejo's death was added later (it isnt there in the workprint). Maybe when Zombie decided the final version needed a bit more gore and Michael was to look scary (and do a bit more justice to the original), he added it. In the workprint we can see him actually control Michael...

And another part which didnt make sense. If young Michael loved his baby sister even a wee bit so as to spare her life...why grow up and go after her? In the workprint its shown that he merely wanted to meet her, and wouldnt have stalked and attacked her unless provoked first. In the final version, he has murderous intent because he is evil (according to Loomis in the briefing of his book), and then proceeds to Haddonfield to kill her?

What happened in-between...he "outgrew" his love for Laurie? Huge plothole, indeed.

He did sit down and offer her the picture. It seemed like he really thought she was his sister and he wanted to have her... as his. When she stabbed him and said she didn't know who the people in the picture were (remember, as far as Michael knew his mom had told her about him and the family was fine) Michael decided that it wasn't her and tried to kill her. After all, he carried her to their old house after having not afforded two other girls the luxury of a chance.

[_____V_____]

He did sit down and offer her the picture. It seemed like he really thought she was his sister and he wanted to have her... as his. When she stabbed him and said she didn't know who the people in the picture were (remember, as far as Michael knew his mom had told her about him and the family was fine) Michael decided that it wasn't her and tried to kill her. After all, he carried her to their old house after having not afforded two other girls the luxury of a chance.

If he offered her the picture and wanted her to remember, he was pretty convinced Laurie was his sister, right? And after she stabs him and says she doesnt remember, he thought it wasnt her? From one extreme to another in an instant, IMO.

Zombie needed to handle that scene very delicately. It was one of the centerpoints of his movie. Somehow it doesnt fit into the overall picture and leaves a question mark.

[massacre man]

Yeah, I forgot to hit the quote button, but anyway I'm referring to the last 2 or 3 posts. About Michael asking if everyone at home was OK, I'm sure he just said that for a chance at going home. He found out it was his sister either when A) Tommy and Laurie went by the Myers house and Tommy called her "Laurie" or B) While he was following Laurie, Lynda, and Annie.

My take on the trying to kill Laurie thing. He spared her when she was a baby so I'd reckon after she stabbed him he saw that she wasn't the person he loved as a baby, just another random person. Maybe I'm overanalyzing, Maybe I'm stupid, Maybe I'm both. Oh well.


Question: Did he wear the orange mask in the workprint?

[Despare]

If he offered her the picture and wanted her to remember, he was pretty convinced Laurie was his sister, right? And after she stabs him and says she doesnt remember, he thought it wasnt her? From one extreme to another in an instant, IMO.

Zombie needed to handle that scene very delicately. It was one of the centerpoints of his movie. Somehow it doesnt fit into the overall picture and leaves a question mark.

It was just snap judgement but Michael IS a psychopatch that was taken over by pure evil when he stopped talking. Loomis couldn't even slow down Mike at the end. I don't know, there were some problems, but it exceeded my expectations.

Massacre, I doubt Laurie was her original name. The cop just dropped the baby off at an emergency room so when she was adopted the Strode's most likely named her.

[_____V_____]

Question: Did he wear the orange mask in the workprint?

For awhile, yeah.

It was just snap judgement but Michael IS a psychopatch that was taken over by pure evil when he stopped talking. Loomis couldn't even slow down Mike at the end. I don't know, there were some problems, but it exceeded my expectations.

Massacre, I doubt Laurie was her original name. The cop just dropped the baby off at an emergency room so when she was adopted the Strode's most likely named her.

Exactly.

And about the name...I think the Strodes named her Laurie, like Des said.

I am sure she was born (something) Myers. Michael calls the baby "Boo"...I am unsure what the Myers' called her then.

And about Michael figuring Laurie out, I think it was when he heard Laurie outside, bringing a key to the front door of his old home. No one else would have a key, would they?

[bleeding_angelgirl]

last night i watched the work print of the new halloween and i have to say i liked it better then the first, at least the begining, i liked how they took more time on young myers.

[Despare]

last night i watched the work print of the new halloween and i have to say i liked it better then the first, at least the begining, i liked how they took more time on young myers.

Wait... hold on... what do you mean the first? You mean you liked it better than the original???

[bleeding_angelgirl]

ummmm i feel like if i say yes im going to have a book thrown at me. I only liked the begining better, i liked how they had shown how myers became insane, the process, im a psych major and serial killers minds facinate me. sorry. lol but yes i liked it better then again i am not a huge fan of the original i have a thing for the newer ones.

I know no account for tast.

[DEATHH DREAMS author]

He obviously didn't learn from his mistakes in The Devil's Rejects. Dialog is just dumb. Meyers is too big, the new backstory seems fake, and as said in a prior post, there is no atmosphere.

Bad, bad, bad...

One good thing: Rob's wife is NOT in the film...

[massacre man]

One good thing: Rob's wife is NOT in the film...

Have you actually seen it?

[missmacabre]

Have you actually seen it?

Well she did look a lot less trashy than in Rob's other movies, if that's possible. I spent the whole first part of the movie thinking about how familiar she looked and when it clicked I was a little surprised that her acting had actually improved.

[bleeding_angelgirl]

He obviously didn't learn from his mistakes in The Devil's Rejects. Dialog is just dumb. Meyers is too big, the new backstory seems fake, and as said in a prior post, there is no atmosphere.

Bad, bad, bad...

One good thing: Rob's wife is NOT in the film...

ummm yes she is, sheri moon is the mother of micheal. she is even in the credits.

[Despare]

Hmmm, I think you're the first person I've heard say that BAG... errr Bleeding_Angelgirl. Damn kids...

Just kidding, it was a decent movie but I'm a bit surprised somebody likes it better than the original. As for Myers being big... I don't see what the problem is there. He's always been super strong (picking a young man up by his skull and crushing it) and it's not like he moved super fast or anything. Ah well, I think it could have been a lot worse.

[KllSlasher]

I really liked the moive. I bet if it wasnt called Halloween and had a different killer, people wouldn't be bitching as much. And of course the storyline would have to be somewhat different but for the love of god IT WASN"T THE ORGINAL!!!! Don't get me wrong I love the orginal, and I didn't go into the theater to see the orginal movie. I thought Rob did a good job. I enjoyed the movie and I liked his take on it. It could always be worse, cough Paul Anderson cough........

[DEATHH DREAMS author]

That was her, huh? She used that weird high pitched voice in 1,000 & Rejects, so here voice was alot different in Halloween. Also the hair. I must say she is pretty good in Halloween. If it weren't for that dumb Otis type step Dad, all her scenes would have been OK.

I stand corrected, thank you...

P.S. This film was a good advert for Swank magazine. I'm going to order a subscription...

[Zombette]

(I apologize If there has already been a related topic made.)

I went to see Halloween today and I have to say i was very very disappointed! The little boy that played Michael Myers was one of the worst young actors I have ever come across. And u may like to take note that almost all of the cast of 'Devils rejects' was in it.

It was a massive let down to the origional. The 'Giant' that Micheal turned out to be made me dislike the character and it took away his mysteriousness.

In the origional, Michael would baffle us all at how he managed to survive the blows he took, but in the new one, the obvious reason he survives is because he is built like a house.

and please may i add.....

if u are ever in the situation where u have a man/monster walking toward u and u only have a gun in ur hand.....AIM AT HIS GOD-FORESAKEN HEAD AND DO NOT RUN UP THE STAIRS.....GRR


Zombette is UBER excited about 30 days of night!!! ROLL IT ONNNNN yay :)

[Arioch]

ummmm i feel like if i say yes im going to have a book thrown at me. I only liked the begining better, i liked how they had shown how myers became insane, the process, im a psych major and serial killers minds facinate me. sorry. lol but yes i liked it better then again i am not a huge fan of the original i have a thing for the newer ones.

I know no account for tast.

psych major here as well...

Oh ya halloween was dissapointing....and rob shouldve done the music...

[the_real_linda]

thats what i liked as the ending was aweful compared to workprint.

but also on a flip side it takes away the mystery of the killer by showing you his tragic childhood

[Despare]

Oh ya halloween was dissapointing....and rob shouldve done the music...

I like Rob's music but I thought the soundtrack was pretty damn good, I'll be picking it up for sure.

[the_real_linda]

yeah i got the soundtrack before i saw it

[ferretchucker]

just watched it. hated the ending. Hated lindsay and hated Laurie. The rape scene was vulgar and Daeg fuck was a complete dissapointment. Other than those main points....it was okay. Not good but not bad. Although, why did laurie limp away? She wasn't hurt.

[massacre man]

just watched it. hated the ending. Hated lindsay and hated Laurie. The rape scene was vulgar and Daeg fuck was a complete dissapointment. Other than those main points....it was okay. Not good but not bad. Although, why did laurie limp away? She wasn't hurt.

Workprint watchin' mafucka.

[the_real_linda]

Workprint watchin' mafucka.

yeah i saw both and the workprint is far superior

[massacre man]

yeah i saw both and the workprint is far superior

I didn't like the workprint.

[the_real_linda]

I didn't like the workprint.

why? what made the theatrical release better?

[massacre man]

why? what made the theatrical release better?

I don't know, I just didn't care for the workprint. Maybe's it because I'd already seen a majority of the scenes the night before.

[the_real_linda]

i watched it the other way round...

i watched the workprint on the 29th aug and then the theatrical release when it was eventually released over here... so i had a bit of time inbetween.... i just think the theatrical went on too long and the ending had no meaning

[ferretchucker]

what's the difference then?

[samcat]

Yes I have seen it last night. Dont ask how and where...

And many of you might be queueing in front of your local theaters in a couple days time...so I wont spoil it for you. Its fairly obvious to assume that Zombie's earlier offerings will have an effect on the remake...and thats how it is. Its like watching The Devil's Rejects, with Michael's storyline thrown in. The script and dialogues are virtually the same...and that is not the only downer for Zombie's offering.

There's almost no suspense or foreboding...Michael is basically a terminator-esque unstoppable killing machine...the body count is very high...and the background built up by Zombie for Michael is...a huge letdown. Which brings forth the pretty obvious question (and the casting of Tyler Mane into the limelight) - how could Michael become so big and strong while spending 15 years in a padded up cell?

The movie lacks one big factor the original had - atmosphere. There is NONE of that here. I wont go in any further...most of you will see it and then form your own conclusions...as for me, even when being a huge gorehound...Zombie's Halloween doesnt click it, even with the gracious gore.

Now to catch James Wan's Death Sentence come Friday...

well don't i feel a total pratt!! have just opened a thread for the exact same reason (sorry didn't see yours @ 1st) but i couldn't agree with you more it is a total shambles & waste of space

[VampiricClown]

So there is of course the "Unrated Director's Cut" version out on DVD. Is it basically the workprint, or is it the version that was seen in theaters with extra footage?

[joshaube]

It's unanswerable. We'll have to wait until the actual DVD is released, as there is no official word to what each version consists of.

What has been confirmed is that "The Director's Cut" features 11 minutes of additional footage. 109 minutes for the theatrical, and 120 for the unrated. If anyone has the workprint, how long does it run? 120 minutes? If so, the chances that it is the workprint is pretty much solid.

A site (filmedge) states: "The Unrated Director's Cut of the HALLOWEEN runs 11 minutes longer than the version released in theaters — though fans should note this is NOT the Workprint version of the film that was leaked this summer." However correct they are is unknown.

An interview states that Zombie said the package will contain his "unrated" longer cut of the movie, loads of deleted scenes, documentaries and other bonus features. One thing it will not include, however, is the "workprint" version of the movie that leaked online prior to its theatrical release.

So... I'm leaning towards it NOT being the workprint version.

[joshaube]

Hrm. Well, the rape scene is definitely in there.

[can't get enough gore]

It's the movie, plus even more murder and soft-core porn.

[VampiricClown]

It's the movie, plus even more murder and soft-core porn.

So it's not the Workprint?

[Disease]

So it's not the Workprint?


You can download the workprint... I wouldn't mind seeing it, it's ment to be better than the cinema version...

[GorePhobia]

It's shit plus suck equals the same sucky shitty ass movie.

[joshaube]

I just watched the Director's Cut last night. It is the workprint, but it is NOT THE WORKPRINT; make sense? It's a combination of the two. It includes all the scenes in the workprint that were NOT in the theatrical, PLUS it also has these that were in the theatrical, but not the workprint:

3. A scene of Brackett pulling up alongside the girls as they walk home. Brackett offers a ride, which only Annie accepts.
4. The graveyard scene with Sid Haig.
7. Loomis buys a gun
9. A scene where Brackett explains how he knows who Laurie Strode’s real family is (a much needed addition as it is never explained in the workprint how she came to be with that family or how Loomis would know where to find her).

PS.
Monster Mash is not used in the introduction.
The death of Laurie's mother is more brutal, as opposed to the workprint version.
Bob is killed inside the house, as opposed to outside in the workprint.
The Laurie-shoots-Myers ending is the chosen ending, not the police-shoot-myers ending.

SO YES. There are three distinct versions... the Director's Cut being the most complete. Enjoy.

[GorePhobia]

Movie still blows.

[VampiricClown]

I just watched the Director's Cut last night. It is the workprint, but it is NOT THE WORKPRINT; make sense? It's a combination of the two. It includes all the scenes in the workprint that were NOT in the theatrical, PLUS it also has these that were in the theatrical, but not the workprint:

3. A scene of Brackett pulling up alongside the girls as they walk home. Brackett offers a ride, which only Annie accepts.
4. The graveyard scene with Sid Haig.
7. Loomis buys a gun
9. A scene where Brackett explains how he knows who Laurie Strode’s real family is (a much needed addition as it is never explained in the workprint how she came to be with that family or how Loomis would know where to find her).

PS.
Monster Mash is not used in the introduction.
The death of Laurie's mother is more brutal, as opposed to the workprint version.
Bob is killed inside the house, as opposed to outside in the workprint.
The Laurie-shoots-Myers ending is the chosen ending, not the police-shoot-myers ending.

SO YES. There are three distinct versions... the Director's Cut being the most complete. Enjoy.

Wow, thanks man.

The reason I wanted to know, is because I didn't see the theatrical version, only the workprint. So of course, I want to see the one I haven't yet.

Thanks again. :)

[doctor satan]

Watched this last night. I've noticed over the last few months its come in for a lot of flak on the forums. I did'nt think it was that bad. Sure you only had about a teaspoon of the suspense from Carpenters version & there was buckets of glop flying all other the place but with Rob Zombie at the helm it was pretty much what i thought it would be. Too be fair i'm no fan of slasher movies, once you've seen one group of dumb fuck teens get hacked & slashed the genre is pretty exhausted. Given a choice i'd watch Carpenters Halloween over RZ but it was nowhere near as bad as i was expecting from some of the rabid comments on this forum. I'm wondering if i should give THE FOG remake a chance or should i quit while i'm ahead?

[Yellow Jacket]

It was better than I thought it was going to be. Actually, it was pretty damn good. I think what made it work was it was half prequel/half remake. The prequel was the best part, seeing Michael growing up in the insane asylum, and seeing Danny Trejo as the security guard. The remake portion was good, but definitely didn't live up to the original (then again, did you expect it to). What I thought was going to be my main problem, Malcolm McDowell as Dr. Loomis, didn't bother me much. It's not that I don't like McDowell, but I didn't think anybody could take on the role of Dr. Loomis besides Donald Pleasance (R.I.P.). But, he did a pretty good job. It's not fantastic, or even that memorable. But, for a remake, it was pretty damn good! I'd give it a 4/5.

[newb]

I'll agree with YJ as far as the new Halloween. I liked the backstory of Michael Myers.....you almost felt bad for the crazy little bastard.The second half is just a "stalk & slash"....nothing new there.

As far as The Fog remake........I didn't like this one at all.It had NONE of the atmosphere of the original.

[illdojo]

I'll agree with YJ as far as the new Halloween. I liked the backstory of Michael Myers.....you almost felt bad for the crazy little bastard.The second half is just a "stalk & slash"....nothing new there.

As far as The Fog remake........I didn't like this one at all.It had NONE of the atmosphere of the original.

Ditto.

and

Ditto.

[Angelakillsluts]

Well, I enjoyed the first half.

[doctor satan]

Yeah the first act was the best part of the film. by the way i was joking about THE FOG remake. Heard it was terrible PG 13 horror shite.

[alkytrio666]

The Fog remake is one of the worst movies I've ever seen. Ever.

[jenna26]

The Fog remake is indeed awful. I still regret giving in and watching it, I told myself not to do it, but I did anyway. Apparently I like to suffer....:mad:

As far as the Halloween remake goes, well, I didn't care for it either. And couldn't stand the backstory. I was bored out of my mind. It was heavy handed, just not handled very well at all, in my opinion. Nothing subtle there. :rolleyes: But that's not surprising, since Zombie's filmmaking style is definitely NOT subtle. And there's not a thing wrong with that, it just didn't fit with a remake of such an important, influential horror film. I just hope he decides to make somewhat original films in the future.

[The STE]

I MIGHT have liked his backstory if it wasn't completely unoriginal. Forsyth gave a good performance and I liked the kid from Spy Kids getting beaten to death, but it takes 40 minutes to tell us what only needed ten. His family was white trash and people were mean to him. Really? Is that the BEST you can come up with, Rob? Mean hicks?

And Michael shouldn't have been the Huge Freakin Guy that he was. Michael Myers isn't scary because he's a physically imposing beast. That's Jason. Michael was scary because he was The Shape. He could be anywhere. The lights in the house are out. The room is completely dark except the moonlight coming in through the window. Suddenly, in the shadows of the background, you can make out the hint of the white mask. THAT is Michael Myers. In Rob Zombie's vision? He's a lumbering Frankenstein. No subtlety. No white mask creeping in from the background. Rob just cuts to a closeup. I know subtlety isn't Rob's style, but then maybe he shouldn't have done the movie.

And the thing that really bugged the shit out of me was Laurie. She acted no differently than any other broad in the movie. Oh, but she wore glasses. And she "doesn't like to lie." According to the Teen Comedy Movie clichés, she's the shy, quiet girl. Rob, if 3 of the 7 writers of Scary Movie are able to call you on your shit, then something is very wrong. I never thought I'd say this about a Rob Zombie movie, but the writing is just lazy. Ho1KC sucked, but at least it wasn't lazy. But Halloween? Lazy as shit. It's like he was talking to someone going on about how cool it would be if he could remake Hallween. And then they had him remake Halloween, and he panicked and went on auto-pilot.

[jenna26]

I know subtlety isn't Rob's style, but then maybe he shouldn't have done the movie.


EXACTLY....it worked well for him in The Devil's Rejects. It didn't work here, it was absolutely the wrong style for this film.
And I agree about Micheal's size as well. That bugged the hell out of me. He just didn't make a suspenseful film, not at all, while the original was incredibly suspenseful.

[crabapple]

I liked the "Fog" remake, more or less.

I didn't like the "Halloween" remake, at all.

[Yellow Jacket]

The Fog remake is one of the worst movies I've ever seen. Ever.

Stole the words right out of my mouth.

[Femme Fatale]

"The Fog" remake was deplorable.

I have mixed feelings about Zombie's "Halloween". I liked the back story (as many of you have stated). **SPOILER** - I didn't like the fact that Loomis was killed off and I despised who was cast as Laurie Stroud. She was ridiculous. All she did was scream and cry...now I know this could have been the writing or directing at this point...but seeing her onscreen for the first time was disappointing and then became a constant irritant. The fact that her hair and eyebrows didn't match irked me even more.

[GorePhobia]

I have said this time and time again that I hate the Halloween remake. To me it just felt like Devil's Rejects all over again but instead of Spaulding and Otis you have Michael Myers and his nutty redneck family. Just plain bad.

[fortunato]

zombie's uninspired and unoriginal backstory took the mysticism out of michael myers, which is what made him so frightening to begin with. the new halloween just turned him into some unstoppable psychopath by-product of a messed up family.

booooring.

[crabapple]

I've heard about three hundred people say the "Fog" remake sucks horribly, but I haven't heard a single person who was able to explain why they thought this was so. "It sucks, it sucks..." Okay, but can you tell me why you feel this way? Illuminate me. I didn't think it was a masterpiece but I had no serious problems with it.

[jenna26]

I've heard about three hundred people say the "Fog" remake sucks horribly, but I haven't heard a single person who was able to explain why they thought this was so. "It sucks, it sucks..." Okay, but can you tell me why you feel this way? Illuminate me. I didn't think it was a masterpiece but I had no serious problems with it.

Its so predictable and so dreadfully DULL; the acting, the characters, the effects.....all of it, it was just boring. I can forgive a film a lot, I can't forgive it being a total bore. I need to be entertained at least a bit. I wasn't here, not in the least.

[Femme Fatale]

I've heard about three hundred people say the "Fog" remake sucks horribly, but I haven't heard a single person who was able to explain why they thought this was so. "It sucks, it sucks..." Okay, but can you tell me why you feel this way? Illuminate me. I didn't think it was a masterpiece but I had no serious problems with it.

300 people? I thought there was only 17 posts. Indeed. Well, if I must explain why I didn't like "The Fog" remake. Here are a few reasons (in no particular order).....The acting was crap. The so called twist for the ending was contrived. The movie wasn't scary at all. There was no chemistry between the two main actors. I was bored during their "sexy" shower scene. Not the worst movie I have ever seen in my life, however, I stick by my original comment that it was "deplorable".

[Phalanx]

I feel that this thread is futile.
FUTILE!

[massacre man]

I turned The Fog remake off when that Fallout Boy song started playing. I knew there would be nothing for me after that.

[crabapple]

You people are mean to the Fog remake. :mad:

I just kidding, you're okay. ;) ;) :eek: :rolleyes:

[Liar,liar]

I enjoyed Halloween I love all of Rob Zombie's movies there very gory and twisted hell I've even seen Zombie in concert.

[ChronoGrl]

I enjoyed Halloween I love all of Rob Zombie's movies there very gory and twisted hell I've even seen Zombie in concert.

I've seen Zombie an concert and, quite frankly, he scares the fuck out of me... I was in high school an I had this horrible feeling that someone was going to reach out in the crowd... And stab me.

Then again, I was a relatively paranoid teenager.

Rob Zombie himself, I think he's brilliant. Though I don't enjoy his music, I find it very easy to pigeonhole him as a person, as someone that's a mindless metalhead (not saying that I do that, but that people who do not necessarily enjoy that kind of music might stereotype him)... I love watching interviews with him, and I especially love hearing him talk about movies. I think that he has a wide range of knowledge of pop culture and, in particular, the horror genre.

His MOVIES, however, are another story, an I've been honestly wondering WHAT people see in his movies. "Gorey and twisted," it's been done. I feel as though he draws heavy influence from Texas Chainsaw Massacre and relies solely on that and his sensibilties for torture porn. Devil's Rejects was like Natural Born Killers except without... a point. I actually have a lot longer rant in regards to that movie, but I'll save it for another thread (because, honestly, I am very VERY curious about what people think of Rob Zombie as I honestly do not see or understand the appeal - so I WANT to hear from people who actually like him).

As for Halloween... Ugh...

I felt as the movie actually consisted of TWO movies...

Michael Before (The Mike Myer's Story)
Michael After (The Halloween Remake)

As for Movie I, I thought that, well, it was nothing really new. Tortured youth takes revenge on their family in a very preditacble way. Honestly, the beginning of the movie... Made me feel... NOTHING. Rob Zombie's major weakness is character development (though one can argue that that's the POINT - we are suppose to focus on the spectacle and not the characters), but in this film, I think that we're supposed to FEEL something... Maybe for Michael. Maybe for his mother.

But... I... Didn't... I never thought of Michael as a threat and I just couldn't suspend my disbelief. I felt as though Zombie was making a movie about a tortured kid. Nothing new, but could have been ok if, well, developed.

Oh, and it had a rape scene... What would a Zombie movie be without a rape scene?!

But the backstory has already been critiqued quite a bit. There's the downside that it's nothing new. Trash family and abuse at school.

But you know what else really cheesed me off? I thought that the backstory was completely unnecessary. What I really LIKED about the original Halloween is that we DON'T know why Michael Myers is the way he is. According to Dr. Loomis, he's just "EVIL."

Death has come to your little town, Sheriff. Now you can either ignore it, or you can help me to stop it.

Even though we do not get a lot of insight into the Myers' household, you get the impression that they are a normal family; the neighborhood is suburbia an their house is decked out for Halloween. Honestly, turning them into a cliched white trash nightmare was... disappointing. I prefer the concept of Michael being just... "Evil." Sociopathic. The "Bad Seed," as it were. I find that to be more chilling. Providing a backstory creates a new villian and therefore a new movie.

...

Movie II. Follows Halloween fairly closely. So closely, in fact, that I was again wondering, "What's the point? I've SEEN this already." He wants to add more blood? He wanted to add more profanity? Well, I wasn't impressed... There WERE a few parts that made me jump, which was worthy of note, but overall, honestly, I thought that Halloween was an iconic, fantastic horror movie, and did NOT need to be remade.

One strong point: The very, VERY end. I thought was incredible. I am a HUGE fan of the victim-become-victimizer. THAT was incredible. But it was a good 5 minutes out of 90. Overall, I thought the movie was superfluous. As are his movie in general.

But I am willing to hear the merits of Zombie. I am curious as to what the draw is.

[AmericanManiac]

I have to admit. . . . . . . . . . . I loved this film! I really enjoyed the "Prequal" part. The young mikey just creeped me out, little body with the myers mask walking down the hall?! :eek: Now for the rape scene, I don't take them scenes very well for some reason. But I liked it better how he got out then the theater version. I couldn't believe what I Was seeing, as for how big that Rob made michael. . . . . . I loved that as well, I really never noticed how huge he was in the theater version, Now I mean Ken Foree he is a pretty big guy himself and myers just TOWERED over him! It made it more believeable as to how he can take blows and barely get stunned. Can anyone answer this, the guy who played the grown up Myers, is he the tow truck driver from House and Rejects??

[jenna26]

But I am willing to hear the merits of Zombie. I am curious as to what the draw is.

I don't know, I am beginning to think Zombie got lucky with The Devil's Rejects. I happen to REALLY love that film, its a recent favorite of mine. I admit it. The dialogue is sharp, it is often funny in an uncomfortable kind of way, its unapologetically brutal in a lot of ways. I think it was actually well written, smarter than the average horror film we see these days, and it was heavily influenced by the films that I have a lot of love for. Yet even with that obvious influence, I think he still managed to make it his own. But I am beginning to think it was a fluke. House of 1000 Corpses was just so generic, there were a couple of good scenes, sure, but otherwise, it was just.....nothing special. It just doesn't stand out. And it was more than just a bit annoying. The ending was awful.

But honestly, I watched it and thought, hey he has potential. His love for the horror genre is obvious. That I respect. And I did think he had it in him to make good horror films. Then, in my opinion, he made one. Instead of continuing on, and making another original film, and maybe proving that he could continue to improve.....he decided to remake a classic. That was a huge mistake. He has now made me, and lots of others I'm sure, doubt his potential as a filmmaker. Too bad. Maybe he will learn from his mistake (which I doubt, since the remake was so successful) and will go on to surprise us. But I'm not holding my breath on that one.

[Demonique]

Can anyone answer this, the guy who played the grown up Myers, is he the tow truck driver from House and Rejects??

Yes in Rejects, but not the same guy that played RJ in 1000 Corpses. I loved all Zombie's movies including Halloween.

[Jim Linahan]

The whole Mike in the asylum was done by Carpenter when Halloween was shown on HBO he went back and edited in extra footage.

[Roderick Usher]

The whole Mike in the asylum was done by Carpenter when Halloween was shown on HBO he went back and edited in extra footage.

Actually that footage was shot for the NBC broadcast, because the film was a couple of minutes shorter than the network running time for films. He shot a couple of what he called "carpet scenes" to fill in the gaps

one of which had Jamie Lee's hair up in a towel, because it was significantly shorter than when the film was originally shot.

[THE VAMPIRE]

Halloween was pretty good,but the Fog had just to much FOG

[Liar,liar]

I've seen Zombie an concert and, quite frankly, he scares the fuck out of me... I was in high school an I had this horrible feeling that someone was going to reach out in the crowd... And stab me.



Hahahaha Rob Zombie had to to be the best concert I've been to and I've seen alot a shows and I'm only 15, but as for Halloween yes it was just another gory slasher porn but being a guy a movie with tits and gore is 5 stars hahaha but I like how he should why Michael was the way he is kinda like Hannable Rising.

[CrimsonFiend138]

I totally agree with the STE like totally lol....ANYWAY.....One thing(even tho I love the sequels) is how they made him mr muscles. Leave it to Jason or Leatherface. What I liked about Michael was he was tall and Lanky. I HATED the mask in this....plain white mask just like usual fuck those scars and stuff and how does a mask get that messed up sitting in the same spot. No matter what anyone says about Malcom Mcdowell, There is no replacment to Donald pleasance period and thats another nail in the coffin...or...knife in the teenager. It was too much like DR also shouldnt have gotten all those same people.....

[massacre man]

how does a mask get that messed up sitting in the same spot.

The material for the masks rot after a while, especially after being used and being sweated in (a teenager anxious to have sex and a kid who just killed 3 people).

[ChronoGrl]

I don't know, I am beginning to think Zombie got lucky with The Devil's Rejects. I happen to REALLY love that film, its a recent favorite of mine. I admit it. The dialogue is sharp, it is often funny in an uncomfortable kind of way, its unapologetically brutal in a lot of ways. I think it was actually well written, smarter than the average horror film we see these days, and it was heavily influenced by the films that I have a lot of love for. Yet even with that obvious influence, I think he still managed to make it his own. But I am beginning to think it was a fluke. House of 1000 Corpses was just so generic, there were a couple of good scenes, sure, but otherwise, it was just.....nothing special. It just doesn't stand out. And it was more than just a bit annoying. The ending was awful.

But honestly, I watched it and thought, hey he has potential. His love for the horror genre is obvious. That I respect. And I did think he had it in him to make good horror films. Then, in my opinion, he made one. Instead of continuing on, and making another original film, and maybe proving that he could continue to improve.....he decided to remake a classic. That was a huge mistake. He has now made me, and lots of others I'm sure, doubt his potential as a filmmaker. Too bad. Maybe he will learn from his mistake (which I doubt, since the remake was so successful) and will go on to surprise us. But I'm not holding my breath on that one.

Thanks for the response, Jenna... I wonder if I just have an issue with that particular genre... I feel as though Devil's Rejects most certainly emulates Torture Porn - those "uncomfortable" moments are uncomfortable to me because they seem very exploitative for the sake of being exploitative.

What strikes me, though, is that, when I consider other torture porn and exploitative movies, I realize that Zombie hasn't really done anything original. He takes a LOT from movies such as TCM, Last House on the Left, and I Spit On Your Grave... I think there's even a bit of The Hills Have Eyes in there. But I don't think that he adds to the genre, per say.

Take something like Hostel or Saw. Both of these movies add to the exploitative torture porn genre because they, well, torture people in more explicit and different ways (both of them being more strictly TORTURE than anything else).

I guess my problem with Devil's Rejects is that I found myself asking, "What's the point?" At least with Hostel or Saw, the point IS the spectacle. But with Devil's Rejects, I'm just confused with that... Is he out to make the audience uncomfortable? Perhaps that's the answer: Experimenting with the audience to see whether or not they come back. After all, MOST horror is an experiment in human comfort/discomfort boundaries.

...

Hahahaha Rob Zombie had to to be the best concert I've been to and I've seen alot a shows and I'm only 15, but as for Halloween yes it was just another gory slasher porn but being a guy a movie with tits and gore is 5 stars hahaha but I like how he should why Michael was the way he is kinda like Hannable Rising.

hahaha... This post actually made me smile. I might just like you, after all.

...

Re: The backstory... I think that a lot of people actually enjoyed that aspect of the film... I wasn't as big a fan because I liked the idea of him coming from "anywhere" or "nowhere," the quintessential urban monster... That concept is, to me, more frightening than a monster from a broken home.

[jenna26]

Thanks for the response, Jenna... I wonder if I just have an issue with that particular genre... I feel as though Devil's Rejects most certainly emulates Torture Porn - those "uncomfortable" moments are uncomfortable to me because they seem very exploitative for the sake of being exploitative.

What strikes me, though, is that, when I consider other torture porn and exploitative movies, I realize that Zombie hasn't really done anything original. He takes a LOT from movies such as TCM, Last House on the Left, and I Spit On Your Grave... I think there's even a bit of The Hills Have Eyes in there. But I don't think that he adds to the genre, per say.

Take something like Hostel or Saw. Both of these movies add to the exploitative torture porn genre because they, well, torture people in more explicit and different ways (both of them being more strictly TORTURE than anything else).

I guess my problem with Devil's Rejects is that I found myself asking, "What's the point?" At least with Hostel or Saw, the point IS the spectacle. But with Devil's Rejects, I'm just confused with that... Is he out to make the audience uncomfortable? Perhaps that's the answer: Experimenting with the audience to see whether or not they come back. After all, MOST horror is an experiment in human comfort/discomfort boundaries.

No, I don't think he has done anything groundbreaking, or particularly original, but I also don't think that is the point. That doesn't mean that a film doesn't have merit, and it doesn't mean that a film can't be effective. All he added to the genre was (in my opinion, of course ;) ) a well made horror film, reminiscent of the films of the '70s that I love, with some unique characters. THAT is what I find interesting about The Devil's Rejects. Its a movie where you get to know the monsters of the piece FAR better than you do the victims. Nothing new there. But what is interesting, and in general maybe a bit different from other films, is the family dynamic. What makes it disturbing to me, and intriguing, is that at times they seem so NORMAL. Besides the bad hygiene...;) and the fact that they are brutal murderers, I mean. How they relate to one another. There is the favored child, the mostly annoyed older brother. They bicker, they eat ice cream, etc. And while this might not be a new direction to take (and let's face it, there are so few genuinely NEW ideas out there right now, that's not really a mark against it in my book), it did keep me watching, it did keep me interested, and it did.....effect me. In my opinion, it is well written, and stands on its own. And I would much rather see Rob Zombie, or any other horror director for that matter, develop interesting characters of his own and make his own movie, even if it is at times derivative, then the endless number of remakes we apparently have to look forward to.

And yes, I think the point of The Devil's Rejects is to make you squirm, make you wince, make you laugh, and make you feel a bit dirty. Like all horror should, it is meant to disturb you on some level. Its not subtle, its not tasteful.....and that's why I happen to like it. And like it a lot. I can completely see why others wouldn't though.

[AmericanManiac]

No, I don't think he has done anything groundbreaking, or particularly original, but I also don't think that is the point. That doesn't mean that a film doesn't have merit, and it doesn't mean that a film can't be effective. All he added to the genre was (in my opinion, of course ;) ) a well made horror film, reminiscent of the films of the '70s that I love, with some unique characters. THAT is what I find interesting about The Devil's Rejects. Its a movie where you get to know the monsters of the piece FAR better than you do the victims. Nothing new there. But what is interesting, and in general maybe a bit different from other films, is the family dynamic. What makes it disturbing to me, and intriguing, is that at times they seem so NORMAL. Besides the bad hygiene...;) and the fact that they are brutal murderers, I mean. How they relate to one another. There is the favored child, the mostly annoyed older brother. They bicker, they eat ice cream, etc. And while this might not be a new direction to take (and let's face it, there are so few genuinely NEW ideas out there right now, that's not really a mark against it in my book), it did keep me watching, it did keep me interested, and it did.....effect me. In my opinion, it is well written, and stands on its own. And I would much rather see Rob Zombie, or any other horror director for that matter, develop interesting characters of his own and make his own movie, even if it is at times derivative, then the endless number of remakes we apparently have to look forward to.

And yes, I think the point of The Devil's Rejects is to make you squirm, make you wince, make you laugh, and make you feel a bit dirty. Like all horror should, it is meant to disturb you on some level. Its not subtle, its not tasteful.....and that's why I happen to like it. And like it a lot. I can completely see why others wouldn't though.

I think i'm in love, Will you marry me?! :D

[ChronoGrl]

No, I don't think he has done anything groundbreaking, or particularly original, but I also don't think that is the point. That doesn't mean that a film doesn't have merit, and it doesn't mean that a film can't be effective. All he added to the genre was (in my opinion, of course ;) ) a well made horror film, reminiscent of the films of the '70s that I love, with some unique characters. THAT is what I find interesting about The Devil's Rejects. Its a movie where you get to know the monsters of the piece FAR better than you do the victims. Nothing new there. But what is interesting, and in general maybe a bit different from other films, is the family dynamic. What makes it disturbing to me, and intriguing, is that at times they seem so NORMAL. Besides the bad hygiene...;) and the fact that they are brutal murderers, I mean. How they relate to one another. There is the favored child, the mostly annoyed older brother. They bicker, they eat ice cream, etc. And while this might not be a new direction to take (and let's face it, there are so few genuinely NEW ideas out there right now, that's not really a mark against it in my book), it did keep me watching, it did keep me interested, and it did.....effect me. In my opinion, it is well written, and stands on its own. And I would much rather see Rob Zombie, or any other horror director for that matter, develop interesting characters of his own and make his own movie, even if it is at times derivative, then the endless number of remakes we apparently have to look forward to.

And yes, I think the point of The Devil's Rejects is to make you squirm, make you wince, make you laugh, and make you feel a bit dirty. Like all horror should, it is meant to disturb you on some level. Its not subtle, its not tasteful.....and that's why I happen to like it. And like it a lot. I can completely see why others wouldn't though.

Very well put. I guess my issue is that while I do recognize that part of the point is to reverse the traditional family dynamic, I'm just not interested or compelled to watch the family dynamic.

But then again, that's me. At least now I have a bit more insight as to the popularity of the film. Thanks. :)

[jenna26]

I think i'm in love, Will you marry me?! :D

Sorry, I already have a husband, and so far, just the one is plenty.....:p



Very well put. I guess my issue is that while I do recognize that part of the point is to reverse the traditional family dynamic, I'm just not interested or compelled to watch the family dynamic.

But then again, that's me. At least now I have a bit more insight as to the popularity of the film. Thanks. :)

Sure. :) Everyone is different. Basically comes down to personal taste. And I admit to wondering what the heck other people see in certain films...LOL. The Halloween remake for one. ;)

[Roderick Usher]

Sorry, I already have a husband, and so far, just the one is plenty.....:p


you sure about that?;)

[AmericanManiac]

:p . . . . . . . Yes I know what you mean

[jenna26]

you sure about that?;)

I certainly hope so....it was hard enough to find just ONE that could put up with me for so long.....:D

[Castlewood]

How does the unrated version compare to the theatrical? I'm thinking about buying the unrated.

[AmericanManiac]

How does the unrated version compare to the theatrical? I'm thinking about buying the unrated.

I really only noticed one scene in the unrated that wasn't in the theater version, I really can't take scenes like that one that was added. I'm not going to spoil it for you, but it has to do with how he breaks out of the looney ward. To be honest, even though I couldn't take it, it was much more enjoyable than the theater version. If you liked the theater one then then this is worth buying imo.

[DEATHH DREAMS author]

Rob writes the dumbest dialog ever... it had me cringing in my seat it was so bad... a film spectator shouldn't have to suspend their disbelief after every word that is spoken...

[Staplez]

I must admit. I didnt hate the remake. It wasnt great, wasnt horrible IMO.
Couldnt touch the orginal, then again, nothing else can as far as Im concerned.

[rasobasi420]

I didn't mind the movie actually (Halloween). I do however have some criticisms of it that really bugged me though. Mainly, I was upset about the first part. I'm not sure what Rob Zombie's childhood was like, but I'm betting he decided to tell his own fucked up story on film, which had very disinterested. And of course if you grow up with a stripper for a mama, a lazy douchebag molester as a stepdaddy and a whore for a sister you'll end up a psycho serial killer.... Or worse yet...
Emo!

I did enjoy watching Michael's descent into complete insanity in the form of a reel to reel recording. I think if Zombie only had that, and the minimal backstory of the original I'd have had a better time watching it, instead of being bored to tears watching these rednecks who's only place in this world is on the Jerry Springer show.

The second half though was fun to watch. Just another hack-em-up horror. You could see Zombie attempt to pull off that 'fading into darkness' thing but couldn't pull it off. After that it was just blood blood and more blood. And apparently Mike Myers can 'smell' the redneck on people, because the only way he knew that Laurie was his sister was by smelling the mail she dropped off at the old Myers residence (anyone notice that?).

I do have to commend Zombie on showing every bit of titty that he could, including the grown up tittays of the little girl from 4 and 5. That's class Zombie

[Elvis_Christ]

Real pissed that this didn't get a theatrical release over here....
I've only seen the workprint version that was floating around last year and I dug it. I thought it was a pretty strong entry to the series after the horrible pile of shit that was Resurrection. Rob Zombie's flicks are some of the best modern horror vehciles of the last 10 years.

[Staplez]

I thought it was a pretty strong entry to the series after the horrible pile of shit that was Resurrection. Rob Zombie's flicks are some of the best modern horror vehciles of the last 10 years.


I agree with you. I loved Rejects and thought Halloween was pretty good. Course, I didnt go in expecting it to surpass the orginal.

[Doc Faustus]

It's a different genre. It's like comparing Little Shop of Horrors the musical to the Charles Griffith Little Shop of Horrors. Different genres, different films, different approaches. Zombie reimagined a suspenseful slasher classic as a splatpunk slasher film. The philopsophical approaches are different and the intent is different. Apples and oranges...no, change that, apples and pianos.

[Elvis_Christ]

^^ Haha apples and pianos I like that one :D and well said you hit the nail on the head brother

Course, I didnt go in expecting it to surpass the orginal.

Definatley dude its not like the original has been erased because of this remake its still there to watch. Its just a new vision of the story thats brought new life to a franchise that was going down the toilet.
The remakes suck debate is tired and is about as exciting to read as all the Uwe Bowl sucks posts.

[BloodRedFlower]

The fact that her hair and eyebrows didn't match irked me even more.

*Giggles* :D

[freddy69]

i love the first helloween

[colubrid660]

I loved that as well, I really never noticed how huge he was in the theater version, Now I mean Ken Foree he is a pretty big guy himself and myers just TOWERED over him! It made it more believeable as to how he can take blows and barely get stunned. Can anyone answer this, the guy who played the grown up Myers, is he the tow truck driver from House and Rejects??

Its Tyler Mane, the guy who played Sabretooth. You can see him sans makeup or William Shatner mask in Joe Dirt as the guy who sets himself on fire.

I think he was the only good casting choice in the reimagining. That Scout whatever her name is girl is annoying. MacDowell is a good actor, hes just too creepy to play Loomis. Brad Dourif as the sheriff was a bad choice too.

[MattC]

I don't like the idea at all of them doing re-makes of these movies. I get the feeling all the classic movies are re-make bound now. Hollywood can't think of anything better to do so they decide to do this. I though Rob Zombies was ok, but I would have much prefered the original being left alone

[La Chat Noire]

I'm just curious what people thought of his remake. I thought it had some strong horror/gore elements, but I didn't like how they tried to give an explanation and a motivation for what made Michael Myers so evil. I thought it was more interesting and mysterious without the whole 'bad childhood and family' element.

[massacre man]

I didn't like how they tried to give an explanation and a motivation for what made Michael Myers so evil.

They didn't do that... He was already evil, his family just happened to be assholes.

[Ferox13]

I liked how they explained the mask bit though.

[illdojo]

http://www.horror.com/forum/showthread.php?t=30249

And it's spelled....MOVIE(your sig) :rolleyes:

[The_Return]

Didnt hate it, but didnt really like it much either.

[Elvis_Christ]

I liked how they explained the mask bit though.

Yeh that was pretty cool. Man this remake gets a lot of shit! I thought it was decent although its Zombie's weakest film so far.
The ending of the workprint reminded me of Frankenstein and gave the film a way different feel... didn't really appreciate it the first time I saw it and was annoyed but now I prefer it over the one that was used when it was released.
It's a hell of a lot better than The Omen or Hitcher remakes.

[James Whale]

He got me with GOD OF THUNDER and the KISS shirt right from the start; however, it's ZOMBIE's weakest film thus far. ZOMBIE likes to show his influences.

[_____V_____]

http://www.horror.com/forum/showthread.php?t=31548


Read through this one from beginning to end, La Chat Noire.

[La Chat Noire]

Even though I have my issues with this remake, I'm surprised by how many people consider this to be Zombie's weakest film. I definitely liked this one better than House of A Thousand Corpses and Devil's Rejects. And I agree that although the original Halloween is much better (obviously), as far as remakes go this one was decent. I can respect that he tried to do something different and make it his own, even if I don't agree with all the changes made.

[Elvis_Christ]

House of 1000 Corpses and The Devil's Rejects totally kill Halloween

They are modern classics that reinvented some tried and true aesthetics of the genre. Great scripts and preformances... true horror films for true fans of the genre. But whatever I'm one of the few people that think that. His work is easily the best of the last 10 years in US horror cinema.

Halloween is just another remake to me it had elements of his earlier films but it just didn't work as well for me. Perhaps because he was somewhat restrained to staying close to the original work.

[neverending]

I agree with you Elvis. Zombie went back to the legends of the South and Midwest roadside horror attractions. Great take on not just horror movies but the traditions of horror in the USA. Zombie knew what he was doing with his first two films. If modern horror fans were better versed in both the history of horror films and rural legends they'd appreciate them more.

[Ferox13]

I'm kinda shocked by the Hate that Zombies first 2 films got. I love them - sure they are flawed but they are sooooooooooo enjoyable.

[La Chat Noire]

I think in general I just like a little more mystery and distance from the killer(s). House and Rejects were up close into the Firefly's lives and family dynamics. At least that's what I remember, but it's been about 3 years since I've watched them. Might need another viewing. But if people like horror roadside attraction type movies, Dark Ride wasn't too bad.

[Ferox13]

Its been along time since I've seen it but were there elements od Mothers day that were similar to House 1000 corpses.

[James Whale]

I like all three of his films. Roger Ebert gave a very positive review to THE DEVIL'S REJECTS. Why does this matter? Ebert is a mainstream critic; it's always important when a mainstream critic acknowledges any genre film; ZOMBIE loves TOBE HOOPER and apparently has an affection for the film,SPIDER BABY as well. The HALLOWEEN remake is decent ,but it really is part prequel and part remake. I really didn't like it at all at first; however, I very much enjoyed it after I bought it on dvd. I think ZOMBIE really is the most important auteur of the genre of the macabre at the moment. He's had three money making films in a row; the first two had some mainstream critical acknowledgement. The third ,well, is an interesting mess.

[Ferox13]

James Whale for some reason i'd thing you'd not be a fan...

[James Whale]

I like his music, stageshow,art and movies. However, I do hope he moves on and away from the white trash,TOBE HOOPER stuff.

[massacre man]

I like his music, stageshow,art and movies. However, I do hope he moves on and away from the white trash,TOBE HOOPER stuff.

Not sure if his next movie will do that, here's a poster.

http://a780.ac-images.myspacecdn.com/images01/18/l_80b45eaffa5c5bec14ab32232b1e534b.jpg

[Noah]

I really loved it.... Not obviously as good as the original. But still a lotta fun, and Michael was a fucking BEAST!

Oh, and the song "Love Hurts" should never be played in a Horror movie, much less a HALLOWEEN movie! :p

[La Chat Noire]

I saw this kid today at work who looked just like the kid who played Michael Myers, especially his eyes. Kind of freaked me out.

[stenchofdeath]

I liked it, it definately had his stamp on it. The b-grade sleazy, dirty white trash characters. I think The Devils Rejects is my favourite of his.

[novakru]

Thing is though, Zombie is coming into the industry as a FAN of horror, not from film school.
If you look at his films from that POV it makes his movies look alot different.
IMHO
I think he does alright.

[La Chat Noire]

Thing is though, Zombie is coming into the industry as a FAN of horror, not from film school.
If you look at his films from that POV it makes his movies look alot different.
IMHO
I think he does alright.


That's interesting. I didn't know that, and you're right- it does change things a little.

[bigkev119]

first of all, i only saw 40 mins of this stupid movie and that was it for me.Rob should had left it alone. im a big fan of the first movie by john carpenter.rob zombies movie sucked. it was so phoney. to have a 6'8 Goon play the part of myersis so stupid.myers was never that tall in all the movies. its a joke:mad:

[fuglystick]

There may be plenty of reasons to criticize Zombie's remake, but because the antagonist was taller than the original envisioned by Carpenter is not one of them.

[Lowrie Productions]

when i first heard about this i just shook my head as Halloween is my favourite film of all time but after watching it....it's ok. not great. i did like the first part when he was a wee boy and in the hospital

he was brave to make it lol even braver to make H2 lol

Dan

[jcp90]

i dont know what everyones problem with Rob Zombies halloweeen was. i thought it was amazing. He took people deeper into the life of Myers and showed how he ended up as he did. This film was a work of art. People need to stop comparing it to the original and appreciate it for what it is.

[The Mothman]

i dont know what everyones problem with Rob Zombies halloweeen was. i thought it was amazing. He took people deeper into the life of Myers and showed how he ended up as he did. T

thats kills the whole purpose of michael myers. One of the greatest things about him was that you knew nothing about him.

[Despare]

thats kills the whole purpose of michael myers. One of the greatest things about him was that you knew nothing about him.

I'm not saying I disagree but... why?

[ferretchucker]

Don't even remember making this thread. :S

Why was the poll closed?

[Elvis_Christ]

You didn't set the poll to last forever. They expire after awhile.

[ferretchucker]

Really? Never noticed that?

[_____V_____]

Really? Never noticed that?

Result of merging multiple threads on same topic. Poll was created by someone else.

[Doc Faustus]

Before anybody posts again about Rob Zombie's Halloween read this book:
http://www.amazon.com/After-Babel-Aspects-Language-Translation/dp/0192880934/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1253468199&sr=1-1
It is highly relevant to the issues expressed in this thread.

[massacre man]

Before anybody posts again about Rob Zombie's Halloween read this book:
http://www.amazon.com/After-Babel-Aspects-Language-Translation/dp/0192880934/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1253468199&sr=1-1
It is highly relevant to the issues expressed in this thread.

I thought it was going to be something by you when I clicked the link. :p

[Doc Faustus]

I know you did. Thank you for clicking anyway. Alas, I am not a world famous linguist but rather an unpopular novelist. As soon as I have the energy, I will look over that book and compose a tiresome article on the hermeneutics of remakes that I will have just to post on my blog because I hope to God nobody would publish something so dull but so necessary.

[Posher778]

If he offered her the picture and wanted her to remember, he was pretty convinced Laurie was his sister, right? And after she stabs him and says she doesnt remember, he thought it wasnt her? From one extreme to another in an instant, IMO.

Zombie needed to handle that scene very delicately. It was one of the centerpoints of his movie. Somehow it doesnt fit into the overall picture and leaves a question mark.

A question mark with a really easy answer:


He's a psychopath... Naturally he's unpredictable. If someone I loved stabbed me with a huge ass knife i'd be pissed off too. And even after that, it didn't really seem like he was trying to 'kill' her, just get her back. (Unless i'm forgetting a detail). He tackled her out the window, but that almost seemed like self defense. If he wanted to kill her right then he could have easily just thrown her out the window.


Also, I realize this is an old post, i'm just reading bits and pieces.