25 reasons why Halloween 9 should not be made!!! Audition Tapes now online!!! (1 Viewer)

[MattFini]

^ Well Zombie has been saying for a while now that the content of his Halloween will at least in part be a prequel that delves into Michael's past.

As for his MySpace comments, I have the feeling he was a bit surprised by the backlash. I don't even think his comments have much validity becuase most people aren't even taking Quint's opinion into account. Instead, the majority of fans are surprised by the contnet of the script.

Personally I could care less about what Quint thinks, but he did state several facts about the script. That's why I'm reacting to becuase I think they sound like crap.

I WILL refrain final judgment until I see this, but I'm worried and a little angry.

 

[Chad R]

Exactly, Matt. What I'm reacting to was the fact that the stalking of Haddonfield only takes up the last 20 pages of script. William Goldman has an adage about writing movies and scenes, "get in late, then get out early." Basically, only tell what is absolutely necessary. Carpenter did that. What Zombie is doing is coming in way, way too early.

I didn't think I'd see this before the script review, I know I won't after it.

 

[JonZ]

oh... my...f*cking...god

Please tell me this is a joke. That sounds worse than any of the sequels, which I didnt think was possible.

 

[Joe Karlosi]

And along those lines, the original HALLOWEEN is all that's needed.
I know many fans are desperate for yet another Michael film, but is this the way to go about it, re-doing the first? I think not.

I mean, people are saying how the actress chosen for Laurie is "the wrong type" and so on ... well, we already had the established "right" Laurie. She was in a 1978 film called HALLOWEEN, as directed by John Carpenter. That's it. That's the film. That was and always will be "Halloween".

 

[BrettGallman]

I have a feeling that I'll be staying at home and watching the original Halloween when the remake is released based on this script review, and that's saying something. I like to give a film a chance, but I'm not sure I can stomach this remake because it fails to grasp to core concepts of the original and seems to mangle it in as many ways imaginable.

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

Welp, more bad news, IMO at least, the new Michael has been revealed, from Rob's myspace page...



Don't like it at all, Zombie promised us an original Shatner looking mask and this is not even close, the hair is too thick, the upper lip is too thin and Mane is far too large and broad in the shoulders, not crazy about the weathering on the mask, either. About the only thing I do like is the coveralls and the way the sleeves hang well over his wrists, that at least is very Nick Castle.

 

[TravisR]

I like it. It's not the original mask (and it's not the original movie) but it looks better/closer than every other mask since Halloween II.

 

[Radioman970]

I read through this whole thread. Man! You guys are hard to please!! As it should be. Halloween is an important film for horror movie fans.

I think the "new" Michael looks tremendous. I'm not exactly sure what everybody was expecting that this image doesn't meet or at least come close to meeting. It'll look different in the movie itself. I can see that.

I don't think Zombie intents to crap on this franchise. He's doing his own vision of it and some things will likely get altered as he goes along. It definately won't please the intense fans of the original. Nothing Zombie could do will please them and that's a fact. If I was in that boat I'd stay home on opening night. Or, like Zombie says, go see it (and put some money in Zombie's pocket) and judge for yourself!!

His other 2 films spent much time showing very intense aspects of the bad guys that really tripped me out and that's likely to increase much much more for this film and character. That is perhaps the #1 reason I"m so excited about this Zombie film. I want to be thrown back in my chair and slapped in the face over and over like he did with Devil's Rejects.

 

[JonZ]

I think this is going to be a abortion.

Zombie is only interested in onscreen mayhem. His dialogue is pathetic(and for this film its important concerning Loomis explaing Myers) and his characters are caricatures. The guy is all about sleeze,trying to pass it off as a homage to exploitation.

Hes also unimaginative. Falling back on serial killer cliches I dont think he understands Halloween as well as he thinks he does. He certain doesnt understand the characters.

The Loomis/Myers dynamic, the thing that makes the first film work so well is all but wrecked here. Myers should never be humanized or explained and Zombie is falling back on cliches you can read in any serial killer book. Making Myers a victim of bad parenting completely depowers and demystifies him. What makes Myers work so well in the original is that he defied all of Loomis training, logic and expertise - now hes the same as every other guy that fills up the FBI library of serial killers. Might as well call them in and Loomis can stay home this time around.

Im going to put this in spoilers since it may not be known to some
The first 1/3 of the film will focus on Myers childhood, the 2nd on his time in the institution, with only the 3rd act of him going back to Haddonfield. So Laurie and her friends have now become minor characters.

This again wrecks another part of what made the first film so great. Instead of seeing Myers close in and stalk the girls, hes going to come in like a freight train and tear through them. Are we supposed to care? We havent spent any time with them, they arent developed characters. Theyre just there to be hacked.....but they all have nude scenes.


Its just depressing. Halloween deserves better.

 

[DavidPla]

If I didn't know, I would think the screenshot of Michael Myers above is from the original movie. Looks pretty much the exact same to me.

 

[Radioman970]

Very good comments JonZ. You're definately representing the diehard fans who are taking it personal that this director is putting his dirty hands all over this material. I see where you're coming from. But I don't agree that Zombie's not worthy of this. I happen to think Zombie is one hell of a horror director and I'll go on to say that if anyone can pull this off it's Zombie.

Just based on what he did with Devil's Rejects (the way that film made me feel while watching it and after) I think his Halloween is going to be a thrilling ride thru hell. That's just my early impression.

Will he tone down things for this for a more mainstream treatment? I doubt it. It'll be bloody as hell and we'll actually be afraid of Michael in a whole new way. How could any director copy such a classic slasher character in 2007 and not make it look like "been there done that" as was the case with the TCM remake (and even moreso with The Hills Have Eyes mutants). He can't. That's why he's going to establish some background to give it some legs to stand on. Then he's going to totally ramp up things so we're as uncomfortable as possible. He'll certainly be making this character an evil force to be reckoned with if his past work is any indication. I truly see this character and one that will benefit from a modern filmmaker like Zombie. Michael was truly one of the first characters to actually scare the crap out of me and make me loose all kinds of beauty sleep. It was Creature from the Black Lagoon then Michael. I think Zombie's version will be the monster some of us want. I'm actually one who wants more understanding about why Michael is a monster. "Just that he is" has been done already with the original film. I'm more than happy to get more. However, bad parenting, I agree, ain't good enough. Michael needs to be like....well, the opposite of Hercules. How's that?

I love it when I sit there questioning why I'm watching a certain horror film like a Zombie film or something from Craven (Last House on the Left) or Hooper (TCM). I expect no less from this one. I really don't think this will be Rob Zombie's Silence of the Lambs or something that reminds us of Jeepers Creepers. That'll ruin his career as a horror director. Although I do agree the Michael and Dr. Loomis relationship is very important for this film to work at the level we would want. I hope he can find time to think about that while throwing all the mayhem at us.

Anyway, I'm more excited for this film than I've been for any film since Peter Jackson's passed efforts. I simply cannot wait! It really deserves a chance instead of just writing it off this early.

 

[Seth Paxton]

I agree with JonZ and Quint (if what he claims to be in the script is accurate). It sounds like a total misunderstanding of the original film. Much like the Silence sequels focused on Hannibal, the story was really about the cop (as was the original Manhunter) not the killer.

Halloween was about Laurie's innocence and vulnerability and Loomis frustration over his inability to communicate the impending danger Myers represented.

Even the extended scene from the original follows that tract, showing more of Loomis trying to warn the doctors about Myers.

Myers is the storm, the force of nature. Loomis and Laurie are the investigations into the human condition, showing their human emotions as a reaction to confronting someTHING like Myers.


Humanizing Myers is just a huge mistake, he's NOT THE LEAD and never was originally (or even the sequel, though it was headed that way).

Of course the same thing was true with the first Nightmare or Friday the 13th. It always ends up being about the killer rather than the victims in these sequels. They grab onto the fluff and basic high concept and discard all the real substance that was driving the original stories.


I just didn't think Zombie of all people was going to make that mistake. I guess I should have expected it in hindsight, he is obsessed with the killers not the killed. He needs to do the Manson Family story instead, or Dahlmer.

 

[JonZ]

"That's why he's going to establish some background to give it some legs to stand on."

But the problem is its nothing we havent seen before and full of stuff we have. Have u seen the new pic of Myers as a kid? Hes got long hair doing his Alex the droog imitation. He looks like the type of kid other kids joke will turn into a serial killer when he grows up. What makes a kid from a good middleclass family with loving parents kill one day - thats scary. Here we have the same old tired story of the poor family,stipper mom, abusive father, other kids pick on him, sexually attracted to older sister and so on. Its so lazy. Its not Michael Myers. Changing the fundamental basics of the character make it something else.


"Then he's going to totally ramp up things so we're as uncomfortable as possible."

I think he tries too hard to be disturbing - ohh look how disturbing my characters are! DR was over for me when I saw the pornstar holding a gun to the clown with bad teeths head while they were romping around in the sack to dialogue that sounded like it was written by a 12th grader. I couldnt help but laugh at the stupidity of it. I found myself laughing my way through the rest of the film at the formula and stupidity of the dialogue and characters. Of course people are gonna find masterbating to dead animals or rape as uncomfortable. Its also lazy and unimaginative to rely on them.

Even some of the worst horror movies at least took the time to set up the characters before theyre hacked. Zombie shows no consideration for the people in his films just his oh so scary carnival freaks. How are you supposed to sympathize with a victim whos only on film long enough to get out of the shower and then be terrorized? Look at the recent Descent. We spent 40 minutes with the characters before they enter the cave.

And the homage to exploitation is getting old. Those films were a sign of the times they were made. A period of unrest and paranoia in the country. Zodiac and Manson were out there. Its been argued on whether Last House has a social commentary or is just exploitive garbage. I wouldnt even lump TCM in with those films becuase I think its much better done than the likes of the Hills Have Eyes and Last House. And it has whats IMHO one of the great scenes of 70s cinema.Leatherface twirling around with the chainsaw with the sun going down behind him(for the record I liked the Hills remake)

Saying its a homage to exploitation seems to be becoming a excuse for bad ideas being passed off as cool or hip. Example:the gun for a leg in Rodriguezs Planet Terror.



Im sorry Im ranting , but Halloween is holy to me and I hate whats being done here.

 

[TravisR]

In all fairness, you may be 100% correct but it's not like you've actually seen the Halloween remake or Grindhouse. It sure sounds like you shouldn't ever see them either but I don't get how anyone can decide if something is good or bad when they haven't seen the movie.

 

[JonZ]

Well I didnt judge the movie just one of its ideas. Do I need to see the movie to think that someone who walks around with a machine gun leg is a silly idea?

 

[WillG]

But the problem is its nothing we havent seen before and full of stuff we have. Have u seen the new pic of Myers as a kid? Hes got long hair doing his Alex the droog imitation. He looks like the type of kid other kids joke will turn into a serial killer when he grows up. What makes a kid from a good middleclass family with loving parents kill one day - thats scary. Here we have the same old tired story of the poor family,stipper mom, abusive father, other kids pick on him, sexually attracted to older sister and so on. Its so lazy. Its not Michael Myers. Changing the fundamental basics of the character make it something else.

Yeah, I agree. I do understand that the story of "Halloween" is so bare bones that you really do have to introduce new elements in a remake to keep it from being a carbon copy of the original. But, they really shouldn't dump the M.M. mythology and turn him into just another serial killer. However, if they get the look of M.M. right, and the picture posted above looks decent to me, it will win some points from me on that alone.

If the movie sucks, we'll still always have the original.

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

Like I said Mane is not even close to Castle's Myers...








Even this fanmade pic is better than what we're getting.




A mask that I converted.





That ghostly mystique just isn't there in the new Michael IMO, Mane's Michael is what has been dubbed 'FrankenMyers' on other boards and a more proper term I can't imagine. I'm disappointed because Zombie said he would go back to the original hero mask from H1 and he isn't.

 

[Greg_S_H]

I won't comment too much, since I have zero plans to see this, but the childhood thing is a huge mistake. What made the original work is that Michael was, by outward appearances, a normal kid with a normal suburban family. His family comes home, and they are a typical man and woman--not some stripper with a redneck boyfriend. THAT just sounds so typical in this day and age of filmmaking.

 

[DavidPla]

This



and this



don't look the same?

Not saying the film is going to be any good but come on... the costume is probably the LEAST of its problems in being faithful to the original.

 

[BrettGallman]

The costume is close to the original, but it's not an exact copy. The eyes, eye brows, and hair are a bit different, but yes, you're right, Michael's look is the very least of the problems. In fact, I'd have to say it's about the only positive thing going for this film right now.