What's new

Halloween (franchise discussion) (1 Viewer)

John Maher_289910

Supporting Actor
Joined
Nov 7, 2013
Messages
704
Real Name
John Maher
I love the original film and its sequel. I can find things to like in Part 6 and H2O. Otherwise, I can pass. The two Rob Zombie reboots were among the worst motion pictures I ever saw. As for these two reboots, Michael acting like he's on PCP takes a lot of the"charm" of the originals out of it and they are far superior to Zombie's, but they do nothing to better the first two. I LOVE HALLOWEEN III, and would have truly appreciated seeing what might have been.
 

Reggie W

Senior HTF Member
Joined
May 31, 2004
Messages
8,749
Location
Agua Verde
Real Name
Pike Bishop
Ok so Ive skimmed through the entire thread and I get the idea that Carpenter was Good for Halloween and Halloween II and then he didnt want to do anymore. am I right in that?

Well, not exactly. The original picture is his. The sequel to the original picture, Halloween II, he helped on but he thinks is a terrible film. He also helped on Halloween III which is the direction he wanted the entire enterprise to go in, which was to tell different stories all set on or around the holiday. Carpenter thinks Halloween III is a good picture and endorses that. So, essentially, he put his stamp of approval on the first and third films.

Basically, the ending that they had in the original film is the one he wanted for Michael Myers, which was he disappears and we don't know what happens to him. We live with the idea that he is out there lurking. Sort of very No Country for Old Men before that ever came out.

When the people financing the pictures wanted a sequel they wanted more Myers and more gore. So, Carpenter made sure that the second film had an ending where Myers was definitely killed off so that the plan for new Halloween stories could begin. Which it did but audiences did not like the idea of Halloween films with no Michael Myers. This ended Carpenter's involvement with the series as he felt it was a terrible idea to keep making Michael Myers pictures.

They did try to bring Carpenter back for Halloween 6 and Carpenter said sure he would do it if he could set it on a space station. I believe he said that because he thought the entire idea of Myers still being around killing people was ridiculous so he made a ridiculous suggestion. Needless to say, they passed on that idea.

He has returned to make music on these more recent films and appears to endorse them but my bet is he does not really care about them. He's not a guy that pulls his punches.

Carpenter would basically get pigeon holed into making horror pictures, something he did not really intend to happen. So, you can look at this a couple of ways, he did go on to make a series of different horror films and while he was doing that Myers fans got a whole bunch of pictures with Michael doing his stalk and slash thing.

We never got the series of horror pictures all set on or around Halloween but we did get a pretty great series of horror pictures from John Carpenter.
 

Tino

Premium
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Apr 19, 1999
Messages
20,407
Location
Metro NYC
Real Name
Valentino
He has returned to make music on these more recent films and appears to endorse them but my bet is he does not really care about them. He's not a guy that pulls his punches.
He’s also an Executive Producer on both films.
 

TravisR

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2004
Messages
40,164
Location
The basement of the FBI building
PCP?? I don’t get that impression at all. He’s pretty much the same as he was in the first two films.
Yeah, to me, it's more like Michael is as big as a wall. Tyler Mane is a massive human being and it really makes Michael powerful in the movies. His size against teeny Danielle Harris makes her plight seem all the worse.
 

Caproni

Second Unit
Joined
Apr 6, 2018
Messages
441
Real Name
DRB

One of things that bothers me the most about the Halloween franchise is how they've treated some of their actors. Danielle Harris, a very talented young actress who gave us Jamie Lloyd in the fourth and fifth films, was basically shoved out of what became Halloween: The Curse of Michael Myers. As the story goes, a casting call went out for a Harris look-alike to play Jamie for the sixth film because producers didn't want to comply with any child labor laws because Harris herself was only 17 at the time. Harris had herself legally emancipated from her parents, and through a whole bunch of other mess, she still didn't end up playing the part. There were problems with her salary, her screen time, and the direction of the character and apparently the writers-producers wouldn't work with her ─ so she walked. We got J.C. Brandy in the sixth film, which confused my adolescent mind. I remember wondering whether or not "Jamie" from Halloween 4 and Halloween 5 were the same "Jamie" in Halloween: The Curse of Michael Myers.

They also did Ellie Cornell wrong. She basically became the heroine Halloween 4 as she takes a young Jamie under her wing, but then they totally disregard her in Halloween 5. The way she was killed and written out was unforgivable and, quite frankly, disrespectful to fans. It was like a slap in the face, and then we got Wendy Kaplan as Tina as a result. Ellie Cornell has often said that she felt disappointed by the way her character Rachel died, and that she wished she could've stuck around, especially after the way she stuck it to Michael at the end of the fourth film.
 

TravisR

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2004
Messages
40,164
Location
The basement of the FBI building
They also did Ellie Cornell wrong. She basically became the heroine Halloween 4 as she takes a young Jamie under her wing, but then they totally disregard her in Halloween 5. The way she was killed and written out was unforgivable and, quite frankly, disrespectful to fans. It was like a slap in the face, and then we got Wendy Kaplan as Tina as a result. Ellie Cornell has often said that she felt disappointed by the way her character Rachel died, and that she wished she could've stuck around, especially after the way she stuck it to Michael at the end of the fourth film.
I hate that they killed her off as much as anyone but I think they were going for the shock of a popular character being killed. It completely backfired on them since, in a really lousy movie, her death is still one of the most frequently cited things that people hate about it. Rachel's death might (and it's a big 'might') have worked if it did something for the story or to the characters but Jamie sees her body later on and is upset for probably less than 10 seconds and it's never brought up again.
 

Caproni

Second Unit
Joined
Apr 6, 2018
Messages
441
Real Name
DRB
I hate that they killed her off as much as anyone but I think they were going for the shock of a popular character being killed. It completely backfired on them since, in a really lousy movie, her death is still one of the most frequently cited things that people hate about it. Rachel's death might (and it's a big 'might') have worked if it did something for the story or to the characters but Jamie sees her body later on and is upset for probably less than 10 seconds and it's never brought up again.
Rachel's death was one of the most unceremonious things I've seen in the franchise. Rachel was great in the fourth film, and I hated to see her die so soon in the fifth film. Ellie Cornell said she figured she "wouldn't survive another one" when discussing her death in the fifth film. Her original death scene was to concern Michael shoving scissors down her throat, but it was changed at Cornell's request to Michael stabbing her in the heart with scissors instead. It was a lousy exit to one of the best characters in the franchise.
 

Michael Elliott

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2003
Messages
7,853
Location
KY
Real Name
Michael Elliott
I think Rachel was meant to be a PSYCHO shock but it just didn't work. The added touch of Three Stooges comedy with the cops didn't help.

In regards to Harris and H6, I understand what she was saying but at the same time I can see why a studio wouldn't want to pay her more. There are so many things wrong with this film that I'm not sure Harris could save it.

In all honesty, parts 5 and 6 are the golden eggs to show people why the horror genre got so awful before SCREAM came into play. I find both of these movies to be extremely bad but at the same time they're just disappointing because of where they took the stories and what they did to characters.

All the more reason for Blumhouse to make a direct sequel to 4. :D
 

TravisR

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2004
Messages
40,164
Location
The basement of the FBI building
In regards to Harris and H6, I understand what she was saying but at the same time I can see why a studio wouldn't want to pay her more. There are so many things wrong with this film that I'm not sure Harris could save it.
My first thought was "absolutely not" but with her, it might have been even worse. Assuming that the character's fate would have still been the same, I think it would have been really unpleasant to see the teenaged version of the little kid from 4 and 5 that everyone liked 'die'. With a different actor, there's a disconnect when Jamie is killed which takes some of the ugliness out of it.


As an aside, tonight is the last night that Halloween Kills is playing on the biggest screen around me (Dune gets it tomorrow) so I'm probably going to see it again.
 

TravisR

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2004
Messages
40,164
Location
The basement of the FBI building
You seriously think he is the same character in the 2018 and 2021 films as he is in the first two?! Okay.
I thought you were talking about the Rob Zombie ones where he's clearly a beast. I think in these new ones, he's reasonably close to the original especially when you factor that the newest movie theorizes that he's getting stronger as he kills more and more.
 
Last edited:

TravisR

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2004
Messages
40,164
Location
The basement of the FBI building
Pretty much yeah. He’s certainly not acting like he’s on PCP.
Agreed. Michael is way more violent in these movies than in the original but he's a psycho that got even more of a taste for killing in 1978 and that had been corked for 40 years so I think movie logic dictates that he'd be very violent when he got the chance to kill again.



I thought you were talking about the Rob Zombie ones where he's clearly a beast. I think in these new ones, he's reasonably close to the original especially when you factor that the newest movie theorizes that he's getting stronger as he takes more punishment.
I saw the movie again and actually, the theory is that he gets stronger the more that he kills.
 

TravisR

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2004
Messages
40,164
Location
The basement of the FBI building
I just watched Halloween 5 again yesterday and I have to say one good idea in the movie is when Rachel is in her house and sees Max the dog barking up at another window essentially right next to where she is in the house could have been really cool. However, that good idea was screwed up by not really hanging on the moment long enough to make it creepy or suspenseful.
 

Caproni

Second Unit
Joined
Apr 6, 2018
Messages
441
Real Name
DRB
I just watched Halloween 5 again yesterday and I have to say one good idea in the movie is when Rachel is in her house and sees Max the dog barking up at another window essentially right next to where she is in the house could have been really cool. However, that good idea was screwed up by not really hanging on the moment long enough to make it creepy or suspenseful.
Agreed. That part could've been more "spooky" that it really was. As a kid, I remember it given my the chills because you knew Myers was close by.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Forum Sponsors

Latest Articles

Forum statistics

Threads
351,073
Messages
4,941,450
Members
142,982
Latest member
braydonsfrosario
Recent bookmarks
0
Top