Halloween movies, what edition is the best version of each dvd? (1 Viewer)

[BrettGallman]

Yes, they are going to correct the color timing for the BD release. It's been somewhat confirmed to me by someone who knows such things.

 

[MarcoBiscotti]

Is there any difference between these two versions, or is it simply cover preference? --

 

[Winston T. Boogie]

Halloween is a wonderful film and also a scourge of the dvd universe as we are beaten mercilessly with version after version of the film. It's obvious the 1999 version at this point is the definitive edition, in terms of the film itself.

It is worth owning the extended cut of the film as it remains an interesting artifact because Carpenter recut his film with new footage to dovetail with the sequel, Halloween 2.

Halloween 2 is a very interesting film because it's a sequel that picks up right where the first film ends. You could not find a more interesting concept for a sequel and it is well executed and Carpenter participated. This chapter ends the Michael Meyers saga and there should have never been another Myers/Halloween film. The rest of the Meyers/Halloween films are terrible and not a single person should waste a moment of their lives on them.

Halloween III, which interestingly the original poster in this thread says they will likely skip, is a very important film from the 1980s. This was the film Carpenter hoped to use to prevent a slew of crappy slasher films designed to cash in on his original work. It was an outstanding attempt by John Carpenter to prevent what he knew was coming in the 80s...a decade of sequels and a sharp decrease in developing original films to instead make the same films again and again with a new number at the end of their title all in the name of cash.

Carpenter would get trampled by hordes of screaming baboons that found it more entertaining to watch the same film again and again with the only change being new ways of upping the gore factor. "Where's Michael?" the crowds would whine seeing a disruption in the "sameness" of their lives. They would drift from the pinnacle of bland sameness, say a McDonalds in a shopping mall, into the movie theatre eager to gorge themselves now on bland sameness for their cerebral cortex. Filled with outrage that they did not get their fix they were whipped into a frenzy and the film was endlessly bashed. Carpenter's concept for developing original stories based around Halloween was thrown on the ash pile and Carpenter walked away in disgust.

He would respond to these mindless drones with "They Live" but it was a message ignored as the drones flocked to see "Friday the 13th 17" and Police Academy 19" and of course a slew of Halloween sequels that all had Michael Meyers...and McDonalds changed their sign to billions and billions served. Eat up!

So my advice would be to own the first three films and use the rest as coasters. They are the best versions of Halloween films and have the most significance in film history.

 

[Jim_K]

That would be fantastic news! 1080P HD resolution and corrected color timing! That would make the upcoming BD release the one definitive version to get (if one has a BD player that is) and if things turn out the way they should.

 

[TravisR]

The cover is the only difference.

 

[Mark Hawley]

Personally I thought Halloween III was pretty bad. It may not have been have been a slasher film, but it was still pretty exploitative with liberal doses of gore. No wonder Nigel Kneale had his name removed from the credits.

Halloween 4, while far from a great film, and despite the ridiculousness of bringing both Myers and Loomis back, actually does a better job of capturing the feel and spirit of the first film, than the second does.

While I do enjoy Halloween 2 to a degree, it was clearly Carpenter on autopilot in terms of the script, introducing an Empire-Strikes-Backsian plot twist that dimimished that sense of horror of being randomly attacked by a madman that the first film had and by stepping in and shooting a bunch of inserts of gory deaths, he turned Halloween into just another slasher film.

As for Myers not being in III, I can see why audiences might have been pissed off. Not that I think that's the reason it bombed, but few people like in-name-only sequels. If I go see a Jaws movie, I want it to be about a shark, not about a lion or something. He shouldn't have called it Halloween III since it had nothing to do with the other two. He was cashing in on the franchise, rather than doing something brave and edgy.

It seems whenever a sequel that tries something different flops, no matter how bad it is, people come out of the woodwork singing it's praises and dismissing everybody else as "mindless drones", and patting themselves on the back because they're the only one that got it.

And They Live is a guilty pleasure at best. Aside from a very obvious, and easy to agree with political subtext - Reaganites are bad! - it's a very cheesy movie.

 

[Winston T. Boogie]

Well, I don't think you got my point, Mark, or any of the humor. That aside, I was not saying that Halloween 3 is a great film or patting myself on the back. It's a B-movie and sure, it has it's issues. The point is the 80s was a terrible time for film due to the focus on creating sequels to make a buck rather than developing original films. Halloween 3 was meant to move the Halloween series toward new stories that take place on and around Halloween and to avoid endless repeats of the first film with the gore amped up.

You can trash Halloween 3 for all its flaws, there are plenty, but the great thing about the film was it was made in the hope that it could stop a bunch of crappy sequels and open a door to creating more original stories. It was in no way cashing in when your goal is mainly to kill off an endless series of films where a guy walks around in a mask hacking people up.

Jaws was about the worst example you could have come up with because it was the film that kicked off the "let's cash in" trend. They blow up the shark and of course more sharks just keep coming...some in 3D...it pretty much proves the point Carpenter wanted to make with Season of the Witch. You also make the hilarious comment that when you go to a Jaws movie you want to see a shark! That was a riot in the context of this conversation and I hope you were laughing when you wrote it!

Hey, you can bash Carpenter and his B-movies all you want but they have brains, wit, and humor...something none of the films in the Halloween series after 3 had.

 

[Mark Hawley]

Fair enough.

But I wasn't necessarily bashing Carpenter as he himself has admitted that he didn't really care for Halloween II and was just going through the motions while writing the script, and that he came up with the twist while downing a sixpack, and that it was his idea to insert gory death scenes into the final cut.

And it would have been cool if Halloween III had worked out and it led to an anthology of Halloween stories, but the film just simply isn't that good. I don't believe it was ignored just because the mindless masses didn't want a Halloween film without Myers.

And my point with Jaws was that one should expect sequels to stay within the realm of the franchise's reality and not be a standalone film which is why, even if their was no need to continue the Myers storyline -and no way of plausibly continuing it - people were somewhat rightly ticked off about it not having anything to do with the first two.

I also believe that III has it's fair share of gratuitous gore, most of which, I believe, was added at the behest of Carpenter, which I believe caused a rift between Carpenter and Kneale (whose Quatermass series was a big influence on Carpenter) so it's an eighties horror film all the way, even if it doesn't follow the slasher model.


A standalone film is a standalone film. He should have just called it "Season of the Witch" or "Attack of the Killer Halloween Masks".

 

[JonZ]

IMHO the Dean Cundey approved transfer of the 1999 version is the one to watch.

The color correction adds lots of atmosphere and mood that is REALLY missing from the other transfers.

 

[Dave Mack]

I actually really liked H;III

No, it's not perfect but for what it is, I think it worked. It's a great "Late nite" film. To me it also has more halloween atmosphere than any of the later films. I saw it opening day and everyone was really into it it seemed right up until the kind of cop out ending.
Everyone went "awwwwww.....!!!!" instead of "woah" but until then, they were going with it even without Myers.
Interestingly, (but rarely mentioned) is that H:III snuck in a slightly interesting message.
Kids watching Tv will ruin their minds, literally.


I also LOVED H:II, saw that opening day as well.

 

[WillG]

I do find that HII is a very worthy follow up. In fact, there was even a time in my more Naive days where I actually prefered to the original because I thought it delivered more of "the goods" I liked the picking up right where the original left off which was a fairly original idea at the time (even though it does not seem to make much sense that the main events of both films took place over 5 or so hours as it is depicted by the two films) there is even a scene or two that in there that rivals the original (Laurie at the elevator comes to mind) The big problem though, was having Jamie Lee pretty much relegated to a sedated stupor through most of the movie (I think if you took all her dialogue in the film it wouldn't come out to more than two pages of script) But I guess there wasn't much you could do as realistically, she would have been taken to a hospital and likely have been drugged up.

 

[Daryl L]

I use to own the 1999 release of Halloween. Like an idiot though I gave it away once I pre-ordered the 2003 Divimax release when it first came out but before knowing about the color timing change. At first I liked the new look (more realistic with the less blue lighting) but for the last few times I've watched the Divimax version I've really missed that spooky blue atmospheric lighting. I decided I want that back.

I'm curious about this new 2007 Halloween: Restored that Anchor Bay released.

Description from Anchor Bay's website.
I want to be clear about this. Does this latest 2007 release for sure have the same color timing as the 1999 release? Also does it have a new cleaner, better looking transfer compared to the 1999 release? I just want to be sure about this before I buy it. Thanks for any info provided.

 

[TonyD]

doesn't seem very clear from any of the posts in here if the latest, non divi version is the correct one.

according to travis in post 4 the '99 cundey version was re-released after the divi edition.
that one seems to be the right one to get.

i thought i saw that the br verson was NOT the color corrected verison therefore not the right one to get.

 

[TonyD]

here's the br talk.

http://www.hometheaterforum.com/htf/...loween-bd.html

 

[Daryl L]

Thanks TonyD. Unfortunately I have a HDDVD player (christmas gift) and not BD player so the BRDVD is out. I also discovered on a review at DvdActive of the Halloween 2007 release is identical (exact same) transfer as the 1999 release. So, since I've been wishing I still had my 1999 disc to watch and the 2007 disc is in a sense the 1999 disc behind a new cover and under $10 I went ahead and ordered it from DeepDiscount today. I want that chilling atmospher back the blue lighting has the off white lighting just can't give.

And to all. I am sick of and absolutely, totally, utterly, wholly, fully, thoroughly, unreservedly, definitely, certainly, positively, unconditionally, categorically, unquestionably despise the daggone discutting computerized green filtering excessively used destroying the natural color of every single item/element in probably 90% of all horror and action flicks from beginning to end made the past few years. ENOUGH!

 

[Richard--W]

Anchor Bay's 1999 Limited Edition is perfect. Here is what you get:

Limited Edition No. ------
Lenticular 3-D Cover.
Insert for Theatrical Version.
Insert for Television Version.
Postcard of Jaimie Lee Curtis.

Disc 1 Theatrical Version (92m):
- widescreen anamorphic 2.35:1
- full frame 4x3 for TV
Transfer supervised by dp Dean Cundey.
5.1 audio, 2.0 audio, Original Mono Soundtrack.
Theatrical Trailer and Re-release Trailer.
Television Spots 3
Radio Spots 3
Talent Bios 6
Still and Poster gallery
Behind-the-scenes Stills gallery.
+ Halloween Unmasked 2000 (27.14).

Disc 2 Carpenter's Extended Television Version:
- widescreen anamorphic 2.35:1
- "About the Television Version."
- recut with 11 minutes additional scenes.

Here is a link to the amazon page:

Amazon.com: Halloween: Restored Limited Edition: Brian Andrews,Jamie Lee Curtis,Charles Cyphers,John Michael Graham,Peter Griffith,Adam Hollander,Sandy Johnson (II),Nancy Kyes,David Kyle,Brent Le Page,Arthur Malet,Tony Moran,Robert Phalen,Donald Plea

Out of print, but still obtainable from dealers. Unfortunately, it does not have a commentary nor the expanded documentary. You'll need the Divimax edition for those, I suppose. But it does have a perfect transfer and everything else.

 

[Richard--W]

The only DVD edition to have a commentary is Anchor Bay's Divimax. Is it the same commentary from the Criterion laser disc, or a different commentary, does anyone know?

 

[TravisR]

Yeah, it's the same track from the LD with John Carpneter, Debra Hill and Jamie Lee Curtis.

 

[cafink]

I keep reading that the newest DVD release of the original Halloween is the "same" as the 1999 release. But is it actually the same disc, or a new disc that simply uses the same transfer?

If it's a different disc, then what are the differences between them?

 

[WillG]

I believe it was simply a repackaging of the 1999 release.