PDA

View Full Version : Rob Zombie's Halloween: Discussion IV



Pages : [1] 2 3 4 5

H-Field Hero
03-25-2007, 07:49 AM
Continued from http://www.ohmb.net/showthread.php?t=10822

Pick up the convo from the last thread. Some pretty interesting things being said on those last two pages. Let's hear more. Enjoy.

EvilOnTwoLegs
03-25-2007, 09:35 AM
LET'S GET READY TO RUUUUUUUUMBLLLLLLLLLLLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :bastard:

freethy
03-25-2007, 10:21 AM
LET'S GET READY TO RUUUUUUUUMBLLLLLLLLLLLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :bastard:

LMAO!! It has been like boxing match in here from time to time. Plenty of left jabs, a few right strikes, and every now and then someone has to ring the bell or throw in the towl.

:D

EvilOnTwoLegs
03-25-2007, 10:26 AM
LMAO!! It has been like boxing match in here from time to time. Plenty of left jabs, a few right strikes, and every now and then someone has to ring the bell or throw in the towl.

:D
I know, man. It's crazy. I mean, I know we're all passionate...even fanatical...about Halloween. But still...damn. haha

nwiser
03-25-2007, 02:23 PM
Picking up from the last discussion thread regarding sympathetic vs unsympathetic characters: With the history that Halloween has out there, Michael will be the most well known "face" in this movie, while all the others will be completely new, even if they're characters we've known before. Assuming that the movie will be less than 2 hours long, and a good portion of that will be spent on events with young Michael, wont that cut back on the time we have to care about/develop sympathy for any of Michaels victims in the time that TM is playing Michael?

I guess what I'm saying is, in movies with sequels where characters span the sequels, we actually can care about those charaters, but its often very difficult to care about what happens to someone who you see on screen for less than 15 minutes. With the whole "crummy childhood" background, and the fact that even though this is a remake of "Halloween", we know Michael, wont it be very difficult for us not to be sympathetic towards him?

The Kilted One
03-25-2007, 02:33 PM
With the whole "crummy childhood" background, and the fact that even though this is a remake of "Halloween", we know Michael, wont it be very difficult for us not to be sympathetic towards him?

If we try hard enough, anything is possible.:crazy:

EvilOnTwoLegs
03-25-2007, 03:25 PM
As I've said before, audiences have found it hard not to be sympathetic toward Myers for years. If fans are cheering for you on the big screen, they obviously identify with you in some way. The sequels took a villain and turned him into an iconic anti-hero figure...much as the NoES sequels did with Krueger. Most fans go to Halloween movies to see Michael Myers, first and foremost. Not necessarily to see Sam Loomis or Laurie Strode. Those characters play second fiddle to Myers in the eyes of most fans.

I'd say it's pretty hard to make a character sympathetic when audiences around the world are already cheering him on. And let's face it...the latter-day sequels have given us, for the most part, very few victims to sympathize with. They're essentially lined up as knife fodder for Michael Myers, who comes across as the real protagonist of those films. Myself, I'm most interested in seeing Loomis in another Halloween film. The way he's presented will go a very long way toward swaying my opinion of the film.

I'm among the extreme minority who don't go to these movies just to see Myers.

mcilroga
03-25-2007, 03:32 PM
And filming is done!

Don't believe me? (http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=101946169&blogID=244766279&MyToken=0a91b367-8ea1-43a3-b94c-58924e2cf5b5)

Time has flown by... I feel so much closer to it now.

ILoveHalloween3
03-25-2007, 03:32 PM
This isn't 1982. Anyone going to a "Halloween" film is going to see Myers butcher some kids up. The substance ended after "H3", where they actually wanted to give the characters some depth.

As for this film, I like Rob's first two films, and I have faith that this will finally be the true boost the franchise has needed & fans have been looking for the "Halloween" franchise, since 1988.

The Dark Shape
03-25-2007, 03:39 PM
As I've said before, audiences have found it hard not to be sympathetic toward Myers for years. If fans are cheering for you on the big screen, they obviously identify with you in some way. The sequels took a villain and turned him into an iconic anti-hero figure...much as the NoES sequels did with Krueger. Most fans go to Halloween movies to see Michael Myers, first and foremost. Not necessarily to see Sam Loomis or Laurie Strode. Those characters play second fiddle to Myers in the eyes of most fans.

I'd say it's pretty hard to make a character sympathetic when audiences around the world are already cheering him on. And let's face it...the latter-day sequels have given us, for the most part, very few victims to sympathize with. They're essentially lined up as knife fodder for Michael Myers, who comes across as the real protagonist of those films. Myself, I'm most interested in seeing Loomis in another Halloween film. The way he's presented will go a very long way toward swaying my opinion of the film.

I'm among the extreme minority who don't go to these movies just to see Myers.

I'd argue that Halloween has always been best at keeping its villain as exactly that -- a villain. Freddy and Jason were anti-heroes by their second or third sequel. The only film in the series that really treats Michael Myers like the hero is Halloween: Resurrection. It's a Friday the 13th flick set in Haddonfield, and that's one of the reasons I really don't like it.

Are most of the kids in the latter sequels set up as cannon fodder? Well, yeah. But it's always been that way. Any genre-savvy teen who sits down to watch Halloween for the first time is going to know that Annie, Lynda, and Bob will be blue and non-responsive by the time the credits roll.

EvilOnTwoLegs
03-25-2007, 03:56 PM
I'd argue that Halloween has always been best at keeping its villain as exactly that -- a villain. Freddy and Jason were anti-heroes by their second or third sequel. The only film in the series that really treats Michael Myers like the hero is Halloween: Resurrection. It's a Friday the 13th flick set in Haddonfield, and that's one of the reasons I really don't like it.

Are most of the kids in the latter sequels set up as cannon fodder? Well, yeah. But it's always been that way. Any genre-savvy teen who sits down to watch Halloween for the first time is going to know that Annie, Lynda, and Bob will be blue and non-responsive by the time the credits roll.
Point is, several sequels give us characters we're bound to despise...real unsymathetic characters...just so the audience can cheer when Myers kills them. Mike in H5, John Strode in H6, etc. That sets Myers up as an anti-hero...because the filmmakers have manipulated the audience into siding with him.

Note that the OHMB includes a "John Strode Hate Thread"...I don't see a "Michael Myers Hate Thread" anywhere around here. Fans don't hate him. They love him. They don't boo when he comes on screen. They cheer. Heather Bowen's fan video...the one that qualified her for her walk-on role...basically rambles on about how sexy Myers is. I don't see anyone rambling on about how terrible he is, and how much they despise him.

In the '80s, all horror series made their villains into iconic figures who skated the line between hero and villain. I'd say that even in some of the films that feature Loomis (to my mind, the only strong hero the series has ever had) treat Myers more as a protagonist than an antagonist. In all honesty, he hasn't been a pure, unsympathetic villain for a long time.

And what's funny is that if you go to various threads around this board, you'll find virtually all of the people who are complaining about Myers being "made sympathetic" talking about how much they love Michael Myers...how he's the reason they love these movies. And that, my friends, is called "irony."

Monte
03-25-2007, 03:58 PM
Any genre-savvy teen who sits down to watch Halloween for the first time is going to know that Annie, Lynda, and Bob will be blue and non-responsive by the time the credits roll.

While that may be true, the "cannon fodder" in the first film are generally likeable and we don't really wish to see them get killed. As opposed to, well, Resurrection, where I desperately wanted Michael to butcher every single main character in the most horrific ways possible the very moment they first appeared on screen.

The Dark Shape
03-25-2007, 04:02 PM
And what's funny is that if you go to various threads around this board, you'll find virtually all of the people who are complaining about Myers being "made sympathetic" talking about how much they love Michael Myers...how he's the reason they love these movies. And that, my friends, is called "irony."

Yes, but I'd say that's simply because he's the one factor who's a constant in every film in the series. People latch on to what they're comfortable with. While the series did create unlikeable characters that the audience would be grateful to see offed (Mike, John Strode... ahem, Tina...), the series never made a real attempt to treat Michael like the protagonist until HR.

At the end of the day, it was always the filmmaker's intention that we'd want Michael defeated. Did we ever want him to get Jamie Lloyd or Laurie Strode? No.

(Did we want him to murder every fucking character in Halloween Resurrection? Yes.)

EvilOnTwoLegs
03-25-2007, 04:19 PM
Yes, but I'd say that's simply because he's the one factor who's a constant in every film in the series. People latch on to what they're comfortable with. While the series did create unlikeable characters that the audience would be grateful to see offed (Mike, John Strode... ahem, Tina...), the series never made a real attempt to treat Michael like the protagonist until HR.

At the end of the day, it was always the filmmaker's intention that we'd want Michael defeated. Did we ever want him to get Jamie Lloyd or Laurie Strode? No.

(Did we want him to murder every fucking character in Halloween Resurrection? Yes.)
But you obviously recognize that truly sympathetic victims were the exception, not the rule. We had the occassional character like Laurie, Jamie or Rachel. But most of them, we couldn't really give a fuck about...and some, we were just ready to see die the moment they appeared on screen.

And really, how many wanted to see Myers permanently defeated? If he was a straight villain, wouldn't we want him to die? But the fans don't, really...they want him to keep coming back. Mostly, of course, because they want more Halloween movies...but also because they respond to that character. Which is why they really want more Halloween movies in the first place. Ask ten random Halloween fans who their favorite series character is...you'll get at least nine answers of "Michael Myers." More likely, you'll get ten.

I contend that it's hard to "make" a character sympathetic when a vast majority of fans already proclaim him their favorite character in the entire series. When they already love him. Hell, that's why they don't want to see him "messed with." Because they love the character. Which means he's already pretty damn sympathetic. They feel he's being "attacked" or "ruined," and they jump to his defense. Am I the only one who finds it hilarious that people accuse Zombie of making Myers a sympathetic character, when they're so ready to proclaim their Myers love?

H-Field Hero
03-25-2007, 04:27 PM
This isn't 1982. Anyone going to a "Halloween" film is going to see Myers butcher some kids up. The substance ended after "H3", where they actually wanted to give the characters some depth.Even in 1982 Halloween and Michael Myers were synonomous, hence why H3 bombed. Also, H3 wasn't the last Halloween film to feature quality characters. Actually, aside from Cochran and Challis everyone in H3 is basically 'blah' and that's coming from someone who really likes the movie.
Point is, several sequels give us characters we're bound to despise...real unsymathetic characters...just so the audience can cheer when Myers kills them. Mike in H5, John Strode in H6, etc. That sets Myers up as an anti-hero...because the filmmakers have manipulated the audience into siding with him.I'm really glad you mentioned people like Mike and John Strode, because I want to comment on that. Do you ever notice in this series how the sleezy characters tend to be the most interesting of the batch of fodder? Case in point: Bud in H2. He's the sleezy one of the bunch who you know is going to get it, yet he's the most interesting of the hospital staff. Mike in H5 is obviously set up to be a total dick so the audience gets satisfaction when the shape kills him, which in retrospect is the WRONG way to go about setting up characters, but it was the 80's so it's hard to pound on them now. Anyways, point being I always found Mikey's attitude and lame "cool guy" act more interesting than Spitz, Sammy, Tina, etc. There was so much care-free spirit in those characters that Mikey's "I don't have time for this shit" demeanor served as a nice change of pace... leave it to H5 to kill him first. Halloween 6, has John Strode and Barry Simms who are obviously set up in such a way that the crowd will celebrate their deaths and again that = stupid. But it's hard to deny that their characters are certainly more interesting than 'blah' characters like Tim, Beth, Debra, etc. Finally, Halloween III features the main character as a sleeze and the audience loves him!

Just an off topic tid bit I wanted to elaborate on :p.

But anyways, the whole 'rooting for Michael' thing is something I've always hated and can't say I ever took part in. I think it's safe to say that Rob's version of the shape won't be a likable fellow. But the question we have to ask is: Is it too late? After nearly 30 years is Michael Myers so engrained in pop-culture that it's impossible for us to view him the same way he was viewed in the early years: Someone who scares the shit out of you.

Roswell
03-25-2007, 04:40 PM
I'm among the extreme minority who don't go to these movies just to see Myers.

I guess I'm in that minority too. I've always been more into the characters than Michael (although Michael is admittedly cool). Maybe that's why I don't care for the films after H4, because they made pretty much all the characters unlikeable in the films after that.

The Dark Shape
03-25-2007, 05:05 PM
And really, how many wanted to see Myers permanently defeated?

Well, me. It's one of the reasons H20 is my favorite sequel.


I contend that it's hard to "make" a character sympathetic when a vast majority of fans already proclaim him their favorite character in the entire series. When they already love him. Hell, that's why they don't want to see him "messed with." Because they love the character. Which means he's already pretty damn sympathetic. They feel he's being "attacked" or "ruined," and they jump to his defense. Am I the only one who finds it hilarious that people accuse Zombie of making Myers a sympathetic character, when they're so ready to proclaim their Myers love?

But a character doesn't have to be sympathetic to be loved. Those same nine would probably say Freddy Krueger is their favorite Nightmare On Elm Street character. Is there even an ounce of sympathy associated with him?

Khan
03-25-2007, 05:29 PM
But a character doesn't have to be sympathetic to be loved. Those same nine would probably say Freddy Krueger is their favorite Nightmare On Elm Street character. Is there even an ounce of sympathy associated with him?

Very true.

I don't like Myers or Jason or any other killer because I feel sympathy for them, but because they are cool characters.

NightmareMan84
03-25-2007, 06:18 PM
Even in 1982 Halloween and Michael Myers were synonomous, hence why H3 bombed. Also, H3 wasn't the last Halloween film to feature quality characters. Actually, aside from Cochran and Challis everyone in H3 is basically 'blah' and that's coming from someone who really likes the movie.I'm really glad you mentioned people like Mike and John Strode, because I want to comment on that. Do you ever notice in this series how the sleezy characters tend to be the most interesting of the batch of fodder? Case in point: Bud in H2. He's the sleezy one of the bunch who you know is going to get it, yet he's the most interesting of the hospital staff. Mike in H5 is obviously set up to be a total dick so the audience gets satisfaction when the shape kills him, which in retrospect is the WRONG way to go about setting up characters, but it was the 80's so it's hard to pound on them now. Anyways, point being I always found Mikey's attitude and lame "cool guy" act more interesting than Spitz, Sammy, Tina, etc. There was so much care-free spirit in those characters that Mikey's "I don't have time for this shit" demeanor served as a nice change of pace... leave it to H5 to kill him first. Halloween 6, has John Strode and Barry Simms who are obviously set up in such a way that the crowd will celebrate their deaths and again that = stupid. But it's hard to deny that their characters are certainly more interesting than 'blah' characters like Tim, Beth, Debra, etc. Finally, Halloween III features the main character as a sleeze and the audience loves him!

Just an off topic tid bit I wanted to elaborate on :p.

But anyways, the whole 'rooting for Michael' thing is something I've always hated and can't say I ever took part in. I think it's safe to say that Rob's version of the shape won't be a likable fellow. But the question we have to ask is: Is it too late? After nearly 30 years is Michael Myers so engrained in pop-culture that it's impossible for us to view him the same way he was viewed in the early years: Someone who scares the shit out of you.


You forgot Jim from Resurrection. He's creepy and sleezy. I love his line "So Donna, what time do your legs open?" (She flips him off) "Would that be 1 O'Clock?" Such a creep.

Frazetta
03-25-2007, 06:22 PM
I contend that it's hard to "make" a character sympathetic when a vast majority of fans already proclaim him their favorite character in the entire series. When they already love him. Hell, that's why they don't want to see him "messed with." Because they love the character. Which means he's already pretty damn sympathetic. They feel he's being "attacked" or "ruined," and they jump to his defense. Am I the only one who finds it hilarious that people accuse Zombie of making Myers a sympathetic character, when they're so ready to proclaim their Myers love?I definitely agree with this. Look at how passionate most fans get at every detail about Myers that is released. You don't get that with Laurie or Loomis. McDowell could say he's going to give Loomis a Russian accent & most fans wouldn't care that much but if you change anything about Michael (un-shaping him, making him afew inches taller, a bloodier pair of overalls) there is fan outrage left & right.

WhiteZombie
03-25-2007, 06:45 PM
I agree with this past disscussion. I really want Michael to be unlikeable in this movie. Even with his background, I want the veiwers to hate him. I want them to feel attached to the girls and Loomis. That makes for a much scarier, intense villan. Opposed to everyone rooting for Myers on screen, I want them to fear him and hope the victems gets away. The reason I am refering to the veiwers as "them" is because of what H-Feild Hero said:
"But the question we have to ask is: Is it too late? After nearly 30 years is Michael Myers so engrained in pop-culture that it's impossible for us to view him the same way he was viewed in the early years: Someone who scares the shit out of you".

All of us on this board surely have seen the Halloween movies tons of times, which may make it hard for us to veiw Myers as the evil villan. We've just grown to attached to him. Im just hoping Rob can break it. But general veiwers, and people not so familiar with the series on the other hand, may very well see this movie and have this Hatred for Myers that comes with him being a new, murderous character. Lets not forget, Myers has obviously become a big name in horror, but hes not even close to as known as Jason or Freddy (pop culture speaking). For them its become inpossible to be scary anymore. There to well known, and to unrealistic. Myers on the other hand is fairly on the "downlow", and in this movie, very realistic.

EvilOnTwoLegs
03-25-2007, 07:21 PM
Even in 1982 Halloween and Michael Myers were synonomous, hence why H3 bombed. Also, H3 wasn't the last Halloween film to feature quality characters. Actually, aside from Cochran and Challis everyone in H3 is basically 'blah' and that's coming from someone who really likes the movie.I'm really glad you mentioned people like Mike and John Strode, because I want to comment on that. Do you ever notice in this series how the sleezy characters tend to be the most interesting of the batch of fodder? Case in point: Bud in H2. He's the sleezy one of the bunch who you know is going to get it, yet he's the most interesting of the hospital staff. Mike in H5 is obviously set up to be a total dick so the audience gets satisfaction when the shape kills him, which in retrospect is the WRONG way to go about setting up characters, but it was the 80's so it's hard to pound on them now. Anyways, point being I always found Mikey's attitude and lame "cool guy" act more interesting than Spitz, Sammy, Tina, etc. There was so much care-free spirit in those characters that Mikey's "I don't have time for this shit" demeanor served as a nice change of pace... leave it to H5 to kill him first. Halloween 6, has John Strode and Barry Simms who are obviously set up in such a way that the crowd will celebrate their deaths and again that = stupid. But it's hard to deny that their characters are certainly more interesting than 'blah' characters like Tim, Beth, Debra, etc. Finally, Halloween III features the main character as a sleeze and the audience loves him!
Yeah, Bud was a good example from early on of characters the audience is fairly ready to see bite the dust. If it isn't the attitude, then the singing does him in. ;) Interesting choice to have his death take place largely off-screen, though. In later sequels, the filmmakers gave those unlikable characters "showcase" death scenes...so that the audience really gets a chance to revel in their hate (not to mention their opportunity to side with Myers). The ultimate example, I think, being John Strode & His Amazing Exploding Head.



But anyways, the whole 'rooting for Michael' thing is something I've always hated and can't say I ever took part in. I think it's safe to say that Rob's version of the shape won't be a likable fellow. But the question we have to ask is: Is it too late? After nearly 30 years is Michael Myers so engrained in pop-culture that it's impossible for us to view him the same way he was viewed in the early years: Someone who scares the shit out of you.
Indeed...I'm not one of those people who is into cheering for Myers, either. I was always on Loomis's side. Until Loomis was gone, when, in his absence, it became hard to be on anyone's side...but certainly, I wasn't on Michael's. My favorite characters in the series are Sam Loomis and Michael Myers...because I feel that they need each other. But if I'm rooting for anyone, I'm always rooting for Loomis. Myers should be a villain...but he's become a T-shirt logo instead.

I don't think Myers is going to be any more sympathetic in this film than he already is, thanks to too many strictly Michaelcentric sequels...made by people who knew damn well what the audience came to see. All of the horror franchises of the '80s proved that success meant turning your killer into a pop culture icon. And at the end of the day, Michael, Freddy, Jason, Chucky, Pinhead, etc. became the faces of horror. Story could take a back seat to iconography, so long as you could get people to watch any movie that featured their favorite killer. And so it goes...sadly enough.



But a character doesn't have to be sympathetic to be loved. Those same nine would probably say Freddy Krueger is their favorite Nightmare On Elm Street character. Is there even an ounce of sympathy associated with him?
Is there a single reason to love him, either? Of course not. He's a hideous child murderer. Doesn't matter...people love Krueger, anyway. I don't...but most NoES fans do. My favorite films in the series are the original and New Nightmare, because those are the two main films that portray him as a straight villain. Which is what he should be.

When all is said and done, getting people to identify with these characters in some way (which is where some measure of sympathy has to come in) is how the studios put asses in seats. So they'll find a way to get the audience to relate to the killer. To come back again and again, just to see the killer kill...so that the sequel machine can continue to roll on. It's straight economics...but the net result is that most audience members do side with the killers, to one degree or another. And those killers become the most popular characters in their respective series, even when there are other continuing characters.

So seeing people get all hot and bothered because Zombie is "making" Michael Myers, whom they love, into a "sympathetic character" just makes me chuckle. That and, of course, the fact that this has all been deduced without a single frame of the footage coming under public scrutiny. :D



Very true.

I don't like Myers or Jason or any other killer because I feel sympathy for them, but because they are cool characters.
Damn straight...because murdering scores of innocent people is so cool.

Honestly, what's "cool" about these characters? The story is cool. That's why I like good horror films. But to my mind, there's nothing cool about a mass murderer. And yet, they're the characters that a majority of the fans fall completely gaga in love with. Why? Because they're cool? I don't think so.

WhiteZombie
03-25-2007, 07:26 PM
Damn straight...because murdering scores of innocent people is so cool.

Honestly, what's "cool" about these characters? The story is cool. That's why I like good horror films. But to my mind, there's nothing cool about a mass murderer. And yet, they're the characters that a majority of the fans fall completely gaga in love with. Why? Because they're cool? I don't think so.

A Zombie in a hockey mask, and a burnt up dream demon is pretty damn cool:bastard:

EvilOnTwoLegs
03-25-2007, 07:33 PM
A Zombie in a hockey mask, and a burnt up dream demon is pretty damn cool:bastard:
Oh yeah...what the hell was I thinkin'? haha

Frazetta
03-25-2007, 07:39 PM
A Zombie in a hockey mask
Everyone knows Jason was his best before the whole Zombie idea :nodsmile: .

EvilOnTwoLegs
03-25-2007, 07:53 PM
Everyone knows Jason was his best before the whole Zombie idea :nodsmile: .
Honestly, I even prefer Part 5's Pseudo-Jason to Zombie Jason. Especially with the lame-ass way he was (Dammit...why do I even have to say this?) reanimated (God, I feel dirty now) in Part 6. Yeah, Tommy...bring him his mask, then jam a big fucking metal rod through his body during a lightning storm. With the director being such a huge Frankenstein fan and all, I'm sure nothing bad will happen under those circumstances.

Stupid dumbfuck Tommy.

Frazetta
03-25-2007, 08:04 PM
Honestly, I even prefer Part 5's Pseudo-Jason to Zombie Jason. Especially with the lame-ass way he was (Dammit...why do I even have to say this?) reanimated (God, I feel dirty now) in Part 6. Yeah, Tommy...bring him his mask, then jam a big fucking metal rod through his body during a lightning storm. With the director being such a huge Frankenstein fan and all, I'm sure nothing bad will happen under those circumstances.

Stupid dumbfuck Tommy.
Cmon, ya gotta love the look on Tommy's face as Jason rises froim the grave. The look of 'Damn, I thought this was a fool proof plan!?!?!?"

EvilOnTwoLegs
03-25-2007, 08:27 PM
Cmon, ya gotta love the look on Tommy's face as Jason rises froim the grave. The look of 'Damn, I thought this was a fool proof plan!?!?!?"
Exactly...the awestruck expression of thorough dumbfuckery.

And How can you not love watching Jason kill Horshack? I kept expecting the poor bastard to start going "OOOOO-OOOOO-OOOOO!!!!!!" whilst Jason was dispatching him. :D

Frazetta
03-25-2007, 08:32 PM
Exactly...the awestruck expression of thorough dumbfuckery.

And How can you not love watching Jason kill Horshack? I kept expecting the poor bastard to start going "OOOOO-OOOOO-OOOOO!!!!!!" whilst Jason was dispatching him. :D
He should have yelled for Barbarino to give him a hand lol. This is another reason why I prefer Myers to Jason somuch. They never really went to these absurd lengths to show how Michael cameback in the next film. Or changed his look with each film.

SLAB
03-25-2007, 08:50 PM
Isn't there a Jason Lives thread already? ;) :p

Back on topic gents. :)

ChrisYorkville
03-25-2007, 08:53 PM
I wonder if this movie is going to be the typical hour and a half long horror movie or a 2 to 2 and a half hour movie.

EvilOnTwoLegs
03-25-2007, 09:10 PM
Isn't there a Jason Lives thread already? ;) :p

Back on topic gents. :)
Yeah, way to kill what could have been the best damn Jason-related threadjack since "Friday the 13th Part LXXXVI: Jason Snorts Blow and Fucks Hookers." :p

DonaldPismyHero
03-25-2007, 10:58 PM
I agree with this past disscussion. I really want Michael to be unlikeable in this movie. Even with his background, I want the veiwers to hate him. I want them to feel attached to the girls and Loomis. That makes for a much scarier, intense villan. Opposed to everyone rooting for Myers on screen, I want them to fear him and hope the victems gets away. The reason I am refering to the veiwers as "them" is because of what H-Feild Hero said:
"But the question we have to ask is: Is it too late? After nearly 30 years is Michael Myers so engrained in pop-culture that it's impossible for us to view him the same way he was viewed in the early years: Someone who scares the shit out of you".

All of us on this board surely have seen the Halloween movies tons of times, which may make it hard for us to veiw Myers as the evil villan. We've just grown to attached to him. Im just hoping Rob can break it. But general veiwers, and people not so familiar with the series on the other hand, may very well see this movie and have this Hatred for Myers that comes with him being a new, murderous character. Lets not forget, Myers has obviously become a big name in horror, but hes not even close to as known as Jason or Freddy (pop culture speaking). For them its become inpossible to be scary anymore. There to well known, and to unrealistic. Myers on the other hand is fairly on the "downlow", and in this movie, very realistic.



I agree with where you are coming from. Scout says in a lot of her interviews that Michael can be sort of sympathetic, but then again I think Rob is going for making you feel for the character, whether it be good or bad. I think after he starts knocking off bodies people with start to feel negative towards him. A lot of the pop culture ruins that for fans, which is sad.

Lucifer
03-26-2007, 12:30 AM
Really love this picture of the Myers house

http://www.ohmb.net/imagehosting/23446056c3b2a7a5.jpg

Myers Insurance
03-26-2007, 02:08 AM
I don't necessarily think of Myers as the most sympathetic character (I'm sure nearly everyone roots for Jamie in H4/H5), but I do think he's the reason people watch the Halloween films. Case in point: Halloween 3. It was the third best sequel in my opinion and had a lot of suspense, and it bombed simply because there was no Myers to kill everyone.

I remember when I first watched Resurrection with my friend, and she goes, "Are they trying to turn him into another Jason or Freddy?" I asked her what she meant, and she goes, "Well, he died in the last way, and they're trying to make it to where he didn't, which totally ruins the whole ending to H20."

Personally, I'm seeing the new way for a different reason than Myers: It's a Halloween film, and it's got Sheri Moon Zombie and Danielle Harris.

Khan
03-26-2007, 04:20 AM
Damn straight...because murdering scores of innocent people is so cool.

Honestly, what's "cool" about these characters? The story is cool. That's why I like good horror films. But to my mind, there's nothing cool about a mass murderer. And yet, they're the characters that a majority of the fans fall completely gaga in love with. Why? Because they're cool? I don't think so.

Our society is a interesting and twisted one, where a fictional mass murderer gets a rabid cult following.

Whether it be Jason, Freddy, Michael or whatever killer, people (me included) love to see them do some slicing and dicing on screen.

Call me sick and twisted, but it is some escapist fun.

renee30152
03-26-2007, 07:40 AM
I wonder if this movie is going to be the typical hour and a half long horror movie or a 2 to 2 and a half hour movie.

I am hoping two or in the most 2 1/2.:nodsmile:

The Kilted One
03-26-2007, 08:25 AM
I am hoping two or in the most 2 1/2.:nodsmile:

I'm hoping for it to be on the long side but, like you said, no longer than two and a half hours. That said, I feel like it might not be that long (although it needs to cover a crap-load of material). They may be editing this bad boy as we speak so, who knows...

freethy
03-26-2007, 09:04 AM
I've got a feeling the movie may seem rushed.

samhain51
03-26-2007, 09:05 AM
The original Halloween was 92 minutes Long . I think because we have his child hood we will be looking at the 2 hr mark!!!

Khan
03-26-2007, 09:16 AM
I've got a feeling the movie may seem rushed.

The adult attention span is incredibly short, and teens are worse.

This film will likely be heavily marketed to the younger crowds, so it won't an epic by a long shot.

Expect MTV-style editing with flashy rapid cuts.

nwiser
03-26-2007, 09:25 AM
(although it needs to cover a crap-load of material). ...

it definately is a lot more material than JC's original Halloween...which is a good reason why this project would have been better split up in to 2 films...one being the Halloween remake with the time frame of the original movie, and one being a prequel film in which he's able to fully explore Michaels childhood/past. Both films could be ~2 hours long and it would then be highly unlikely that anything would feel "left out".

With two movies, we could also have gotten the chance to see some background on and get to know the characters who would eventually die on Halloween night...allowing us to feel sympathy for them and perhaps see Michael as more of a villain...assuming the audience could be conditioned to like the characters in the prequel.

UnpleasantDream
03-26-2007, 09:29 AM
I don't think I've ever rooted for the villain but have still liked them you know. Like I always liked seeing Michael or Freddy on the screen and wanted more and more of them, but was still rooting for Nancy or Laurie or Jamie! I died when these characters were killed, I remember seeing Nancy die in NOES3 when I was still a kid, and I was crushed!!! haha! I definitley think the Halloween sequels are strongest when the characters are well sketched...I always said that the Halloween movies were my soap operas, loved following the family tree as it went down and the different reoccurring places or people in Haddonfield. I would say Halloween would be the series with the strongest background characters...minus resurrection of course.
When it comes to Rob's, I am totally psyched over the feel I get from the photos...it is definitley the right aura and I would go so far as to say that although very different, it's got the kind of feel H1 and H2 had...can't explain "feel" but you know what I mean. I also don't think people will root for Michael, I'm seeing as he's going to be more than just a one sided killing machine...he's going to be a bit more complex, and even though he's a horrible monster of course, we're gonna see a little more motive behind the monster...I'm all for it! In my opinion, my soap opera ended with H20 when Laurie did in her boogeyman...perfect ending, perfect closure. F Ressurrection, Zombie should have done this after H20!

EvilOnTwoLegs
03-26-2007, 09:35 AM
The adult attention span is incredibly short, and teens are worse.

This film will likely be heavily marketed to the younger crowds, so it won't an epic by a long shot.

Expect MTV-style editing with flashy rapid cuts.
Don't speak for me, pal! haha Honestly, I had a better attention span at the age of eight than most adults do today...specifically with regard to films. When I would go to the theater as a kid, I would sit the fuck down, shut the fuck up, and pay strict attention to the movie. No one had to tell me to do this. I knew that's why I was in the theater...to watch a movie. Not to talk, not to run around, not to climb on shit. I don't know why the hell most kids even want to go to the theater...they never seem to watch the damn movie.

Okay, that was a bit of a tangent, admittedly. haha But the fact is, not every adult or teen (or even pre-adolescent) attention span is short. It is a widespread issue, of course...and I'd say that the mass entertainment media (which includes news, as well, these days) is actually responsible for the ever decreasing general attention span. They don't just cater to it now...they created it. By turning everything into a sound bite...by the way they edit things...the use of flashy logos for every damn thing on the planet...catering to the lowest common denominator with constant light and noise. Due to this, more and more people are growing up with less and less need to focus on anything for more than ten seconds at a time.

That said, you're right. Studios do tend to treat all audiences, generally, as if they have ridiculously short attentions spans...whether they do or not. This is their way of trying to "appeal to a wider audience"...which essentially means making films in such a way that someone with a five-second attention span could pretty much follow the action. Which really gets annoying for those of us who actually have a better attention span than a coked-up terrier.

JamieLloydFan
03-26-2007, 10:14 AM
Don't speak for me, pal! haha Honestly, I had a better attention span at the age of eight than most adults do today...specifically with regard to films. When I would go to the theater as a kid, I would sit the fuck down, shut the fuck up, and pay strict attention to the movie. No one had to tell me to do this. I knew that's why I was in the theater...to watch a movie. Not to talk, not to run around, not to climb on shit. I don't know why the hell most kids even want to go to the theater...they never seem to watch the damn movie.

Okay, that was a bit of a tangent, admittedly. haha But the fact is, not every adult or teen (or even pre-adolescent) attention span is short. It is a widespread issue, of course...and I'd say that the mass entertainment media (which includes news, as well, these days) is actually responsible for the ever decreasing general attention span. They don't just cater to it now...they created it. By turning everything into a sound bite...by the way they edit things...the use of flashy logos for every damn thing on the planet...catering to the lowest common denominator with constant light and noise. Due to this, more and more people are growing up with less and less need to focus on anything for more than ten seconds at a time.



About 5 years ago I was in the theater and a Teenage couple started having sex two seats along from me. Theres a time and a place I thought, Rent a Room.

moviestud87
03-26-2007, 10:23 AM
ooh snaps lol someone was smoken weed next to me went i saw tmnt

JamieLloydFan
03-26-2007, 10:37 AM
ooh snaps lol someone was smoken weed next to me went i saw tmnt

I think i would need a joint to watch TMNT. Sure as hell did when i had to sit through the original one back in the day.

Khan
03-26-2007, 10:38 AM
That said, you're right. Studios do tend to treat all audiences, generally, as if they have ridiculously short attentions spans...whether they do or not. This is their way of trying to "appeal to a wider audience"...which essentially means making films in such a way that someone with a five-second attention span could pretty much follow the action. Which really gets annoying for those of us who actually have a better attention span than a coked-up terrier.

Yeah, the wide audience will want more style and less substance, so there is a good chance it will resemble a Scream movie.

The die-hard fans are in the minority in this situation.

JamieLloydFan
03-26-2007, 10:47 AM
Yeah, the wide audience will want more style and less substance, so there is a good chance it will resemble a Scream movie.

The die-hard fans are in the minority in this situation.

I'm really hoping that it doesn't resemble a Scream movie. Ok i know it usually boils down to the studio exec's, but how much freedom does Rob zombie have? Does he have Final cut?

Khan
03-26-2007, 10:52 AM
People like Spielberg and Lucas get final cut.

Let's not forget the Halloween 6 massacre.

JamieLloydFan
03-26-2007, 11:21 AM
People like Spielberg and Lucas get final cut.

Let's not forget the Halloween 6 massacre.
Did Carpenter have final cut on the Original?

I have never really thought of Rob Zombie as a musician as being really appealing to the MTV generation. HOATC and TDR were not really mainstream cinema either. So i wonder what type of deal he has struck up with the exec's at the studio? I dont think he is the type to completly sell out and take it in the rear from the studio monkey's.

Regarding Halloween 6 (Soz if a bit of Topic) I presume Joe Chapelle must have been smoking Crack when he went back and Butchered his own movie. Ok. I still think the Producer's cut would have been the better choice to release theatrically.

Roswell
03-26-2007, 11:31 AM
Yeah, the wide audience will want more style and less substance, so there is a good chance it will resemble a Scream movie.

The die-hard fans are in the minority in this situation.

I have my doubts that it will be a 'Scream-like' movie. Most of the audience may be looking for that, but I doubt that's what they'll get simply because I don't feel that that's the kind of movie Zombie is making.

So far I haven't seen anything to say that we'll have an H6 situation either. From what I've heard and already know, Zombie wouldn't have accepted the job had it been a situation where he would have studio suits breathing down his neck and forcing him to make cuts and do reshoots. Some directors would budge in a situation like that, but Zombie isn't one of them anymore (referring to Universal's treatment of House of 1000 Corpses). He's been screwed over once, so I don't think he would allow it to happen again.

EvilOnTwoLegs
03-26-2007, 11:33 AM
Yeah, the wide audience will want more style and less substance, so there is a good chance it will resemble a Scream movie.

The die-hard fans are in the minority in this situation.
Well, the one thing that's giving me some measure of hope in the current situation is that this film's director is a member of that minority. Granted, Dimension Films is a studio notorious for its interference, but I've heard no rumblings yet of anyone being dissatisfied with what's going on. Neither Dimension, nor Zombie. So until I hear of studio interference, I'll continue to hope for the best. If Dimension does decide to grab the reigns, however, I'll probably start seeing things more the way you do.

Still, I don't think that the film, as Zombie has shot it, will ever really resemble a Scream movie. There's only so much that can be done with editing and reshoots. True, it can seriously affect the tone of the film...but short of reshooting the entire thing (with a different director, as Zombie would no doubt resign in a fit of rage), I doubt they could use the bulk of Zombie's footage to craft a Scream-style film. Zombie hates "neo-horror" films, and I can't see him shooting anything that would fit into a Scream-style film.

Now, as I said, the editing is a different matter. If this film has the potential to be good, Dimension could seriously fuck it up by taking control of the editing. In which case, I see Zombie more than likely disowning it. The Alan Smithee pseudonym is no longer a DGA requirement, so Zombie could put whatever name he wanted on it...but I don't see him attaching his name to a project that was insanely compromised. Of course, everyone will know that Zombie directed it...but by taking his name off it, he'd be able to let audiences know that the final version of the film doesn't reflect his vision of Halloween. A small victory, I suppose...but I'm still hoping it won't come to that.

In the end, I continue to hope for the best...even if I don't necessarily expect it. After all, as a fan, I want this film to be good. If it isn't, I'll be disappointed...but that's nothing new for me, when it comes to Halloween films. So I'm pretty much on the fence about everything until the film comes out. Unless it's announced that Dimension is fucking with the film. That might knock me off the fence...because we all know how that goes every single time. Until then, though, I'll just be hoping that the studio has learned from their past mistakes (a stretch, I know) and leaves this one alone.

You may say that I'm a dreamer...but I'm not the only one. ;)

Khan
03-26-2007, 11:35 AM
Did Carpenter have final cut on the Original?

I have never really thought of Rob Zombie as a musician as being really appealing to the MTV generation. HOATC and TDR were not really mainstream cinema either. So i wonder what type of deal he has struck up with the exec's at the studio? I dont think he is the type to completly sell out and take it in the rear from the studio monkey's.

Regarding Halloween 6 (Soz if a bit of Topic) I presume Joe Chapelle must have been smoking Crack when he went back and Butchered his own movie. Ok. I still think the Producer's cut would have been the better choice to release theatrically.

Given the small nature of the original (only a $300,000 budget), Carpenter had full creative control.

Akkad said in 25 Years Of Terror that he was making a movie that cost that much per day when the heard of the idea.

For him, it wouldn't be a huge loss if the movie had flopped.

ghettomyers
03-26-2007, 12:11 PM
well when u feel the urge, u feel it bro

SLAB
03-26-2007, 12:12 PM
well when u feel the urge, u feel it bro

Sho, sho! :)

mcilroga
03-26-2007, 01:57 PM
Has this been posted yet?

According to Bloody-Disgusting, when you see the trailer with Grindhouse on April 6... you will simply see the name, and hear the theme song (wink).

http://www.bloody-disgusting.com/news/8439

If this is true, it royally sucks.

Khan
03-26-2007, 02:05 PM
Well that is a waste of a teaser!

They could come up with a lot more then that given the amount of time they have.

Then again, this is probably just a ploy to get people pissed off.

Frazetta
03-26-2007, 02:12 PM
I don't have a problem with that being the teaser because, well, it's a fucking teaser! All it's there for is to get ppl that don't know about the movie to sit up & take notice. And seeing that classic title & hearing that classic theme is the perfect way to do it. If I could add onething to it I'd at least put in a shot of young Daeg's face slowly changing into the classic mask.

Man In Black
03-26-2007, 02:14 PM
From someone who worked on the film:
"The newest teaser trailer version for this is awesome... made ME excited to see the damn thing and I've already seen 90% of the movie."

Daeg Faerch:
"At the party we watched (repeatedly) the Halloween trailer, it is killer!"

Tyler Mane also said the trailer he saw was awesome. Now, obviously these people work on the movie so they are bias towards it, but that's not what I'm getting at. I doubt they would get excited purely for a title card and theme music teaser...who knows?

The Kilted One
03-26-2007, 02:15 PM
Has this been posted yet?

According to Bloody-Disgusting, when you see the trailer with Grindhouse on April 6... you will simply see the name, and hear the theme song (wink).

http://www.bloody-disgusting.com/news/8439

If this is true, it royally sucks.

Folks were belly-aching about that back in discussion III... we decided that they meant that the title would just show as "Halloween" and not "RZ's Halloween"... but we were never sure.

nwiser
03-26-2007, 02:50 PM
Tyler Mane also said the trailer he saw was awesome.?

dont forget he also said Michael was previously a one-dimensional character. :eek:

Khan
03-26-2007, 02:56 PM
dont forget he also said Michael was previously a one-dimensional character. :eek:

Mane is the least reliable person involved in the movie.

dragon4kody
03-26-2007, 02:56 PM
This isn't 1982. Anyone going to a "Halloween" film is going to see Myers butcher some kids up. The substance ended after "H3", where they actually wanted to give the characters some depth.

As for this film, I like Rob's first two films, and I have faith that this will finally be the true boost the franchise has needed & fans have been looking for the "Halloween" franchise, since 1988.

Amen to that. I am one of the many who do go the movies to see Michael. And this is something we need. I support Rob and his troops.

Man In Black
03-26-2007, 03:00 PM
Tyler Mane's opinions on how he interperates characters and how good he thinks trailer's are wasn't my reason for the posting - just helping out on the "title card and theme music" teaser. Doesn't matter.

Khan
03-26-2007, 03:22 PM
I saw that as well.

Hopefully the the trailer does indeed have a little more to it.

MM41
03-26-2007, 03:40 PM
I think it will, they cannot simply be hyped from one simple teaser with just a name and music! I think it'll be good, but I will wait for it to hit youtube and whatnot because I do not want to go watch grindhouse..dont ask why just not into it lol.

Johnathon
03-26-2007, 04:16 PM
I saw that as well.

Hopefully the the trailer does indeed have a little more to it.

Commenting on your "The Beyond" avatar, I saw that film at a Grindhouse Film Festival on Saturday.

Anyway, judging from the recent updates like stills and the highly anticipated teaser trailer, I totally cannot wait for this film. Though, I'm not impressed with Tyler Mane's comments on Michael Myers in previous films. I don't get why some people think Michael Myers is one dimensional because he's a silent killer. Michael's actions in the films seem to give him his personality.

Todd
03-26-2007, 05:33 PM
Commenting on your "The Beyond" avatar, I saw that film at a Grindhouse Film Festival on Saturday.

Anyway, judging from the recent updates like stills and the highly anticipated teaser trailer, I totally cannot wait for this film. Though, I'm not impressed with Tyler Mane's comments on Michael Myers in previous films. I don't get why some people think Michael Myers is one dimensional because he's a silent killer. Michael's actions in the films seem to give him his personality.
Yeah, Manes comments kind of bothered me, too.
Not a lot, but still.....
Michael was a prankster in the original, which definitely gave him more personality that Tyler seems to understand.

Khan
03-26-2007, 05:49 PM
Commenting on your "The Beyond" avatar, I saw that film at a Grindhouse Film Festival on Saturday.

Lucky you!

I had to get a burned DVD of it.

On the topic of Mane, this attitude of his really does concern me, not to mention the fact that he disrespected all of the people who have previously played Myers.

shoe1985
03-26-2007, 06:07 PM
I have my doubts that it will be a 'Scream-like' movie. Most of the audience may be looking for that, but I doubt that's what they'll get simply because I don't feel that that's the kind of movie Zombie is making.

So far I haven't seen anything to say that we'll have an H6 situation either. From what I've heard and already know, Zombie wouldn't have accepted the job had it been a situation where he would have studio suits breathing down his neck and forcing him to make cuts and do reshoots. Some directors would budge in a situation like that, but Zombie isn't one of them anymore (referring to Universal's treatment of House of 1000 Corpses). He's been screwed over once, so I don't think he would allow it to happen again.

Actually the Execs where watching this movie very closely. They will until it is released. Unlike most remakes, they want this one to succeed because of Halloween, the original, being considered so great, they want this one to be too. I haven't heard much lately, but I know things have gone pretty well.

Khan
03-26-2007, 06:32 PM
Actually the Execs where watching this movie very closely. They will until it is released. Unlike most remakes, they want this one to succeed because of Halloween, the original, being considered so great, they want this one to be too. I haven't heard much lately, but I know things have gone pretty well.

Yeah, I just can't imagine the executives taking a step back and saying, "Rob, do whatever the heck you want to do! No reshoots or meddlng. You haven't done a box office smash but we don't care."

EvilOnTwoLegs
03-26-2007, 06:43 PM
Yeah, Manes comments kind of bothered me, too.
Not a lot, but still.....
Michael was a prankster in the original, which definitely gave him more personality that Tyler seems to understand.
Any actor who takes on a previously established role is going to go out of his/her way to tell people that they're doing something different with it (even if they're not, in some cases)...more than anything, just to justify the fact that they've been cast in a role that's been done by someone else. They always want to say "I'm bringing more to this role than you've ever seen and blah blah blah...." Again, this is standard actor procedure. And part of the reason for that is that actors have to make themselves believe that...otherwise, they worry too much about their performances. Let's face it...performers tend to be insecure about that kind of shit. And since Mane is a "wrestler-turned-actor," I'd say he probably has that problem, deep down.

The Kilted One
03-26-2007, 06:49 PM
Any actor who takes on a previously established role is going to go out of his/her way to tell people that they're doing something different with it (even if they're not, in some cases)...more than anything, just to justify the fact that they've been cast in a role that's been done by someone else. They always want to say "I'm bringing more to this role than you've ever seen and blah blah blah...." Again, this is standard actor procedure. And part of the reason for that is that actors have to make themselves believe that...otherwise, they worry too much about their performances. Let's face it...performers tend to be insecure about that kind of shit. And since Mane is a "wrestler-turned-actor," I'd say he probably has that problem, deep down.

Yea. Yea, you know deep down, I'm sure that's true...

Todd
03-26-2007, 07:03 PM
Any actor who takes on a previously established role is going to go out of his/her way to tell people that they're doing something different with it (even if they're not, in some cases)...more than anything, just to justify the fact that they've been cast in a role that's been done by someone else. They always want to say "I'm bringing more to this role than you've ever seen and blah blah blah...." Again, this is standard actor procedure. And part of the reason for that is that actors have to make themselves believe that...otherwise, they worry too much about their performances. Let's face it...performers tend to be insecure about that kind of shit. And since Mane is a "wrestler-turned-actor," I'd say he probably has that problem, deep down.
That's certainly true, but Manes comments weren't that big of a deal to me. I'm glad he wants his version of Michael to have a little more on the ball. I just think he missed some things from the original. For instance, Michael using a sheet and Bobs glasses to trick Linda, and his setting up the Wallace bedroom to scare the shit out of Laurie before trying to kill her. That showed more presence of mind than Mane seems to give Mikey credit for. It's all good with me, though. As long as his Michael kicks ass on screen, I'll come away feeling fine.

EvilOnTwoLegs
03-26-2007, 07:12 PM
That's certainly true, but Manes comments weren't that big of a deal to me. I'm glad he wants his version of Michael to have a little more on the ball. I just think he missed some things from the original. For instance, Michael using a sheet and Bobs glasses to trick Linda, and his setting up the Wallace bedroom to scare the shit out of Laurie before trying to kill her. That showed more presence of mind than Mane seems to give Mikey credit for. It's all good with me, though. As long as his Michael kicks ass on screen, I'll come away feeling fine.
Well, that somewhat narrow view probably comes from focusing mainly on one goal: To make his own performance "different" and viable. Mane seems to be having a blast playing the role, which I think bodes well. He's obviously really into it.

I just think that sometimes, people put too much stock in what actors say in these situations. Their main job, as they see it, is to sell people on the film they're working on...and of course, their own performance in it. And a lot of times they say things that seem odd or wrong or even insane. haha That's just "The Biz." I know it doesn't bother you too much, but I think some people are taking his comments too much to heart. Just as they have with other actors who've said things in interviews lately.

The thing is, we pick these interviews apart because we're Halloween fanatics. But we're not the only people these interviews are aimed at. They're trying to bring in new viewers...hoping to get the numbers up at the box office. So it's natural that we'll nitpick everything that's said...but we have to take actors' comments with a grain of salt.

Frazetta
03-26-2007, 07:27 PM
Well, that somewhat narrow view probably comes from focusing mainly on one goal: To make his own performance "different" and viable. Mane seems to be having a blast playing the role, which I think bodes well. He's obviously really into it. I think you can say that about the 5 main Actors in this movie (Mane, Scout, Daeg & Malcolm) which I think will translate beautifully onscreen.

moviestud87
03-26-2007, 08:13 PM
trailer sounds like it may be a ball tease... but who cares!!!! its stil something!!! better then anything... at least it will have the music!!! :)

Shamrock-Robot
03-26-2007, 09:02 PM
I think people are taking Tyler Manes comments too seriously, I think the only thing Tyler is doing is trying to hype up his portrayal of Michael Myers, There is no point in getting bent out of shape over what he said because its no big deal, Wait until you see the movie first.

DonaldPismyHero
03-26-2007, 09:44 PM
I think people are taking Tyler Manes comments too seriously, I think the only thing Tyler is doing is trying to hype up his portrayal of Michael Myers, There is no point in getting bent out of shape over what he said because its no big deal, Wait until you see the movie first.


Church. We try to over-analyze actor's comments way too much guys. Let's wait until the film comes out.

Eric616
03-27-2007, 04:17 AM
New pic from Scouts Myspace
http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j289/slaveass/Picture069.jpg

TommyDoyle2
03-27-2007, 04:20 AM
But anyways, the whole 'rooting for Michael' thing is something I've always hated and can't say I ever took part in.

Me neither. I mean, he tried to slit an 8 year old girls throat. No love from me. I don't care how much of a dick John Strode was.

Scout btw is a very pretty girl...

nwiser
03-27-2007, 04:42 AM
Scout btw is a very pretty girl...

She's cute...but it looks like she's got a bit of a Jay Leno chin going on...at least in the pic in post #81.

shoe1985
03-27-2007, 05:17 AM
The thing is, we pick these interviews apart because we're Halloween fanatics. But we're not the only people these interviews are aimed at. They're trying to bring in new viewers...hoping to get the numbers up at the box office. So it's natural that we'll nitpick everything that's said...but we have to take actors' comments with a grain of salt.

If you notice most of the time spent on this movie is trying to get the MTV audience involved. I have heard the Execs really want the younger people to see this movie so it will be something they will be talking about in 20-30 years, like we are doing with the oldies. Although, it doesn't seem to be working too well. A lot of the teens are asking how much blood will be in the movie, and how Michael will kill the people, example would be: Does he chop them up?


I think you can say that about the 5 main Actors in this movie (Mane, Scout, Daeg & Malcolm) which I think will translate beautifully onscreen.

I count 4 people, who is the 5th?

Just a joke really.

Khan
03-27-2007, 05:36 AM
If you notice most of the time spent on this movie is trying to get the MTV audience involved. I have heard the Execs really want the younger people to see this movie so it will be something they will be talking about in 20-30 years, like we are doing with the oldies. Although, it doesn't seem to be working too well. A lot of the teens are asking how much blood will be in the movie, and how Michael will kill the people, example would be: Does he chop them up?

Yes, and the MTV audience wants buckets of blood, music video editing and brutal kills.

They don't care about the thinks that the hardcore fans tend to focus on, and are the majority of the paying audience.

nwiser
03-27-2007, 05:51 AM
If you notice most of the time spent on this movie is trying to get the MTV audience involved.

not that I would wanna see this...but if they really wanted to get the MTV audience and elder teeny-boppers...they'd have do some sort of Dawsons Creek in Haddonfield. I know people in college even who are still watching laguna Beach...a show which makes me want to throw the tv out the window. The MTV crowd is more into shows about relationships and teen issues...which would kill the mood of Halloween. For example:

From the Diary of Michael Myers: "Dear diary...today I sat next to Billy on the school bus, and he wouldnt lend me his cell phone, so I killed him with my protractor. I think Jenny likes me...she sent me a text message in class asking what the answer to # 16 was and signed it with X's and O's". She still doesnt have a date to the prom...I wonder if she'd go with me. I really like her eyes. Tomorrow i think I'll cut them out. :) "

Todd 78
03-27-2007, 07:14 AM
Me neither. I mean, he tried to slit an 8 year old girls throat. No love from me. I don't care how much of a dick John Strode was.

Scout btw is a very pretty girl...

I agree with the expetion of Part 8, but the midway point I started rooting for Michael. That has more to do with the losers he was trying to killt than himself.

And Yes Scoutis a cutie

mannylb88
03-27-2007, 07:52 AM
i'll tell you, the last time i was afraid of Michael was H2. After that the only exception was H2O. Scenes like the mother stopping in the bathroom with her daughter and Michael stealing her purse and looking at her through the crevice of the stall really felt like i was watching the old Michael.

but as far as H4, H5, H6 and H:R, i was rooting for Michael, not for him to kill Jamie and Stephen Lloyd, but anyone else was fair game. Thank god Tina fucking died, i hated that dumb bitch.

EvilOnTwoLegs
03-27-2007, 08:33 AM
i'll tell you, the last time i was afraid of Michael was H2. After that the only exception was H2O. Scenes like the mother stopping in the bathroom with her daughter and Michael stealing her purse and looking at her through the crevice of the stall really felt like i was watching the old Michael.
As much as I like some of the sequels, I think Myers was really only scary in the original. He had a few moments in the sequels...but overall, the original presented the only incarnation of Michael that I felt was thoroughly effective on that level.

TommyDoyle2
03-27-2007, 08:33 AM
Thank god Tina fucking died, i hated that dumb bitch.

Tell us how you really feel :bastard:

Shamrock-Robot
03-27-2007, 09:37 AM
She's cute...but it looks like she's got a bit of a Jay Leno chin going on...at least in the pic in post #81.

A Jay Leno Chin :bigeyes:, Wow your really digging deep to criticize on this film arent you.

freethy
03-27-2007, 10:25 AM
A Jay Leno Chin :bigeyes:, Wow your really digging deep to criticize on this film arent you.

I'm starting to think nwiser actually means none the wiser.

nwiser
03-27-2007, 10:34 AM
A Jay Leno Chin :bigeyes:, Wow your really digging deep to criticize on this film arent you.

someone said she was beautiful...I saw the pic...saw the chin sticking out there...and figured I'd point it out. It isnt a knock on the film as much as STC...and even then it's not that much of a knock.

Dark Vampire
03-27-2007, 10:38 AM
someone said she was beautiful...I saw the pic...saw the chin sticking out there...and figured I'd point it out. It isnt a knock on the film as much as STC...and even then it's not that much of a knock.Like I said in the last thread I donít find her attractive at all

ILoveHalloween3
03-27-2007, 10:46 AM
All the women in this film are beautiful.

Good looking cast, including Dee Wallace & Sybil Danning.

JKwinter
03-27-2007, 01:02 PM
I'm kind of interested in learning why MM(Mane's) hands are so fricking dirty. The original showed a rather diligently clean Michael Myers. Looks like he'd dipped his hands in a pig sty. (Post 81)

Roswell
03-27-2007, 01:31 PM
I'm kind of interested in learning why MM(Mane's) hands are so fricking dirty. The original showed a rather diligently clean Michael Myers. Looks like he'd dipped his hands in a pig sty. (Post 81)

Killing people isn't exactly a clean job.

Myers Insurance
03-27-2007, 01:34 PM
Especially in a film this gory.

Khan
03-27-2007, 01:35 PM
Probably from all of the blood and gore that Rob said wouldn't be in the movie.

Roswell
03-27-2007, 01:38 PM
Probably from all of the blood and gore that Rob said wouldn't be in the movie.

:rolleyes:

To be honest, I don't remember Rob saying there wouldn't be blood in this film. He'd be silly not to put some blood in the movie. I mean, after all, this is a slasher film.

mcilroga
03-27-2007, 01:43 PM
Probably from all of the blood and gore that Rob said wouldn't be in the movie.

Hey, didn't you say you'd stop complaining?

Zombie was only being realistic here. It's only natural that a serial killer gets a little blood/dirt on him. In the original, Myers was in tip top shape, clean as a new penny... which is fine, for that film.

Man In Black
03-27-2007, 01:48 PM
Guys, keep checking the front page for updates in the next few days and weeks RE: the movie. I'm not sure its really worth posting them in this thread anymore as they would likely get lost quite quickly.
Steve

Roswell
03-27-2007, 01:53 PM
Guys, keep checking the front page for updates in the next few days and weeks RE: the movie. I'm not sure its really worth posting them in this thread anymore as they would likely get lost quite quickly.
Steve

Will do, MIB. Thanks for the updates.

Monte
03-27-2007, 02:01 PM
I'm kind of interested in learning why MM(Mane's) hands are so fricking dirty. The original showed a rather diligently clean Michael Myers. Looks like he'd dipped his hands in a pig sty. (Post 81)

Rob took away Michael's Irish Spring for this film.

WhiteZombie
03-27-2007, 02:06 PM
Probably from all of the blood and gore that Rob said wouldn't be in the movie.

Hes a serial killer. He's spent the night killing. No matter what, realisticaly, unless your showering all night, your going to get bloody and dirty. This is a horror/slasher movie, there obviously going to be blood. That doesent mean ripped apart bodys etc.

JKwinter
03-27-2007, 02:22 PM
I figured, indeed, it stands that a little dirt would be involved if it meant Michael was, you know, getting in there and getting his hands dirty and all; the reason I posted was because in the picture, his hands look virtually charred. I'm a 'pro-Halloween-remake advocate,' so the picture and its clues just added a little more to my avid and anxious curiosity.

Shamrock-Robot
03-27-2007, 02:28 PM
What do you people expect for him to stab people and Ice Cream and Sprinkles spray out, Just because there is blood in the film doesnt necessarily mean its going to be gory, Killings a messy thing thats what makes this more realistic.

Khan
03-27-2007, 02:43 PM
We have heard reports saying that the movie is incredibly bloody (Mane) and not excessively bloody (Harris and Zombie).

I am a gorehound, so I welcome piles of guts in most cases, but some movies don't need it.

Yes, blood is necessary, just not buckets of it.

EDIT:

I had a really bad day, so I probably just vented.

mattnotis
03-27-2007, 04:22 PM
New pic from Scouts Myspace
http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j289/slaveass/Picture069.jpg

Now that's just a little slice of adorable right there.

Inhumane
03-27-2007, 04:30 PM
The original Halloween was 92 minutes Long . I think because we have his child hood we will be looking at the 2 hr mark!!!

Hmmmm ...

Ok, here's some useless math:

On average the "Halloween" movies ran 91 minutes.

"Halloween I - V" ran an average of 93 minutes.

"Halloween VI - VIII" (the Dimension films) ran an average of 89 minutes.

The average Rob Zombie film (based on 'House' and 'Rejects') run 99 minutes.

My guess will be it will fall in between the average 'Halloween' runtime and Zombie's average runtime. I'll predict 95 minutes for the theatrical release and 98 minutes for the inevitable Unrated DVD release.

However, Dimension is known to butcher up their horror releases for an under 90 minutes run time. In recent years, they have butchered "Black Christmas" (to 84 minutes), "Pulse" (89 minutes), "Venom" (85 minutes), "The Prophecy: Forsaken" (75 minutes), "Dracula III: Legacy" (85 minutes), "Hellraiser: Deader" (88 minutes) .... I think you get the idea. Sadly, Dimension rarely ever allows a filmmaker to make the film they want. Unless there names are as bankable as Quentin Tarantino and Robert Rodriguez, Dimension treat their filmmakers (and generally the films themselves) like shit. Hopefully, that will not be something Zombie will have to deal with. Whether the film turns out good or bad, I'd like the responsiblity to lie solely on Zombie's shoulders.

Khan
03-27-2007, 04:46 PM
Wow, they really have control issues.

Plus, as good as TDR was, it was not a box office smash.

Both 1000 Corpses and TDr made double their budgets back, but the total take was less then $20 million each time.

MMyers89
03-27-2007, 04:54 PM
...98 minutes for the inevitable Unrated DVD release.

Wow, that just made me realize, that this may very well be the first Halloween movie we get that will have an un-rated version available. Cool.

scoob
03-27-2007, 05:16 PM
I agree with you Inhumane in that thinking it will last 95-100 mins max. I would love a 2 hour Halloween but I cant see that happening.

I dont think its going to be exactly a slow moving start either with all the prequal and Michael in the sanitarium prequal scenes. I actually would prefer a slow and suspensful first half, if we're getting to know Michael Myers mind more I would be entertained by the more psychological kind of horror then an out an out slasher/gore fest. That can all come when he gets out.
From what we probably have read or whatnot

he kills 5 of his family in the opening act

which sounds to me like its going to be pretty chaotic from the get go.

Of course its all rumours and blah blib blab but I am very much looking forward to seeing it.

H-Field Hero
03-27-2007, 05:59 PM
The 2003 Halloween convention featured a panel of all of the men who played Michael Myers (except for Castle). Most of these guys (particularly Wilbur) were just kind of "blah" about the whole thing. Shanks showed some enthusiasm, but that's about it. It just seemed like something these guys did because they wanted a paycheck. Tyler Mane, by contrast, seems to be really loving his time during this shoot. From reading his blogs and looking at pictures he really seems to be into the whole thing... Kind of like when Kane Hodder played Jason (Although I hope Mane doesn't take it that seriously like Hodder). So do you guys think that genuine enthusiasm for the role will enhance the performance or ultimately make no difference?

... just trying to toss questions out to you guys to take the convo in new areas.

scoob
03-27-2007, 06:15 PM
I've been really impressed with Tyler Mane and he has atleast bothered to write on his myspace page about the shoot and seems really enthusiastic about it. He seems a really nice guy and I hope he does well, it seems like he is loving the job and wouldnt hesitate to reprise the role should that happen.
(Mind you, I wouldnt expect him to say its been a nightmare working on the film but at least he is building the film up.)

I am interested to see if and how this Myers version acts. Hes bound to be compared to previous, but since this is more focused on what is going on in his head, then I would have thought hes going to have to act more then any Myers actor/stuntman has before.
I always thought whoever played Myers previously did a good job and kept it simple and as familiar to the original as possible. Thats probably not too difficult to do but it will be fascinating to see how this one works out.

I got to say I dont think Tyler meant to insult anyone when he was talking about this being a shapeless Myers. I think maybe he was saying this one has more character, more of a role in the film then what the previous have played. Instead of being told to walk-kill-tilt the head and duplicate the original as much as possible, it would sound like he has a bigger role to play this time. Im thinking maybe the sanitarium scenes, the escape for one.

Khan
03-27-2007, 06:23 PM
He doesn't seem to understand the way Myers was portrayed in the previous movies by a long shot, but I suppose it is good that he is enthusiastic about playing the role himself.

Todd
03-27-2007, 06:24 PM
The 2003 Halloween convention featured a panel of all of the men who played Michael Myers (except for Castle). Most of these guys (particularly Wilbur) were just kind of "blah" about the whole thing. Shanks showed some enthusiasm, but that's about it. It just seemed like something these guys did because they wanted a paycheck. Tyler Mane, by contrast, seems to be really loving his time during this shoot. From reading his blogs and looking at pictures he really seems to be into the whole thing... Kind of like when Kane Hodder played Jason (Although I hope Mane doesn't take it that seriously like Hodder). So do you guys think that genuine enthusiasm for the role will enhance the performance or ultimately make no difference?

... just trying to toss questions out to you guys to take the convo in new areas.
I know what you're saying about the former "Michaels" who were
at that convention. Just from watching the H25 documentary, it was apparent that most of them had about a thousand places they would have rather been. I thought Warlock and Shanks seemed happy to be there, though.
As far as Tyler Manes enthusiasm for the role, it can't hurt. Your point about the possibility of him going overboard is well taken, however. I get the feeling that Kane Hodder actually thinks he is Jason. Hopefully, Tyler won't get that carried away.

DeanCorso
03-27-2007, 06:27 PM
Hmmmm ...

Ok, here's some useless math:

On average the "Halloween" movies ran 91 minutes.

"Halloween I - V" ran an average of 93 minutes.

"Halloween VI - VIII" (the Dimension films) ran an average of 89 minutes.

The average Rob Zombie film (based on 'House' and 'Rejects') run 99 minutes.

My guess will be it will fall in between the average 'Halloween' runtime and Zombie's average runtime. I'll predict 95 minutes for the theatrical release and 98 minutes for the inevitable Unrated DVD release.

However, Dimension is known to butcher up their horror releases for an under 90 minutes run time. In recent years, they have butchered "Black Christmas" (to 84 minutes), "Pulse" (89 minutes), "Venom" (85 minutes), "The Prophecy: Forsaken" (75 minutes), "Dracula III: Legacy" (85 minutes), "Hellraiser: Deader" (88 minutes) .... I think you get the idea. Sadly, Dimension rarely ever allows a filmmaker to make the film they want. Unless there names are as bankable as Quentin Tarantino and Robert Rodriguez, Dimension treat their filmmakers (and generally the films themselves) like shit. Hopefully, that will not be something Zombie will have to deal with. Whether the film turns out good or bad, I'd like the responsiblity to lie solely on Zombie's shoulders.


And Lets not forget that Dimension Films demanded Wes Craven and Kevin Williamson to reshoot "Cursed", i dont mean to be disrespectful to Rob Zombie but he doesnt exactly have a director reputation (stature) like Wes Craven have... if they asked Wes to reshoot his movie, they certainly can do the same with Rob Zombie (he's no exception).

JKwinter
03-27-2007, 06:32 PM
What do you people expect for him to stab people and Ice Cream and Sprinkles spray out, Just because there is blood in the film doesnt necessarily mean its going to be gory, Killings a messy thing thats what makes this more realistic.

That' real funny: Ice Cream and Sprinkles. :yar:

Frazetta
03-27-2007, 06:34 PM
Probably from all of the blood and gore that Rob said wouldn't be in the movie. But he did say that there will be blood in this movie, more than in the original, just that the film wouldn't rely on it.

Frazetta
03-27-2007, 06:37 PM
I count 4 people, who is the 5th?

Just a joke really. Whoops...forgot to put Brad Dourif's name in there lol.

Todd
03-27-2007, 06:39 PM
Rob said he wanted a more realistic Michael, and let's face it, slaughtering people with a butcher knife would probably get kind of messy.

H-Field Hero
03-27-2007, 07:07 PM
He doesn't seem to understand the way Myers was portrayed in the previous movies by a long shot, but I suppose it is good that he is enthusiastic about playing the role himself.Just because he's doing the right thing and not copying the way Myers was portrayed in the previous movies (which varied from film to film anyways) doesn't mean he doesn't understand it.
I get the feeling that Kane Hodder actually thinks he is Jason.haha, True dat!

The Kilted One
03-27-2007, 07:22 PM
I get the feeling that Kane Hodder actually thinks he is Jason.

The guy has "Kill" tatooed on the inside of his lower lip, I'd say that was a pretty damn good sign.

MyersFan75
03-27-2007, 07:25 PM
The guy has "Kill" tatooed on the inside of his lower lip, I'd say that was a pretty damn good sign.


:roflmao:

Point and case.

ghettomyers
03-27-2007, 07:31 PM
well i was goin to meet him at the signing thing but im not now hell na! he might try to choke slam me or somtin and i aint no small dude

shoe1985
03-27-2007, 08:45 PM
From what I hear it is more bloody than the usual Halloween movie, but not as bad as most horror movies these days. It is much more violent then the original. From the latest talks with my buddy, it seems this is really almost a whole new movie with almost no resemblance to the original except for small details here and there, so Rob was truthful to us. Be ready for a NEW Halloween soon. I am actually excited because I hear it uses the holiday theme much better than the first one did.

o.n.i.x
03-27-2007, 08:54 PM
What do you people expect for him to stab people and Ice Cream and Sprinkles spray out, Just because there is blood in the film doesnt necessarily mean its going to be gory, Killings a messy thing thats what makes this more realistic.

Hee. Oh, the cute mental images. Pretty.

Shamrock-Robot
03-27-2007, 10:01 PM
From what I hear it is more bloody than the usual Halloween movie, but not as bad as most horror movies these days. It is much more violent then the original. From the latest talks with my buddy, it seems this is really almost a whole new movie with almost no resemblance to the original except for small details here and there, so Rob was truthful to us. Be ready for a NEW Halloween soon. I am actually excited because I hear it uses the holiday theme much better than the first one did.

Im glad to hear that, One thing that was always on my mind was how well Rob will use the holiday theme, After seeing how well Rob used the Halloween Holiday theme in House Of 1000 Corpses im pretty sure he will use it well in this film.

Man In Black
03-27-2007, 10:37 PM
About his hands - I'm sure its a lot to do with blood. You stab someone at close quarters and they'll probably bleed on you. But I think his hands also seem...
Muddy. We've seen the picture of Tyler with Ezra, so it seems there is a scene in the grave yard, where he will remove the Myers headstone, probably digging around it with his hands.

I saw an animated gif from Halloween 5, where is slowed down the kill of Samantha and you can see blood flick on Myers' mask...which he obviously cleaned before leaving the barn - the new Myers doesn't seem as vain.

Talking of animated gifs, I'll be making a ton of these (both static and animated) if anyone wants to use them.
http://i148.photobucket.com/albums/s18/maninblack2007/trickortreat.gif

Glad to hear about the Holiday theme though - did Resurrection even take place on Halloween?:D Oh, yes - the costume party.

Man In Black
03-27-2007, 10:42 PM
Cool pic of Loomis & Laurie - I'll stick it in spoilers just incase:
http://img135.imageshack.us/img135/2028/loomislauriekx8.jpg

MyersFan75
03-27-2007, 10:43 PM
About his hands - I'm sure its a lot to do with blood. You stab someone at close quarters and they'll probably bleed on you. But I think his hands also seem...
Muddy. We've seen the picture of Tyler with Ezra, so it seems there is a scene in the grave yard, where he will remove the Myers headstone, probably digging around it with his hands.

I saw an animated gif from Halloween 5, where is slowed down the kill of Samantha and you can see blood flick on Myers' mask...which he obviously cleaned before leaving the barn - the new Myers doesn't seem as vain.

Talking of animated gifs, I'll be making a ton of these (both static and animated) if anyone wants to use them.
http://i148.photobucket.com/albums/s18/maninblack2007/trickortreat.gif

Glad to hear about the Holiday theme though - did Resurrection even take place on Halloween?:D Oh, yes - the costume party.

Pretty neat gif. Really get's me excited for some reason. Ha! :han:

scoob
03-27-2007, 10:43 PM
I hated HOTC but have to admit he decorated well.

I expect this to be completly different which is why I am looking forward to it and partly dreading it at the same time.

Monte
03-27-2007, 10:44 PM
Anyone who's ever gotten the slightest pin prick knows just how damn much even the tiniest of wounds can bleed like all holy hell. Realistically speaking, Michael should have looked like this at the end of the original movie.

MyersFan75
03-27-2007, 10:44 PM
Cool pic of Loomis & Laurie - I'll stick it in spoilers just incase:
http://img135.imageshack.us/img135/2028/loomislauriekx8.jpg

Where'd you find that? Awesome picture. Looks like the two will work well on screen.

I'm not digging the albino facial hair on McDowell, though. Only beef I have.

JackPumpkinhead
03-27-2007, 11:16 PM
Cool pic of Loomis & Laurie - I'll stick it in spoilers just incase:
http://img135.imageshack.us/img135/2028/loomislauriekx8.jpg

I love that picture. It's nice to see Scout showing some emotion. Most of what we have seen of her in pics is her bubbly side.

Man In Black
03-27-2007, 11:55 PM
Where'd you find that? Awesome picture. Looks like the two will work well on screen.

I'm not digging the albino facial hair on McDowell, though. Only beef I have.

Suprisingly it was on IMDb:D It was surrounded by the favorites such as "raping a classic", "Zombie's A Hack" and "What about Thorn" but I just noticed it before closing the browser:bastard:


I love that picture. It's nice to see Scout showing some emotion. Most of what we have seen of her in pics is her bubbly side.

Yeah:
Looks like she's wearing Loomis' trenchcoat too

Lucifer
03-28-2007, 02:23 AM
Thats a good picture

nwiser
03-28-2007, 02:45 AM
My guess will be it will fall in between the average 'Halloween' runtime and Zombie's average runtime. I'll predict 95 minutes for the theatrical release and 98 minutes for the inevitable Unrated DVD release.

lets hope your math is wrong. assuming its done right, there's way too much information to cover in 90 minutes.

nwiser
03-28-2007, 03:35 AM
he kills 5 of his family in the opening act

unless I saw a different movie, that didnt happen in the original. so if the above is true, i guess its not just a re-imagining...but a rewrite of history.

It's cool to add more backstory...fill in the gaps of what we never saw in JC's original, and even make minor changes to reflect the personality of the particular director, but to make a major change like that is disrespectful to the fans of original film.

Man In Black
03-28-2007, 04:41 AM
Speak for yourself, sir. I love the original movie and have for 15 years and I don't feel disrespected one bit about trivial things like that. My love for the original will not and cannot be changed via anything in this movie in the same way it didn't by pieces of poop like Resurrection. If it did, maybe I didn't have much faith in it in the first place.

I personally don't think changing dates, order of victims or characters ages is disrespectful either. If anything the changes are there to add difference and make it its own movie and not associate it with past continuity.

MIB, speaking for himself, by the way.

P.S. My interest in this movie is quite big - I want to watch it - I want to judge it on its own merits and having a webpage listing news and such is neither here or there. I used to run a Resurrection website back in the day. The movie was the pits, but I still enjoyed working on it.

nwiser
03-28-2007, 05:52 AM
Speak for yourself, sir. I love the original movie and have for 15 years and I don't feel disrespected one bit about trivial things like that.

I guess the issue is what is really "trivial"? Like I said...theres not really a problem with a director making minor changes to reflect their own tastes, but killing off 4 additional family members...in the first few moments of the movie, when Judith was the only one who died in the original movie doesnt seem trivial.

Suppose if instead of that, RZ made Laurie one of adult Michaels first victims, and centered the events of the remaining movie around another one of the girls instead. The events of the night could still play out the same only with another girl being pursued by Michael instead of Laurie. Would that be considered trivial as well?

shoe1985
03-28-2007, 05:57 AM
lets hope your math is wrong. assuming its done right, there's way too much information to cover in 90 minutes.

Depending on what gets cut, and if there are reshoots, 90 minutes seems fine. I don't know how many pages the shooting script had, but horror movies normally don't go into the 2 hour time because they seem to just drag. Really though, the remake parts are not that long. It is only maybe 20 pages, which turns out to about 20 minutes of film, 1 page a minute.


unless I saw a different movie, that didnt happen in the original. so if the above is true, i guess its not just a re-imagining...but a rewrite of history.

It's cool to add more backstory...fill in the gaps of what we never saw in JC's original, and even make minor changes to reflect the personality of the particular director, but to make a major change like that is disrespectful to the fans of original film.

This isn't our Halloween, it is a whole new movie with similar storyline ideas. They are much more explored in a sense. This isn't John Carpenter's Halloween guys.


Speak for yourself, sir. I love the original movie and have for 15 years and I don't feel disrespected one bit about trivial things like that. My love for the original will not and cannot be changed via anything in this movie in the same way it didn't by pieces of poop like Resurrection. If it did, maybe I didn't have much faith in it in the first place.

I personally don't think changing dates, order of victims or characters ages is disrespectful either. If anything the changes are there to add difference and make it its own movie and not associate it with past continuity.

MIB, speaking for himself, by the way.

P.S. My interest in this movie is quite big - I want to watch it - I want to judge it on its own merits and having a webpage listing news and such is neither here or there. I used to run a Resurrection website back in the day. The movie was the pits, but I still enjoyed working on it.

I agree and disagree with you. I still hate the remake idea, but nothing we can do about it. I am not a Rob Zombie fan at all, and even though I get it is his own movie, I don't like it. Now it is being closely watched by everyone involved, a lot of changes have been made for the better. So, I am hoping for the best.

One thing I didn't understand is how a lot of people were like that is ok when certain storyline ideas were presented, and are no longer in the movie. I believe, even in a remake, you must stay close to the original, follow its basic steps, but at the same time make it different. Too many movies just did the same thing, Psycho and The Omen, and we know how they turned out. While something like The Thing went and did something much different, but closer to the book, and was amazing.

Man In Black
03-28-2007, 06:15 AM
Suppose if instead of that, RZ made Laurie one of adult Michaels first victims, and centered the events of the remaining movie around another one of the girls instead. The events of the night could still play out the same only with another girl being pursued by Michael instead of Laurie. Would that be considered trivial as well?

Some people were all for having new characters, including a new final girl. But to have a new final girl and replace Laurie with her in the same movie that would be quite the curveball and I wouldn't be against it.

Man In Black
03-28-2007, 06:17 AM
Depending on what gets cut, and if there are reshoots, 90 minutes seems fine. I don't know how many pages the shooting script had, but horror movies normally don't go into the 2 hour time because they seem to just drag. Really though, the remake parts are not that long. It is only maybe 20 pages, which turns out to about 20 minutes of film, 1 page a minute.

I believe the shooting script had 105 pages. But as you know well enough, things change on a daily basis and pages were being revised all the time.

Lucifer
03-28-2007, 06:18 AM
Speak for yourself, sir. I love the original movie and have for 15 years and I don't feel disrespected one bit about trivial things like that. My love for the original will not and cannot be changed via anything in this movie in the same way it didn't by pieces of poop like Resurrection. If it did, maybe I didn't have much faith in it in the first place.

I personally don't think changing dates, order of victims or characters ages is disrespectful either. If anything the changes are there to add difference and make it its own movie and not associate it with past continuity.

MIB, speaking for himself, by the way.

P.S. My interest in this movie is quite big - I want to watch it - I want to judge it on its own merits and having a webpage listing news and such is neither here or there. I used to run a Resurrection website back in the day. The movie was the pits, but I still enjoyed working on it.

Someone with sence !!!

Khan
03-28-2007, 06:27 AM
I agree and disagree with you. I still hate the remake idea, but nothing we can do about it. I am not a Rob Zombie fan at all, and even though I get it is his own movie, I don't like it. Now it is being closely watched by everyone involved, a lot of changes have been made for the better. So, I am hoping for the best.

I am normally all for creative control, but in this case, I am glad there is studio meddling.

Without it, several offending elements would have been kept in that would have ruined the story.

EvilOnTwoLegs
03-28-2007, 06:55 AM
unless I saw a different movie, that didnt happen in the original. so if the above is true, i guess its not just a re-imagining...but a rewrite of history.

It's cool to add more backstory...fill in the gaps of what we never saw in JC's original, and even make minor changes to reflect the personality of the particular director, but to make a major change like that is disrespectful to the fans of original film.
First of all, that's what re-imagining implies...that the film is not going to be the same...that there will be significant changes. And a lot of us don't find that notion disrespectful, in itself. If it's poorly exucuted, then maybe. But the idea of changing the whole damn thing...why not?

And please...unless Michael Myers is a real person who actually killed his sister on Halloween night, let's refrain from calling this a rewrite of history. It just sounds stupid.

Man In Black
03-28-2007, 07:12 AM
The upcoming NECA Myers figure:
http://www.ohmb.net/imagehosting/234460a85b1e7e74.jpg

nwiser
03-28-2007, 07:38 AM
please...unless Michael Myers is a real person who actually killed his sister on Halloween night, let's refrain from calling this a rewrite of history. It just sounds stupid.

considering I was speaking in the confines of the events taking place in the Halloween movies, the term "history" is still an appropriate term...an aggregate of past events. the definition doesnt change, and shouldnt be casually dismissed simply because we're talking about fiction. :erm:

Roswell
03-28-2007, 07:43 AM
unless I saw a different movie, that didnt happen in the original.

"It's not the same!!! Ahhhhh!!! Somebody shoot me!!!" :bastard:

Sorry. I couldn't resist.

But really, that's the same arguement that's been made for every thing that Zombie has done different from the original. I mean, what do you want? You say you don't want a rehash, but when Zombie changes an event or something, you cry out that "that didn't happen in the original". Sorry, but you confuse me. I guess you don't understand the word "re-imagining".

Superman
03-28-2007, 07:52 AM
The upcoming NECA Myers figure:
http://www.ohmb.net/imagehosting/234460a85b1e7e74.jpg

Wow! That's awesome! Thanks for sharing. :)

nwiser
03-28-2007, 08:04 AM
You say you don't want a rehash, but when Zombie changes an event or something, you cry out that "that didn't happen in the original". Sorry, but you confuse me.

the two concepts dont have to be mutually exclusive. it's true, I would have preferred for this halloween not to have been a remake, but at the same time since it's all we have, i would have preferred it to have been a straight remake. The only time I agree with significant changes to a movie in a remake is when the original movie or some of the events in it were crappy and need fixing so that people wont hate the remake like they did the original.

Laow-Z
03-28-2007, 08:10 AM
The upcoming NECA Myers figure:

Very cool looking so far.....any idea if it will be an awesome 18" or the lousy 12"?

halo thirty one
03-28-2007, 08:14 AM
While not as chubby in the middle, that figure reminds me of George Wilbur from H6.

Frazetta
03-28-2007, 08:43 AM
I'm really digging the new Loomis & Laurie picture!It's good to see Loomis comfort Laurie & seem like he really does care.

The new figure is badass too. I already want that on my shelf lol.

Khan
03-28-2007, 08:48 AM
That figure looks pretty good!

myersfan1348
03-28-2007, 08:50 AM
Very cool looking action figure! I want one!

nwiser
03-28-2007, 08:52 AM
Does anyone know if the new film will try and offer up reasons why Michael goes on his killing rampage and comes after Laurie? Also, even though people who've seen the sequels know Laurie is his sister, as this film is starting over and washing a lot of stuff out, will she be revealed as his sister in this film, or is she just a unfortunate "wrong place, wrong time" victim of circumstance?

I know the sequels to the original explained his rampage as being due to the Thorn, but since the Thorn is not in this remake (or is it?), and sequels to this film are uncertain at this point, I would think they would want to give the audience some explanation as to why he escapes back to haddonfield to kill people, other than the simplistic fact that his childhood was crummy.

Thurisaz
03-28-2007, 09:00 AM
unless I saw a different movie, that didnt happen in the original. so if the above is true, i guess its not just a re-imagining...but a rewrite of history.

It's cool to add more backstory...fill in the gaps of what we never saw in JC's original, and even make minor changes to reflect the personality of the particular director, but to make a major change like that is disrespectful to the fans of original film.

Wait, so you mean this movie is going to be different?

Well, fuck that then.

Man In Black
03-28-2007, 09:13 AM
Very cool looking so far.....any idea if it will be an awesome 18" or the lousy 12"?

Not too sure. Hopefully we'll find out soon.

CyanideAssassin
03-28-2007, 09:31 AM
Depending on what gets cut, and if there are reshoots, 90 minutes seems fine. I don't know how many pages the shooting script had, but horror movies normally don't go into the 2 hour time because they seem to just drag. Really though, the remake parts are not that long. It is only maybe 20 pages, which turns out to about 20 minutes of film, 1 page a minute.



2 hour horror movies don't work? The Exorcist is over 2 hours, Psycho is 10 minutes shy of 2 hours as is JC's The Thing.

In the script I have (the early script that was floating around), the remake events take place in approximately 60 pages, so roughly an hour of screen time. Anything less, and the characters won't be developed. One major complaint I have about Zombie's first 2 films is that he hasn't created a single character that I gave a shit about. I don't think 2 hours is too long for this film, there's alot to pack in and once adult Myers shows up in Haddonfield the tone will change. If any section of the film drags it will probably be the prequel part. At the very least, based on what I've read, I would say 45 minutes for the prequel, 60 minutes for the remake, making the movie about 105 minutes. There are some characters that can be axed to make it shorter (but I doubt he'll do that), rather than cram everything into a shorter time span. I still think 2 hours would be perfect.

SicDarko
03-28-2007, 09:39 AM
Now that's just a little slice of adorable right there.

wow, she's standing, and he's sitting and still taller than her, that rock's!

Myers Insurance
03-28-2007, 10:12 AM
lets hope your math is wrong. assuming its done right, there's way too much information to cover in 90 minutes.

Strictly basing this off the early draft, but the script's 126 minutes, and the rule is that one page of script equals one minute of running time. However, there are pages of nothing but action, and pages of nothing but dialouge, so it's likely it'll probably be around 110-120 minutes, which makes since since HO1KC and TDR ran about that long.

Khan
03-28-2007, 10:33 AM
2 hour horror movies don't work? The Exorcist is over 2 hours, Psycho is 10 minutes shy of 2 hours as is JC's The Thing.

In the script I have (the early script that was floating around), the remake events take place in approximately 60 pages, so roughly an hour of screen time. Anything less, and the characters won't be developed. One major complaint I have about Zombie's first 2 films is that he hasn't created a single character that I gave a shit about. I don't think 2 hours is too long for this film, there's alot to pack in and once adult Myers shows up in Haddonfield the tone will change. If any section of the film drags it will probably be the prequel part. At the very least, based on what I've read, I would say 45 minutes for the prequel, 60 minutes for the remake, making the movie about 105 minutes. There are some characters that can be axed to make it shorter (but I doubt he'll do that), rather than cram everything into a shorter time span. I still think 2 hours would be perfect.

At that length, the primary target audience (the MTV generation) will lose interest unless their attention can be captured.

o.n.i.x
03-28-2007, 10:42 AM
No wonder Michael gets a little cranky, having one of those there. Ow.

MyersFan75
03-28-2007, 10:58 AM
That figure reminds me of the McFarlane six inch figure.

Pretty cool looking, but I'm not that big on the pose. Maybe this means we'll get a McDowell figure, as we did for Pleasance?

mannylb88
03-28-2007, 11:01 AM
i guess we'll be seeing the teaser trailer in about a week and a half. Grindhouse is coming out on April 6th.

o.n.i.x
03-28-2007, 11:04 AM
*bounce* I can't wait! ^_^

myersfan1348
03-28-2007, 11:04 AM
i guess we'll be seeing the teaser trailer in about a week and a half. Grindhouse is coming out on April 6th.

I for one cannot wait! :drool:

shothim6times
03-28-2007, 11:13 AM
I've been really impressed with Tyler Mane and he has atleast bothered to write on his myspace page about the shoot and seems really enthusiastic about it. He seems a really nice guy and I hope he does well, it seems like he is loving the job and wouldnt hesitate to reprise the role should that happen.
If Mane decided not to come back for any sequels, I wonder if they would have a hard time finding someone to match his size? It would be kind of odd to see Scout Taylor-Compton (assuming she is in the sequels) going up against a Shape who is much shorter that he was in the first movie.

TheShape'78
03-28-2007, 11:40 AM
the two concepts dont have to be mutually exclusive. it's true, I would have preferred for this halloween not to have been a remake, but at the same time since it's all we have, i would have preferred it to have been a straight remake.

what is the point of a straight remake? i have seen John Carpenter's Halloween, i own it (3 copies to be exact), i don't need to see it again. why would you want a straight remake instead of what Zombie is doing? i don't get that kind of mentality.

please explain?

EvilOnTwoLegs
03-28-2007, 11:40 AM
considering I was speaking in the confines of the events taking place in the Halloween movies, the term "history" is still an appropriate term...an aggregate of past events. the definition doesnt change, and shouldnt be casually dismissed simply because we're talking about fiction. :erm:
Considering this isn't part of the same continuity, there are no past events, as far as this film is concerned. They're not "rewriting history" here...they're re-imagining the concept of the first film. That means they can change whatever the hell they want. That's what a re-imagining does. Look at The Fly, for example...look at how much it doesn't have in common with the '50s version. Or Dawn of the Dead. Same damn thing.

Khan
03-28-2007, 11:50 AM
If Mane decided not to come back for any sequels, I wonder if they would have a hard time finding someone to match his size? It would be kind of odd to see Scout Taylor-Compton (assuming she is in the sequels) going up against a Shape who is much shorter that he was in the first movie.


Zombie cast Mane because he was his friend from TDR, so when a sequal is made (several will be made) and he isn't around to help with casting, they will likely cast someone else.

Finding another 6'10", 280 pound Myers will be interesting.

Kubrickbuff
03-28-2007, 12:22 PM
I read on one of the posters of Rob Zombie's Halloween that the movie will be released on October 19 but on the board I have herd people say that it opens in Augast, what is the actual theactrical release date?

Roswell
03-28-2007, 12:39 PM
I reas on one of the posters of Rob Zombie's Halloween that the movie will be released on October 19 but on the board I have herd people say that it opens in Augast, what is the actual theactrical release date?

I'm not sure if there's an official release date just yet. Originally everyone was saying August 31st, but now I'm not so sure.

I'm hoping they change the date, though. Not that I can't get into the Halloween mood in August, but it's just seems so much cooler to see a Halloween film in the fall.

Khan
03-28-2007, 12:46 PM
Plus, the ticket sales on Halloween itself would be excellent.

Man In Black
03-28-2007, 12:47 PM
HM.com and Rob have both recently stated that Aug 31 is still the "go" date.

shoe1985
03-28-2007, 12:56 PM
2 hour horror movies don't work? The Exorcist is over 2 hours, Psycho is 10 minutes shy of 2 hours as is JC's The Thing.

In the script I have (the early script that was floating around), the remake events take place in approximately 60 pages, so roughly an hour of screen time. Anything less, and the characters won't be developed. One major complaint I have about Zombie's first 2 films is that he hasn't created a single character that I gave a shit about. I don't think 2 hours is too long for this film, there's alot to pack in and once adult Myers shows up in Haddonfield the tone will change. If any section of the film drags it will probably be the prequel part. At the very least, based on what I've read, I would say 45 minutes for the prequel, 60 minutes for the remake, making the movie about 105 minutes. There are some characters that can be axed to make it shorter (but I doubt he'll do that), rather than cram everything into a shorter time span. I still think 2 hours would be perfect.

Many things have been changed since that draft. It should be between an hour and a half and 2 hours. I don't see it going 2 hours though. I gave an idea of 20 minutes for remake, but that was just guess. I know it isn't much remake, it is developing the Michael character.

Inhumane
03-28-2007, 01:01 PM
The 2003 Halloween convention featured a panel of all of the men who played Michael Myers (except for Castle). Most of these guys (particularly Wilbur) were just kind of "blah" about the whole thing. Shanks showed some enthusiasm, but that's about it. It just seemed like something these guys did because they wanted a paycheck. Tyler Mane, by contrast, seems to be really loving his time during this shoot. From reading his blogs and looking at pictures he really seems to be into the whole thing... Kind of like when Kane Hodder played Jason (Although I hope Mane doesn't take it that seriously like Hodder). So do you guys think that genuine enthusiasm for the role will enhance the performance or ultimately make no difference?

... just trying to toss questions out to you guys to take the convo in new areas.

I hear what you're saying and yes, most (if not, all) the people who played Myers did so for a paycheck. But let's not ignore the fact that Malcolm McDowell and Brad Dourif are doing "Hallloween" for the exact same reason. Both actors freely admit they've never seen the original film. So, it's not like they're doing for the legacy or respect of the original film. Also, the cast members (with Mane being the lone exception) seem to enjoy taking little pot shots (or plead ignorance) about the original "Halloween". I don't get the sense that a true lover of Carpenter's "Halloween" is making this film. I see a man making "Halloween" just to further his own career. I know many may bash my opinion on that because there's a lot of love for Zombie here, but that's the way I see it.

Inhumane
03-28-2007, 01:03 PM
I know it isn't much remake, it is developing the Michael character.

Which I find hysterical. Zombie didn't develop any of his characters in his previous two films, but yet he decides to get into character development when he tackles on a remake to one of the genre's greatest films.

samhain51
03-28-2007, 01:07 PM
I know we are all siked up for the new movie and yes I read all the interviews and all the new stuff that has to do with this movie . What makes us think that this movie will be the opening for more Halloweens . I for one want 1000 sequals but hey why would they do this and what would they be about Halloween 2 maybe maybe a hospital ??? I dont know? enlighten me!

Roswell
03-28-2007, 01:11 PM
Also, the cast members (with Mane being the lone exception) seem to enjoy taking little pot shots (or plead ignorance) about the original "Halloween". I don't get the sense that a true lover of Carpenter's "Halloween" is making this film. I see a man making "Halloween" just to further his own career. I know many may bash my opinion on that because there's a lot of love for Zombie here, but that's the way I see it.

I think you're just seeing things.

First off, I don't see what you're talking about when you say "cast members taking pot shots" at the original. From what I've read, the actors either have respect for the original or haven't seen it. I haven't seen anyone putting it down directly. Maybe we're seeing two different things.

And second, if Zombie was doing this just to "further his career" as you put it, why would he do so much work on this film? If it was just to "further his career", why wouldn't he just do a sequel or a straight remake. Why put so much effort into it if he was just trying to "further his career"? That doesn't make sense.

Phatty Matty
03-28-2007, 01:11 PM
I know we are all siked up for the new movie and yes I read all the interviews and all the new stuff that has to do with this movie . What makes us think that this movie will be the opening for more Halloweens . I for one want 1000 sequals but hey why would they do this and what would they be about Halloween 2 maybe maybe a hospital ??? I dont know? enlighten me!

I don't know what you just said. Enlighten me!

samhain51
03-28-2007, 01:16 PM
IM glad to know that even the top dawgs in the Halloween field are also stumped by this one . I wish I could see the future so I can see how many they will make . I THINK if theres money to be made with a some positive feed back from this film ! shoot any thing is possible right.Oh and yes Im also a top dawg my self in Halloweenology!!!!

mattnotis
03-28-2007, 01:20 PM
The upcoming NECA Myers figure:
http://www.ohmb.net/imagehosting/234460a85b1e7e74.jpg

Lookin' good. I'm sure we'll see a painted/articulated version at SDCC in July.

samhain51
03-28-2007, 01:26 PM
That is a baddass doll!!!

CyanideAssassin
03-28-2007, 01:30 PM
At that length, the primary target audience (the MTV generation) will lose interest unless their attention can be captured.

Nah, that's a myth perpetuated by movie studios that want to make shorter movies so they can squeeze in more showtimes in a day and rake in the cash faster. :nodsmile:

If a movie is good, is doesn't matter how long it is, people will sit through it. The top money making movies in the last few years were well over 2 hours (Lord of the Rings at over 3 hours, Pirates of the Caribbean at 2 1/2 hours, the Harry Potter films, etc.), and most of them are aimed at kids younger than Halloween is aimed at.

With the script I read, I would say 2 hours would be a good length for Zombie to cram everything in without it feeling rushed. If he rushed it (especially the remake part) it will reduce the quality of the film. I would say he could get away with 105 minutes (like I said before 45 mins for prequel and 1 hour for remake), no less.

CyanideAssassin
03-28-2007, 01:47 PM
I don't see it going 2 hours though. I gave an idea of 20 minutes for remake, but that was just guess. I know it isn't much remake, it is developing the Michael character.


Which I find hysterical. Zombie didn't develop any of his characters in his previous two films, but yet he decides to get into character development when he tackles on a remake to one of the genre's greatest films.

Yeah, I read the early script and I don't feel the backstory gives us that much insight into Michael's motives or behavior though I kind of liked the ending, but I didn't feel anymore sympathy for him than I did, say, Cujo. I thought Loomis' backstory was a complete waste, not necessary. Zombie is not a guy that has made me feel for his characters at all before, if the girls don't show up until the last 1/2 hour of the film then I probably won't feel involved in the film at all (like Zombie's other films). However, the Haddonfield/remake part is roughly 60 pages long in the early script and it felt just long enough to capture the essence of the characters. Hopefully, that's close to what we end up seeing. If not, then :drool:

Shamrock-Robot
03-28-2007, 02:05 PM
Yeah, I read the early script and I don't feel the backstory gives us that much insight into Michael's motives or behavior though I kind of liked the ending, but I didn't feel anymore sympathy for him than I did, say, Cujo. I thought Loomis' backstory was a complete waste, not necessary. Zombie is not a guy that has made me feel for his characters at all before, if the girls don't show up until the last 1/2 hour of the film then I probably won't feel involved in the film at all (like Zombie's other films). However, the Haddonfield/remake part is roughly 60 pages long in the early script and it felt just long enough to capture the essence of the characters. Hopefully, that's close to what we end up seeing. If not, then :drool:

Reading a script can only give you a little insight on the film, To get the full picture you have to see the film, Thats why I didnt even bother looking at the script and plus I didnt want to know what happens in the movie before I even see it, I never seen a point in that.

shothim6times
03-28-2007, 02:20 PM
I hear what you're saying and yes, most (if not, all) the people who played Myers did so for a paycheck. But let's not ignore the fact that Malcolm McDowell and Brad Dourif are doing "Hallloween" for the exact same reason. Both actors freely admit they've never seen the original film. So, it's not like they're doing for the legacy or respect of the original film. Also, the cast members (with Mane being the lone exception) seem to enjoy taking little pot shots (or plead ignorance) about the original "Halloween". I don't get the sense that a true lover of Carpenter's "Halloween" is making this film. I see a man making "Halloween" just to further his own career. I know many may bash my opinion on that because there's a lot of love for Zombie here, but that's the way I see it.
Being a member of this board, you should know what a real fan does to a movie. They study it, pick it apart and scrutinize every single aspect of it. That is what Zombie has done. He has stated that there are parts about the original that bugged him (Michael driving, clean mask/overalls, etc). He is just another fan who has watched that movie tons of times and has thought about what he would have, and has done, differently. He isn't taking pot shots or disrespecting the original movie, he's just acting like the rest of us.

And I guess since McDowell and Dourif are doing this movie having not seen the original, it must be for the paycheck. Couldn't be because Rob wrote an interesting story and they felt like it would be a fun movie to do.

Khan
03-28-2007, 02:23 PM
Nah, that's a myth perpetuated by movie studios that want to make shorter movies so they can squeeze in more showtimes in a day and rake in the cash faster. :nodsmile:

If a movie is good, is doesn't matter how long it is, people will sit through it. The top money making movies in the last few years were well over 2 hours (Lord of the Rings at over 3 hours, Pirates of the Caribbean at 2 1/2 hours, the Harry Potter films, etc.), and most of them are aimed at kids younger than Halloween is aimed at.

With the script I read, I would say 2 hours would be a good length for Zombie to cram everything in without it feeling rushed. If he rushed it (especially the remake part) it will reduce the quality of the film. I would say he could get away with 105 minutes (like I said before 45 mins for prequel and 1 hour for remake), no less.

With Dimension making the movie and their obsession with films under 90 minutes, watch a lot of scenes end up on the cutting room floor.

Plus, Zombie could have shot as much footage as he wanted, but he doesn't get to say if it all stays in the movie.

Save the deleted/extended scenes for DVD.

Inhumane
03-28-2007, 03:00 PM
With Dimension making the movie and their obsession with films under 90 minutes, watch a lot of scenes end up on the cutting room floor.

Plus, Zombie could have shot as much footage as he wanted, but he doesn't get to say if it all stays in the movie.

Save the deleted/extended scenes for DVD.

Very true. I've said it before, I think Dimension make the worst horror films these days. And that's saying a lot when you have shit like Dark Castle and Ghost House Pictures running amok. I honestly can not recall the last time I actually enjoyed a Dimension (horror) film.

MM41
03-28-2007, 03:08 PM
And I guess since McDowell and Dourif are doing this movie having not seen the original, it must be for the paycheck. Couldn't be because Rob wrote an interesting story and they felt like it would be a fun movie to do.

Well Dourif said that he hasnt seen the original and wont see this one for the same reason, its too scary for him! lol, and McDowell said that Zombie advised him not to see the original film because he wanted to him to be his own "Dr. Loomis"

PanterA Forever
03-28-2007, 03:17 PM
This will be a great movie

Kubrickbuff
03-28-2007, 03:19 PM
I'm not sure if there's an official release date just yet. Originally everyone was saying August 31st, but now I'm not so sure.

I'm hoping they change the date, though. Not that I can't get into the Halloween mood in August, but it's just seems so much cooler to see a Halloween film in the fall.

It's been a while since they released a Halloween film in the fall, the last one to be released in october was Halloween 5, although H6 was released in september if that counts. H20 in Augast and HR in July.

nwiser
03-28-2007, 03:48 PM
Zombie cast Mane because he was his friend from TDR, so when a sequal is made (several will be made) and he isn't around to help with casting, they will likely cast someone else.

Finding another 6'10", 280 pound Myers will be interesting.

terriffic. a "fresh" start to the series and it's already paving the way for discontinuities in the future. :godno:

Thurisaz
03-28-2007, 04:01 PM
terriffic. a "fresh" start to the series and it's already paving the way for discontinuities in the future. :godno:

What the hell are you even talking about? Every post you seem to make has me scratching my head more and more.

H-Field Hero
03-28-2007, 04:06 PM
Zombie cast Mane because he was his friend from TDR, so when a sequal is made (several will be made) and he isn't around to help with casting, they will likely cast someone else.

Finding another 6'10", 280 pound Myers will be interesting.So the only reason Mane was cast was because he was Rob's "friend"? You know they're friends? You know for sure that he wasn't cast because Rob like his look? Moreover, you know that the party in charge of a possible sequel won't seek out Mane for the role?

I must say, some of you guys know an awful lot... or maybe you don't know anything. Who can say?
What the hell are you even talking about? Every post you seem to make has me scratching my head more and more.He and others seem to think their prophets and can foretell the future casting of the series. C'mon TJ, get with the program!!

Frazetta
03-28-2007, 04:31 PM
Zombie cast Mane because he was his friend from TDR, so when a sequal is made (several will be made) and he isn't around to help with casting, they will likely cast someone else.

Finding another 6'10", 280 pound Myers will be interesting.
How do you know that was Zombie's sole reason for casting Mane? Has nothing to do with the Myers look, which he has down pat, or Michael's walk, which he also has down to a T? Are you in Zombie's inner circle & we just don't know it yet? And how do you know that Mane won't completely blow the roof off of everyone's expectations & have Dimension begging him back for another movie?

Khan
03-28-2007, 05:13 PM
Rob has a Devil's Rejects reunion in the film, so they are his friends.

John Carpenter cast regular actors who were his friends, but were also talented actors.

As for being able to predict the future, I never claimed to be a psychic or an insider.

Why wouldn't they make a bunch more? It worked the first time, so why wouldn't Malek want to make several more films?

Most people on this board would freely admit that they want several sequals.

Malek said in an interview that this is a new series.

H-Field Hero
03-28-2007, 05:19 PM
I never denied the probability of sequels. I'm saying that to claim that Mane won't be a part of them is a rush to judgment.

Khan
03-28-2007, 05:27 PM
Most of the cast would do them in a heartbeat.

Malek will milk the life out of this movie.

One would hope that Mane, as miscast as he is, would return for continuity's sake.

H-Field Hero
03-28-2007, 05:29 PM
A) Mane isn't miscast
B) You say "Malek will milk the life out of this movie" as if you and the rest of the nay-sayers don't want more films.

Frazetta
03-28-2007, 05:35 PM
One would hope that Mane, as miscast as he is, would return for continuity's sake.
Miscast????? Have you seen the pictures of him in the outfit/mask? Have you watched the Mtv video with the classic walk in it?

Lupinus
03-28-2007, 05:38 PM
How is mane miscast?

Was the origional Mikey a big guy? No, he wasn't, but the origional Laurie was a cute little hot blond either.

But you know big guys do happen. It's not like mane is unnatural or surgicaly enchanced or anything. Mane doesn't even look really buff in the pictures, just big and kinda bulky. Some people just have that body type.

Khan
03-28-2007, 05:38 PM
A) Mane isn't miscast
B) You say "Malek will milk the life out of this movie" as if you and the rest of the nay-sayers don't want more films.

The more films we get, the better the chance of another Resurrection.

People here want five or more movies after this!

Wow, so a few seconds of the Myers walk convinces everyone that he is going to do great job.

Frazetta
03-28-2007, 05:51 PM
Wow, so a few seconds of the Myers walk convinces everyone that he is going to do great job.
Wow, 5 extra inches in height convinced you he isn't.

ghettomyers
03-28-2007, 05:54 PM
ooooo got em^

Khan
03-28-2007, 06:08 PM
Wow, 5 extra inches in height convinced you he isn't.

To be correct, it is 5 1/2 inches, as Brad Loree is 6' 2 1/2.

Good one though.:bastard:

ghettomyers
03-28-2007, 06:22 PM
oooo got em again^

Frazetta
03-28-2007, 06:28 PM
To be correct, it is 5 1/2 inches, as Brad Loree is 6' 2 1/2.

Good one though.:bastard: Ah, the nitpicking gets even heavier. You're really digging at the bottom of the barrel aren't you?

Khan
03-28-2007, 06:33 PM
I lost my sense of optimism a long time ago.

The only thing I can be overly positive about in terms of movies is a film called The Ocean.

Explain something for me:

When did this "In Zombie I Trust" cult get formed?

Frazetta
03-28-2007, 06:38 PM
When did this "In Zombie I Trust" cult get formed? It's not a 'Cult' actually. I guess I should just go around bitching & moaning about how every movie in the World will suck instead of being just a tad optimistic.

shoe1985
03-28-2007, 06:49 PM
What a night. I was able to read the shooting script tonight, and I am not going to reveal anything about it. I will say I don't know what I think about it. I like many of the ideas presented, this doesn't have a lot of what was discussed with the early draft, thank god. My problem is how much Michael we have in this movie, well script, things could be different, and probably will.

The thing I liked about it is how well it plays out in your head. It seems to play perfectly as a movie. For a Halloween movie though I am not sure because of certain things in the script. Too much of something maybe? I guess when I see it on the big screen I can judge it best.

I will say that it really didn't feel like Rob's previous movies. So, for those who didn't like those movies, like me, this is different then those.

Also, don't ask for me to send it or give out details. I am not giving it out, and it has already been destroyed. I feel waiting is probably the best option with this movie now, especially after reading this. I am very close with my friend, and will not get him in any trouble, unlike some people who leaked the early draft.

Many will hate it, but many will love it. This is going to be the most divided movie in the series by far.

Khan
03-28-2007, 06:55 PM
It's not a 'Cult' actually. I guess I should just go around bitching & moaning about how every movie in the World will suck instead of being just a tad optimistic.

When did the idea of the phrase come about?

I know a guy who basically worships the ground Rob Zombie walks on.

Frazetta
03-28-2007, 07:07 PM
When did the idea of the phrase come about?

I know a guy who basically worships the ground Rob Zombie walks on.
I can't remember actually. I think 13Myers13 was the 1st to use it.

mcilroga
03-28-2007, 07:13 PM
13Myers13 was the first to use it. Ken (TheTwistedSoul) then said he liked the sound of it and made it his CT, and Frazetta added it to his sig. People started adding it to theirs soon after.

Frazetta
03-28-2007, 07:22 PM
13Myers13 was the first to use it. Ken (TheTwistedSoul) then said he liked the sound of it and made it his CT, and Frazetta added it to his sig. People started adding it to theirs soon after.
This man has the mind of an Elephant.

leechcode5
03-28-2007, 07:52 PM
Man I can't wait to be able to put that new Myers figure next to the original Myers, young Myers, and Loomis NECA figures I have sitting on my shelf.

And also, I guess I'm one of the "In Zombie I Trust" cult themyerswalk brought up. What can I say, I figured I might as well join a cult sooner or later, why not join the best. :)

.... and then Scientology said I didn't have enough money to join, so I settled for the Zombie thing.

Khan
03-28-2007, 07:55 PM
The only director I have full faith in is Dante Tomaselli.

He is being called the next Argento or Bava.

I do think that Zombie has shown promise, I am just not totally convinced.

Then again, it takes a lot to convince me of things.

Neematoad
03-28-2007, 08:19 PM
I havent seen any fanatical postings, unlike robs myspace page so I'm willing to guess every one else is fueled on promise as well.

CyanideAssassin
03-28-2007, 08:28 PM
The only director I have full faith in is Dante Tomaselli.

He is being called the next Argento or Bava.



Really?! By whom?!
Not to insult your taste, and I don't have an opinion on him as I've never seen one of his films, but most people seem call him the next Edward D. Wood Jr., which is why I've been steering clear of his films thus far.


IMO, the only guy in the last few years that has crafted a really great horror/thriller was Neil Marshall, and that film was The Descent. It's the only film in the genre that I've seen recently that I enjoyed from start to finish without any reservations. I'm sure that flick is far too mainstream for some though. I'm judging the guy on one film though, my opinion can change on the guy with his next film, but hopefully not. The Descent was a fun movie.

shothim6times
03-28-2007, 08:36 PM
Many will hate it, but many will love it.
Imagine that.

I don't wanna know the degree of nit-picking and shit talking that will be going on after this movie comes out. Some will refuse to like it simply because they've hated the idea of a remake since the get go. Others will praise it as the best film since H1. Then we will have the 'experts' who will act like they could have made a better film if given the chance. I can't wait.

The Kilted One
03-28-2007, 09:00 PM
Anyone who's ever gotten the slightest pin prick knows just how damn much even the tiniest of wounds can bleed like all holy hell. Realistically speaking, Michael should have looked like this at the end of the original movie.

Anyone who has gotten a cut-to-the-bone with a razor sharp object knows that it takes several seconds for the blood to really flow (depending on the location).:)

shothim6times
03-28-2007, 09:41 PM
Lookin' good. I'm sure we'll see a painted/articulated version at SDCC in July.
Something I whipped up:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v716/rkw_82/myerstoycolor.jpg

Man In Black
03-28-2007, 10:25 PM
Hey that looks good man. Probably close to what we're going to get.

o.n.i.x
03-29-2007, 01:16 AM
What the MIB said. Wicked.

Lucifer
03-29-2007, 02:07 AM
Something I whipped up:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v716/rkw_82/myerstoycolor.jpg

Very cool !!

EvilOnTwoLegs
03-29-2007, 02:42 AM
John Carpenter cast regular actors who were his friends, but were also talented actors.
Like Tom Atkins? What a thespian. Way more talented than Malcolm McDowell or (Oscar-nominated) Brad Dourif.

But wait...Zombie's never worked with McDowell or Dourif before. DAMN! And someone told me this movie was gonna be a Devil's Rejects reunion.

Oh wait...that was you.



Most people on this board would freely admit that they want several sequals.
Count me (as usual) in the minority.



To be correct, it is 5 1/2 inches, as Brad Loree is 6' 2 1/2.
Yeah...and how tall was, say, Dick Warlock? Hell of a lot shorter than Brad Loree. So it isn't like the height difference thing is anything new. Just that this is the first time people have really decided to cry about it.



I know a guy who basically worships the ground Rob Zombie walks on.
I know a lot of people who worship John Carpenter. Pity when I have to point out to them how long it's been since he's made a decent movie. Point is, there are always people who worship "icons"...whether said icons deserve it or not. So what?


And believe it or not, I just realized that everything I'm replying to was posted by the same damn member. haha Since when did themyerswalk become the only person in here worth disputing? :p

nwiser
03-29-2007, 02:56 AM
What the hell are you even talking about? Every post you seem to make has me scratching my head more and more.

cant you read? if they have to recast Michael and he isnt approximately the same dimensions as Mane...that's a discontinuity. how hard is that to grasp?

nwiser
03-29-2007, 02:59 AM
He and others seem to think their prophets and can foretell the future casting of the series. C'mon TJ, get with the program!!

Actually no...my post was based on someone saying that Mane wouldnt be recast b/c he was only cast being Zombie's friend. All I'm saying is that if
he isnt recast and someone with the same dimensions isnt cast, it will be a discontinuity in the series...provided there is a series even.

EvilOnTwoLegs
03-29-2007, 03:05 AM
cant you read? if they have to recast Michael and he isnt approximately the same dimensions as Mane...that's a discontinuity. how hard is that to grasp?
You mean like the "discontinuities" in pretty much all Halloween movies, with regard to Michael's size? Hasn't really bothered people much up to this point. Fact of the matter is, no one gives a shit. Or at least they didn't until certain people realized that it gave them an excuse to bitch about the Zombie film.

nwiser
03-29-2007, 03:07 AM
A) Mane isn't miscast

that depends on your point of view:

if you buy into the "re-imagining" jargon, have no knowledge of michael myers outside of this film, or you take this film to be the only "Halloween"...then no he isnt miscast because he is who he is...theres nothing else to base the behavior or dimensions of the character on.

but if you acknowledge the other films, casting Mane as Michael is akin to casting the Incredible Hulk as Michael, and his understanding of the character is questionable.

its all dependent on how you see the film.

Monte
03-29-2007, 03:14 AM
God I hope there aren't any sequels to this. We do not need to go through all that crap again.

shoe1985
03-29-2007, 05:20 AM
Imagine that.

I don't wanna know the degree of nit-picking and shit talking that will be going on after this movie comes out. Some will refuse to like it simply because they've hated the idea of a remake since the get go. Others will praise it as the best film since H1. Then we will have the 'experts' who will act like they could have made a better film if given the chance. I can't wait.

It will be divided between fans, critics, and regular moviegoers, and for many reasons. I say go in with an open head and hope for the best. I feel Rob should of had a co-writer, maybe someone with more experience, but just something doesn't feel right to me about this for me.

Rob makes us feel bad for Michael then he seems to want us to hate him, but then decides we need to feel bad for him again. Plus, way too much time spent on Michael. I always felt we should never know too much about the killer because it might make us start cheering for him in a sense. I honestly don't understand what Rob means by making Michael scary again? If anything I was hoping for Michael to be cured.


A) Mane isn't miscast
B) You say "Malek will milk the life out of this movie" as if you and the rest of the nay-sayers don't want more films.

A. Mane isn't far from being miscast, as you will see once the movie comes out. The whole movie is meant for a bigger Michael. Not geared towards you Hero, just used your reply as a place to start.

B. Malek will milk the series like his father did. It is a new series, and is not going to deal with the previous one. I wouldn't be shocked if they were prepping for sequel right now. I would rather the series die after this movie. I am getting bored of remakes and sequels from them. I want something original now with new characters. Maybe it is just me though.

mannylb88
03-29-2007, 06:02 AM
guys. guys...c'mon, we're talking about sequels already? Tyler Mane i think was a pretty good cast for Mikey. He's an actor, and he actually studied the moves and actions of the original Michael Myers, he himself said that he got the walk down.

i personally don't want a sequel, even though that will depend on the success of this movie, but on the other hand when has any studio cared about the integrity of a film as long as it can make them money?

This movie is going to be interesting. Do i think it's going to be a classic, probably not...but hey who knows? it will be a good movie atleast...i hope.

myersfan1348
03-29-2007, 06:05 AM
So the old Halloween series is OVER, and if anymore sequels are made it will be made under Rob Zombies Halloween? Thats the impression im getting.....

Laow-Z
03-29-2007, 06:06 AM
I don't wanna know the degree of nit-picking and shit talking that will be going on after this movie comes out. Some will refuse to like it simply because they've hated the idea of a remake since the get go. Others will praise it as the best film since H1. Then we will have the 'experts' who will act like they could have made a better film if given the chance. I can't wait.

At least when the movie does come out we'll know exactly what we're talking about. Some act like they've seen it already or act like they are Kreskin and know what it's going to be like. There will be alot of bitchin when everyone see's the movie but my guess it'll be like you said that those who bitch and complain from the beginning will still do so even if they did like the move just to save face and prevent people from telling them "told ya so!" I can't wait for the movie just for the fact i can tell someone to STFU if they insist the Resurrection mask is better than this one just to stir up trouble.

Muse
03-29-2007, 06:39 AM
It's been a while since i've posted in here, so i'm just going to post my current thoughts on how the movie is looking from my perspective:

Firstly, i've got to say that i'm loving the new look of Myers. Same basis, great fresh feel. Mane looks awesome in the outfit, even though his head looks a little small**. I haven't read any script reviews that mentione anything that happens in the movie, i've just read a couple that go through the writers opinions on the script, and to be honest, it got me a little worried at first. It seemed to be getting bad reviews, such as it has no story, etc. But then I came ot the conclusion that, since when has anything since H2 and before H6 had any story? H4 and H5, H:R all just went beserk and 2 and a half of those movies were great (i'm sure people can guess which).
As for the casting, i'm loving it. The new Laurie looks like a modern Laurie, which is good, i'm still not sure on Danielle Harris as Annie though. I mean, i'm sure she'll play it fine, but I just don't know if i'll be able to see her as a teenage girl instead on either little Jamie Llyod or a grown up woman. As long as she's convincing, it'll be great. And as for Malcolm McDowell: best casting choice I could've imagined. He looks great as Loomis, and i'm still astonished that no one mentioned him beforehand when everyone was saying who they wanted.
And now moving onto the man himself, Mr. Rob Zombie. I feel he's the right man for the job. If this was a seqeul, then no way, because he couldn't put his mark on any film in that series. If he was to do a Halloween film, it had to be this one. Great choice of writer/director, and i'm sure itll be the best written since H4.

And now moving onto the people who are still bashing Zombie and his approach to the film, and the way Myers looks, and the way blah blah blah blah blah... just shut up alright. Most of you are probably sat at home infront of that PC 20 hours a day, just waiting for something to pop up so you can sign in on here and bash Zombie some more, and then when someone disagrees you just love to argue back. It aint a good thing. If you wait a few more months, you have every right to bash it as much as you want, with as many reasons as you want, but right now, you dont know jack, so keep your fingers off the keyboard unless you making a reasonable statement. I do realise it's died down a hell of a lot since last time I checked on these threads properly, but I still wanted my two minutes to say what I think of the ones still doing it :D

And last but not least, my overall opinions on production so far.
I think, by the looks of it, that this will be a fantastic flick. One the subject of sequels, i want none at all, unless someone (preferably Zombie) can come back and make a good sequel or at complete utter maximum, a trilogy where in which the legacy of Michael Myers can be put to rest, until someone decides to ressurect him again, or re-imagine him again, or pick up on a dead storyline.

I'm really looking forward to the movie, and I will definately trying to sneak into seeing it on opening night (which is still Oct 19th for UK folk :()


** :bastard: that's just to bash the idiots who are picking out stupid things to bash the movie with without knowing.. anything, really.

Phatty Matty
03-29-2007, 07:22 AM
that depends on your point of view:

if you buy into the "re-imagining" jargon, have no knowledge of michael myers outside of this film, or you take this film to be the only "Halloween"...then no he isnt miscast because he is who he is...theres nothing else to base the behavior or dimensions of the character on.

but if you acknowledge the other films, casting Mane as Michael is akin to casting the Incredible Hulk as Michael, and his understanding of the character is questionable.

its all dependent on how you see the film.

I swear if I ever need a good laugh I just need to come to this thread and read stuff like that.

Hahaha... I woud ask you nwiser what the hell are you talking about but I don't think you have a clue either.

Man In Black
03-29-2007, 07:32 AM
This will probably get removed from youtube, but someone filmed a scene being shot with their camera phone.

The scene is of Lynda and Bob getting out of his van outside the Myers house with Michael on the balcony watching them.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=attP1tnLOGQ

As an aside:
Notice how taller Kristina is than Scout & Danielle, then look at how taller Bob is than Lynda, then if they do do a "sheet scene" it might explain her not realising a massive height difference.

myersfan1348
03-29-2007, 07:35 AM
I think Mane is a good one for Michael.... I used to think I wouldnt have minded seeing Kane Hodder play Mike, but now I dont think ide like that much... Mane is perfect for the role in my opinion.

Masked Madman
03-29-2007, 08:08 AM
This will probably get removed from youtube, but someone filmed a scene being shot with their camera phone.

The scene is of Lynda and Bob getting out of his van outside the Myers house with Michael on the balcony watching them.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=attP1tnLOGQ

As an aside:
Notice how taller Kristina is than Scout & Danielle, then look at how taller Bob is than Lynda, then if they do do a "sheet scene" it might explain her not realising a massive height difference.

after watching this did anyone notice that Michael was standing on the balcony anyway it looked cool...

mannylb88
03-29-2007, 08:13 AM
Man In Black said he was along with his post.

Superman
03-29-2007, 08:17 AM
Not much to see in that clip, but pretty cool none the less. Thanks.

Masked Madman
03-29-2007, 08:33 AM
Man In Black said he was along with his post.
well then....im an idiot..........

UnpleasantDream
03-29-2007, 08:44 AM
How cool was that clip??? Very cool...but here's a question...


Why are Linda and Bob at the Myer's house and not the Wallace house?? Interesting....

JKwinter
03-29-2007, 10:05 AM
Thank's for the clip Mr. MIB.

I'm getting the 'pre-Halloween' jitters.

One thing I never understood about horror movies:

I have great peripheral vision; I think I would have seen him there.

That's just me though. I guess it is just part of the art; creating scenes that are simply far fetched for real life. And who knows, maybe it got clipped.

The Sequel to this film is IMO as follows:

HO 1000 C/TDR
TCM remake/TCM the beginning
Grudge 1/Grudge 2
Hostel 1/Hostel 2
THHE/THHE 2
Wrong Turn 1/Wrong Turn 2

It's my official prediction a sequel will be made for Halloween, but go easy, it's just a prediction.


God I hope there aren't any sequels to this. We do not need to go through all that crap again.

I sympathize, but who knows, maybe they'll just stick with the format, and remake H3. HaHa!

shothim6times
03-29-2007, 10:19 AM
God I hope there aren't any sequels to this. We do not need to go through all that crap again.
I tend to agree. Zombie has already said he is done after this movie. Of course that could change but if he decided not to come back I wouldn't want someone else to take over. We've seen what happens to a series when the original director bales out....we end up so far away from their vision that everyone gives up and decides to start over.