PDA

View Full Version : Malcolm as Dr. Loomis Thread



Myers Insurance
09-02-2007, 02:15 PM
We got one for Tyler Mane, so why not for Malcolm? What did you think of him - good, bad, okay?

The Dark Shape
09-02-2007, 02:16 PM
Okay.

His acting worked quite well, but it's clear Zombie didn't really know what to make of the character.

mmyers78
09-02-2007, 02:16 PM
i thought that malcolm played loomis very well

Roswell
09-02-2007, 02:17 PM
He did an okay job. His delivery of lines from the original didn't strike me the way Pleasence did them, but I kind of figured that would happen.

renee30152
09-02-2007, 02:19 PM
He did an okey job. Nowhere NEAR Donald's standards. He seemed like a pussy to me. Very whisy washy.

Myers Insurance
09-02-2007, 02:20 PM
I voted bad.

No offense to Malcolm, but I think he was the wrong person to play Loomis. No one could come close to Pleasance, but I think they could've found someone who would've been better.

Ravenheart
09-02-2007, 02:21 PM
He was okay but his role should have been bigger.

H-Field Hero
09-02-2007, 02:21 PM
There were times where I really liked him. [broken record]I want to rewatch the film before fully passing judgment on his performance, but as of right now I liked what I saw.[/broken record :p]

I will say that while watching the film I didn't find myself thinking "oh man, Pleasence did this or that way better".

The Dark Shape
09-02-2007, 02:22 PM
The only times I found myself thinking of Pleasence were when Malcolm was forced to deliver the same lines.

The real Shape
09-02-2007, 02:24 PM
I felt that he didn't do a good job. He just didn't have the same force, the same FEAR that Donald had put in Loomis' voice.

The Kilted One
09-02-2007, 02:25 PM
I think it's important to remember that Zombie's Loomis and Carpenter's Loomis are completely different characters. That said, I think the quality of Donald Pleasance's performance in HalloweeN is much higher than Malcolm Mcdowell's performance in Halloween... So there you go.

Ashleigh
09-02-2007, 02:33 PM
I think it's important to remember that Zombie's Loomis and Carpenter's Loomis are completely different characters. That said, I think the quality of Donald Pleasance's performance in HalloweeN is much higher than Malcolm Mcdowell's performance in Halloween... So there you go.

Completely agree. I felt myself looking for Pleasance a lot in the movie. lol I know that's impossible, but the movie was definitely missing that caliber performance that he gave in the original Halloween. I thought that McDowell worked better in the first half because we weren't privvy to Michael and Loomis' interactions while he was in Smith's Grove in the original. So there was nothing to compare it with. To make a long story short, I didn't care for McDowell in the second half of the movie but he was on fire the first half. :p

Myers Insurance
09-02-2007, 02:37 PM
Loomis was the only thing I was comparing. I ddidn't realize it until after the movie was over, but I found myself comparing. Pleasance is just the type of guy that you remember.

Sidenote: Anyone think the new film should've been dedicated to him like with H6 and H20.

Worthystevens
09-02-2007, 02:43 PM
Malcolm was good. His line delivery could be shaky at times though.

The Dark Shape
09-02-2007, 02:57 PM
Loomis was the only thing I was comparing. I ddidn't realize it until after the movie was over, but I found myself comparing. Pleasance is just the type of guy that you remember.

Sidenote: Anyone think the new film should've been dedicated to him like with H6 and H20.

Why? It was already dedicated to Moustapha Akkad, and Pleasence has been dead for twelve years.

Fiberawptic
09-02-2007, 03:04 PM
He did an okay job. His delivery of lines from the original didn't strike me the way Pleasence did them, but I kind of figured that would happen.

Well yes, he wont just try to impersonate pleasences voice. He would be critisized for that even more. He kept loomis as a strange phyciatrist who means well, and is determined to stop MM, also british, but gave it his own spice... I respect that he didnt just try to directly copy Donald and again he kept the important traits of loomis around still.

Danny Strode
09-02-2007, 03:39 PM
I thought he did a good job, for him saying to have not seen any of the other films. I always remember him from when he was in Star Trek: Generations, so at first it was a little wierd to see him as Loomis. Of course, I will always perfer Pleasence. He was brilliant.

MichaelJrdnMyrs
09-02-2007, 03:46 PM
The only times I found myself thinking of Pleasence were when Malcolm was forced to deliver the same lines.

And that's not exactly fair either, as far as blaming McDowell and not the script.

He did look like he didn't give half a damn through portions of the movie. When he was on the ball I liked him. I voted okay.

Lupinus
09-02-2007, 03:53 PM
He did alright. Not bad, not great, but ok. I think he could have done better by fearing Michael a little more and at the same time growing a bigger set.

MyersFan927
09-02-2007, 04:02 PM
Holy schnike - I agree with everybody. Dark Shape hit the nail on the head. He was simply okay...Pleasence was made to play Loomis. It's as if he studied the character and understood him in a way nobody else could. McDowell's contribution was lukewarm.

Dr_Loomis02
09-02-2007, 05:32 PM
I voted good, because of what I did see was just that. It was a different take, but one I liked.
Malcolm didn't have a true chance to show what he's made of IMO. I sequel could help with this, because I believe his character to be very much alive.

Khan
09-02-2007, 05:53 PM
He is a good actor, but I thought he just wasn't a good Loomis.

Icebreaker_8605
09-02-2007, 06:28 PM
McDowell gave us a new Dr. Loomis, indeed. Characteristics were different when comparing the films, but this is good because I didn't anticipate a complete rehashing of the original. So, he's no DP, but McDowell made the character in a new light. I'd say yea he did a good job.

Todd
09-02-2007, 06:32 PM
I thought McDowell did an okay job of acting, but I just didn't care much for this version of Loomis.

wyatt s
09-02-2007, 07:28 PM
I liked McDowell. He was absolutely brilliant in the prequel portion of the movie. Unfortunately he was under used in the later half.

Frazetta
09-02-2007, 08:24 PM
I liked McDowell quite abit. Obviously there was noway that he was going to make me, or anyone else, forget Donald Pleasence but I thought he did a verygod job in his scenes with Daeg & Tyler. The only scene that I found really corny was when he was buying the gun.

SSteward
09-02-2007, 08:30 PM
I thought he did well. I mean, no one can truly replace Donald Pleasance, so I didn't hold him to that standard. He did a solid job in his own right. I hated the hairstyle of "young" Loomis though (i.e. Loomis who meets with Michael at age 6). It just looked phoney.

Frazetta
09-02-2007, 08:36 PM
I particularly liked 3 scenes of McDowell's. All 3 are powerful scenes in their own way.

#1 where he hugs a crying Michael (Daeg) in Smith's Grove.
#2 Talking to Michael (Tyler) in Smith's Grove about not being able to help him anymore
#3 Telling Michael (Tyler) that he had failed him.

mtd20_2000
09-02-2007, 09:04 PM
I think Malcom did an okay job, more the caring doctor, then Donald's melodramatic Loomis (which gave Myers more of a mythic feel)
Then again since Rob chose to build up Michael character background then the victim's (Laurie, Annie, & Linda) Malcom's tone probabaly worked best for this script.
I still think he should have casted John Carpenter's original second choice to play Loomis, Christopher Lee!

Frazetta
09-02-2007, 09:05 PM
I've never once thought that Christopher Lee would have made a good Loomis.

mtd20_2000
09-02-2007, 09:20 PM
You might be right about Christopher Lee not being a good choice Frazetta, but as movies go, you never know how the actor will actually do till you see how their performance is, I for one would have liked to see him give it a try. you just never know.

Villain612
09-02-2007, 09:27 PM
The young Loomis was great.

The older Loomis was borderline bad.

I think that had more to do with the lines than anything McDowell did.

But I really enjoyed his take on young Loomis.

As a comparison - I would say Pleasance was more of a likeable, wise old man. Whereas, McDowell was more a contemporary friend - if that makes any sense.

Sam Loomis922
09-02-2007, 10:20 PM
Malcolm was great as Loomis, Sam is my fav charcter in the series and Malcolm was the right choice. I if they resurect the Loomis charater later Malcolm plays him.

JamieLloydFan
09-03-2007, 04:14 AM
I feel Mcdowells performance as Loomis was Ok. I prefered him in the First act of the film. He was slightly underused in the 2nd act. I still think Rob Zombie made a good casting choice. I really cant think who else could have played the role.

punkrocklove
09-03-2007, 04:18 AM
i didnt like him
his acting, his accent, his persona, everything was totally off.

and wtf was zombie thinking with that dialogue

he ruined the entire movie IMO.

MyersFan927
09-03-2007, 10:02 AM
Some of McDowell's lines and portions seemed to have been rushed or edited in the last minute by Zombie. "You know what? I think we should squeeze in a good Donald Pleasence line." And it didn't come out all too credible.

FUCK! He should have totally gotten Christopher Lee for the remake! That could've definitely worked.

Halloween444
09-03-2007, 10:11 AM
Malcolm was great in the Workprint and in the Young Myers segment.

Myers-89
09-03-2007, 10:16 AM
I thought that Malcolm did a fantastic job as Dr. Loomis. It was different in that you got the impression that he actually cared for Michael. His acting was superb.

Rich
09-03-2007, 10:18 AM
This guy sucked as Loomis plain and simple. I didn't like his Loomis. I didn't care about his Loomis.

DONALD PLEASENSE = Dr. Loomis...PERIOD!!

Myers-89
09-03-2007, 10:22 AM
This guy sucked as Loomis plain and simple. I didn't like his Loomis. I didn't care about his Loomis.

DONALD PLEASENSE = Dr. Loomis...PERIOD!!

Well, to each his own I guess. But I don't think they could have casted a better actor to play this version of Dr. Loomis. I felt he was perfect for the role, but that's just me.

mcilroga
09-03-2007, 10:38 AM
This guy sucked as Loomis plain and simple. I didn't like his Loomis. I didn't care about his Loomis.

DONALD PLEASENSE = Dr. Loomis...PERIOD!!

Yes, he's so important to you your spelling of his last name is nowhere close.

:bastard: :p

Frazetta
09-03-2007, 04:53 PM
Yes, he's so important to you your spelling of his last name is nowhere close.

:bastard: :p
:roflmao: Donal Pleasant iz muh favuright1111!!!1

fateicon
09-03-2007, 05:28 PM
I really liked Malcolm. After watching both versions of Halloween 2007 and the first two Halloween movies, I was able to really make my mind up. As far as the story goes, I thought Loomis was stronger in the first half(as was the story itself). I don't see what was so bad about the lines in the second half, it's not cringe-worthy like a lot of prequel Star Wars lines were. He used a lot of Pleasance material too.

Malcolm's Loomis has a lot more to him. I really enjoyed that the film showed more of a connection with Michael.

Myers-89
09-03-2007, 05:32 PM
Malcolm's Loomis has a lot more to him. I really enjoyed that the film showed more of a connection with Michael.

Exactly.

jaquen
09-03-2007, 05:41 PM
McDowell was excellent, as usual. Too bad the writing for Loomis wasn't nearly as good as him. I was very open to a fresh take on Loomis, and while I quite enjoyed the younger Loomis, once the Haddonfield mayhem started the character crumbled into a weak, confusing mess. He provided none of the tell tale sense of security, or quiet assurance, that I want to see in a "Van Helsing" type. What's the point of Loomis if he seems just as lost, and ineffective, as those around him?

WhiteZombie
09-03-2007, 05:45 PM
:roflmao: Donal Pleasant iz muh favuright1111!!!1

:roflmao:

Anyways, I thought Mcdowell did a wicked job with Loomis. One thing I REALLY wanted, was intsed of somthing like "Evil has come home" (outside of the convienient store), I wanted "Death, has come to your little town Sherif". Classic line.

Casper
09-03-2007, 06:26 PM
To tell you the truth, i really didnt like him as loomis. Rob portrayed him as all vain and what not. In the wp version before he left michael he told him "Dont go too crazy or cry" acting as if he was the greatest thing happening to michael. Then when the convo about the book at the school was going on the teacher said his book was great and loomis talked about himself how great it was...

LOOMIS 68
09-03-2007, 07:34 PM
I Felt That Malcolm Did A Fine Job As Dr Loomis-i Felt He Would Have Made Donald Pleasence Proud!!!!

jigsaw_dude
09-03-2007, 07:40 PM
I thought McDowell did pretty good. He ain't no Donald Pleasence, but he was able to convince me that HE was Dr. Sam Loomis.

njdevs03champs
09-03-2007, 07:44 PM
No Donald Pleasance but did a great job in my opinion.

MikeyMyer$
09-05-2007, 10:05 PM
I would have loved to have seen Anthony Hopkins play Loomis.. I think he would have been dead on.. I can see old Hop with the trench coat.. He would have been great!!! Thoughts ????

wyatt s
09-05-2007, 10:33 PM
Nah, Hopkins is good and all but I just don't get the impression that he'd have been a very good Loomis. I honestly can't think of an actor that I think would have been a better fit for this version of Loomis. Unless of course Zombie had some how magically managed to cast Gary Oldman, now that would have made me shit myself to see Oldman in a Halloween flick.

MikeyMyer$
09-05-2007, 10:51 PM
Nah, Hopkins is good and all but I just don't get the impression that he'd have been a very good Loomis. I honestly can't think of an actor that I think would have been a better fit for this version of Loomis. Unless of course Zombie had some how magically managed to cast Gary Oldman, now that would have made me shit myself to see Oldman in a Halloween flick.

Oldman is excellent. That guy is 1 amazing actor. He just turns into any body and you cant even tell the difference. Take for example the movie, True Romance ,where oldman plays the pimp with the dreadlocks.. Can you even tell that its him ? How about when he plays Lee harvey Oswald in JFK ? It is as if he was the real thing. Hopkins is awsome though. He is one of this generations best actors,hands down. He would have been awsome also.

wyatt s
09-05-2007, 11:00 PM
I for one agree with you on Oldman, a true actor able to transform himself into absolutely anything.

Hopkins is a great actor, and I'm sure he would have been good in the role, I just don't know that he would be "great". Whatever the hell that means

nix23
09-05-2007, 11:45 PM
BAD. The only reason I selected "bad" was because there was no "awful" option. Terrible, boring, lame delivery of terrible, boring, lame lines. When speaking to the cops about Michael going to Hadonfield....he calmy says "I don't know, but it isn't good"?!?!!?!?!? It isn't good??? A blown tire isn't good. Man, he lulled me to sleep. Pleasance was memorable. I didn't expect anyone to match that or imitate that, but man was this character turned into a big waste of time. Then again, this whole movie was a joke.

MikeyMyer$
09-05-2007, 11:54 PM
I thought Malcolm was pretty bad my self. He was my only negative about the movie. He just didnt show the same passion or enthusiasm as Donald displayed. One part that cracked me up in the WP is when little Michael and Loomis are sitting down facing each other and Loomis asks Michael " Why is your hair so messy ?" or messed up. It's funny because Loomis's hair looked even worse than Michaels.

JustABill
09-06-2007, 12:00 AM
I much prefer Donald, but I liked what Malcolm brought to the role. They were too completely different, but overly similar men, if that makes any sense. Lol.

jaquen
09-06-2007, 11:46 AM
BAD. When speaking to the cops about Michael going to Hadonfield....he calmy says "I don't know, but it isn't good"?!?!!?!?!? It isn't good??? A blown tire isn't good. Man, he lulled me to sleep.

To McDowell's credit, you're incorrect about what he was responding to. Brackett wanted to know why Michael was going after Laurie specifically, and what he might do to HER, and Loomis responded with that line. It was made perfectly clear prior to that that Loomis was aware of the destruction and danger Michael was to Haddonfield in general.

Psych0ticNemes1s
09-06-2007, 01:43 PM
Well, to each his own I guess. But I don't think they could have casted a better actor to play this version of Dr. Loomis. I felt he was perfect for the role, but that's just me.

This is pretty much how I feel. Was he a great Loomis? No... but who else would have done a better job?

Myers-89
09-06-2007, 04:47 PM
Malcolm McDowell's interpretation of Dr. Loomis was fantastic. Just accept that it was great instead of trying to nitpick every little thing and say "Well, he's no Donald Pleasence". Well who really IS Donald Pleasence anyway?! Oh, that's right, Donald Pleasence is.

Fiberawptic
09-08-2007, 09:28 AM
You want to know who could be an excellent loomis? Sean Connery, this aint a joke, he could be second best after pleasance.

Fiberawptic
09-08-2007, 10:45 AM
http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a221/Bertrugers/halloween1.jpg

Schmeer
09-08-2007, 10:55 AM
Malcom was okay. I didn't find myself shaking my head as much when he was on screen. But of course he isn't even close to the performance Pleasence gave us, no one is.

Dr. Wynn
09-08-2007, 10:55 AM
http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a221/Bertrugers/halloween1.jpg

Myers vs Bond

freethy
09-08-2007, 11:06 AM
Next person who disses Malcolm will feel my wrath.

#1FreddyFan
09-08-2007, 11:07 AM
Okay, this is my first post on these forums in a LONG time. I knew months before-hand from reading different leaks of the script that I would NOT enjoy Rob Zombie's HalloweeN. I felt that Zombie was unknowingly pissing all over the Michael Myers character. But, I digress, as my actual full in-depth review of this piece of shit will be expressed in a seperate, more appropriate, thread. Since this thread is about Malcolm McDowell's portrayal of Dr. Samuel Loomis, I'll just cut to the chase on that...

I am a fan of Malcolm McDowell, and when I heard that he was cast as Loomis in Rob Zombie's remake of HalloweeN, it actually gave me some hope that the film wouldn't be a complete and total pile of horseshit. Of everything else that this film already had going "wrong" for it in my mind, McDowell's below sub-par performance made the bitter taste of vinidication in my pre-concieved opinion of how bad this film would be, even worse. Throughout most of his time on screen, it felt like he was simply "phoning in" the performance, like he didn't really want to BE in the movie. I've seen him in some really crap movies, but was never disappointed with any of his performances, until HalloweeN. His apparent lack of interest in giving a great performance was the final nail in this film's coffin to make me feel even more justified in bashing it and telling everyone I know to NOT bother seeing it.

I sacrificed my own $10.00 and 2 hours of my life that I'll never be able to get back in order to save so many friends and acquaintances from wasting their own....

Fiberawptic
09-08-2007, 11:10 AM
I sacrificed my own $10.00 and 2 hours of my life that I'll never be able to get back in order to save so many friends and acquaintances from wasting their own....

Cut the stupid ass drama, some people die and never get back their life period... If you thought you had it hard, think again. This movie was fine, go watch ressurection, im sure you love that. and if you knew this movie would suck, then why did you see it?

RazorBlade101
09-08-2007, 11:18 AM
He's not as good as Donald (no way) but nobody could have done that part better then Malcolm could have ... I think he did really good. He played the part well, and he sounded EXACTLY like Donald did ... You have to except change.

If theres another one (we all know there is going to be another one) then I hope the Dr. Loomis character is still alive. lol H20 and Resurrection were boring without that character.

#1FreddyFan
09-08-2007, 11:24 AM
Cut the stupid ass drama, some people die and never get back their life period... If you thought you had it hard, think again. This movie was fine, go watch ressurection, im sure you love that. and if you knew this movie would suck, then why did you see it?

I won't revert to insinuations and insults. You obviously don't know me or what I have endured, but just to give you a little hint, don't go accusing others of not knowing suffering unless you actually know all that they have endured. Over the last 5 years I could've been clinically diagnosed as DEAD 3 times. I'm giving my opinion of a movie, calm down and step off of your soap box. And I saw Resurrection the day it opened in theaters, the next day started a 3 month stint in the hospital because of kidney failure requiring the start of dialysis, and I always joke that "Resurrection was so bad that it almost killed me", so I know how bad that miserable excuse for a sequel was.

I actually let curiosity, and the rantings of another person on just as high-and-mighty a soap box as yourself, convince me to watch this pile of feces just so that I WOULD be justified in my low opinion of what I believed Rob Zombie was making. And even though deep down I did NOT want to be right, I was.

RazorBlade101
09-08-2007, 11:25 AM
I dont know what you guys are seeing in him thats so bad. Is it even visible to point out? Or are you mad because he's not Donald Pleasence? Otherwise ... Yous judge way too much. I'm sure Malcome did a better job then Donald did in Halloweens 5 and 6. Which were real good movies also ... Well 5 was goofy but I still like it a lot cause of Daniel, Donald, music and the kills.

I like all the halloweens ... Except 3, and H20 is just an allright movie to watch.

jaquen
09-08-2007, 11:31 AM
I'll reiterate that I didn't think McDowell was the problem, but the writing, and Zombie's overall vision for the character, was. Writing and character vision go a long way toward hampering a character. Look at Loomis in H6, Rachel in H5, and Laurie in Resurrection; not even the characters' usual portrayers could save those versions of the character from sucking. Give me McDowell's confused, helpless Loomis over Donald's last two outings as Loomis any day. The "new" Loomis can't touch classic Loomis, but it got to the point that not even classic Loomis could touch classic Loomis. I really think McDowell is getting a bum wrap for a character who's problem does not lie in how he's acted.

#1FreddyFan
09-08-2007, 11:32 AM
Personally RazorBlade, I'm judging his performance as Loomis against other roles he's done much better jobs in. I'm not comparing him to Pleasence, I'm comparing him to himself and the kind of performance that I know he COULD have given

jaquen
09-08-2007, 11:49 AM
Personally RazorBlade, I'm judging his performance as Loomis against other roles he's done much better jobs in. I'm not comparing him to Pleasence, I'm comparing him to himself and the kind of performance that I know he COULD have given

Also very true. Compared to some of his prior stellar work Halloween won't be running on his "greatest moments" reel. I thought his acting was fine for this new film, more than enough suited for what Zombie required, but his Loomis definitely does not stand up well next to his Alex de Large or his Alberto Antonelli. Hell his guest stint on Entourage as Ari's boss Terrance had more fire.

Sirand
09-08-2007, 02:39 PM
Interesting tidbit I just found out: McDowell hated the movie so much that he has vowed never to be associated with the horror genre ever again. So don't expect him in a sequel or anything the least bit genre related ever again.

Silverpsycho
09-08-2007, 02:44 PM
Hmm, I find that interesting, considering positive things were said in a fairly recent Fangoria article. Check it out here: http://fangoria.com/fearful_feature.php?id=4862



I thought McDowell was far better than just good and he's the reason to go see the film more than once in my opinion. He takes the character of Dr. Loomis to a whole new level and made it his own. I didn't want a carbon copy of Pleasance's performance because that would have been lame. I like this new Loomis with an ego combined with a charm that made me care about him. He was definitely my favorite character in the film...no contest.

Khan
09-08-2007, 02:48 PM
Interesting tidbit I just found out: McDowell hated the movie so much that he has vowed never to be associated with the horror genre ever again. So don't expect him in a sequel or anything the least bit genre related ever again.

Link?

MichaelJrdnMyrs
09-08-2007, 03:05 PM
Interesting tidbit I just found out: McDowell hated the movie so much that he has vowed never to be associated with the horror genre ever again. So don't expect him in a sequel or anything the least bit genre related ever again.


Hmm. That's a little hard to believe. Not because this version of Halloween is so great or that he isn't an uppity English blowhard or anything-- but because I saw a horror movie he was in a few years ago on tv a few weeks before Halloween came out... it was horrendous. Had to be a direct-to-video thing.

He played a psychiatrist working in an asylum in that one too.

Myers Insurance
09-08-2007, 03:06 PM
Interesting tidbit I just found out: McDowell hated the movie so much that he has vowed never to be associated with the horror genre ever again. So don't expect him in a sequel or anything the least bit genre related ever again.

Funny considering he's signed on for two sequels.

The Dark Shape
09-08-2007, 03:43 PM
HE WAS OPTIONED BEFORE THEY KILLED HIM OFF IN RESHOOTS.

Seriously, people. Jeez.

RazorBlade101
09-08-2007, 05:02 PM
Personally RazorBlade, I'm judging his performance as Loomis against other roles he's done much better jobs in. I'm not comparing him to Pleasence, I'm comparing him to himself and the kind of performance that I know he COULD have given

I still dont see what he did wrong ... Or what everyone sees that I'm not seeing. How was he bad?

RazorBlade101
09-08-2007, 05:03 PM
Funny considering he's signed on for two sequels.

Ok ... Where did you hear this? Can you give me a link?

Same with the guy that said Malcome hates horror movies.

Myers-89
09-08-2007, 05:28 PM
I thought McDowell was far better than just good and he's the reason to go see the film more than once in my opinion. He takes the character of Dr. Loomis to a whole new level and made it his own. I didn't want a carbon copy of Pleasance's performance because that would have been lame. I like this new Loomis with an ego combined with a charm that made me care about him. He was definitely my favorite character in the film...no contest.

Exactly. McDowell's Dr. Loomis was awesome.

mike32
09-08-2007, 06:32 PM
I thought he was horrible but he was trying to fill the shoes of a great actor.

freethy
09-09-2007, 12:50 AM
He is a great actor.

jaquen
09-09-2007, 05:13 AM
I thought he was horrible but he was trying to fill the shoes of a great actor.

McDowell is a great, classic actor who is every bit as good as Pleasence. Just because his Loomis isn't on the level of classic Loomis doesn't mean that he's a lesser actor than Donald at all.

#1FreddyFan
09-11-2007, 06:23 AM
McDowell is a great, classic actor who is every bit as good as Pleasence. Just because his Loomis isn't on the level of classic Loomis doesn't mean that he's a lesser actor than Donald at all.

Exactly, and I think that's one of the reasons I so vehemently disliked this film, because I was expecting more (that I KNOW he COULD have given) out of McDowell than he gave. His being cast as Loomis was pretty much the only reason that I had any genuine interest in watching this pile of crap.

Hallow's Eve
09-20-2007, 07:28 AM
I've never cared much for Malcolm Mcdowell except of course for his performance in "A Clockwork Orange". Other than that, he hasn't done much to impress me. I was hoping he might be able to step it up as Dr. Sam Loomis but sadly, he did not. He is one of my biggest gripes on this film. His acting is horrible to say the least. Some of his lines are absolutely laughable! Like "Michael...........what the hell !" or when he's asked what Michael is up to, he says "I don't know, but it can't be good". And of course, when Laurie Strode asks "What's the Boogeyman?", he says "As a matter of fact, I do believe that was". Come on, man! Also, there is just none of the conflict between him and Michael that there is in the original. None of the good vs. evil aspect or his determination to take down the monster no one else believed was dangerous. In here, he actually says that Michael is his best friend. You have got to be kidding me. He destroyed the character and is an insult to Donald Pleasense. he couldn't wipe Donald's ass. He almost ruins the movie, almost.

jaquen
09-20-2007, 07:38 AM
I've never cared much for Malcolm Mcdowell except of course for his performance in "A Clockwork Orange". Other than that, he hasn't done much to impress me. I was hoping he might be able to step it up as Dr. Sam Loomis but sadly, he did not. He is one of my biggest gripes on this film. His acting is horrible to say the least. Some of his lines are absolutely laughable! Like "Michael...........what the hell !" or when he's asked what Michael is up to, he says "I don't know, but it can't be good". And of course, when Laurie Strode asks "What's the Boogeyman?", he says "As a matter of fact, I do believe that was". Come on, man! Also, there is just none of the conflict between him and Michael that there is in the original. None of the good vs. evil aspect or his determination to take down the monster no one else believed was dangerous. In here, he actually says that Michael is his best friend. You have got to be kidding me. He destroyed the character and is an insult to Donald Pleasense. he couldn't wipe Donald's ass. He almost ruins the movie, almost.

See I take issue with almost every point you mentioned here as well, we agree, but they are not issues with McDowell as an actor at all. All of these points you mentioned are writing issues with the story, and the character, not the actor. There isn't one point you just brought up that has anything to do with how well, or poorly, McDowell performed. Those were poorly constructed character, relationship, and dialogue issues that exist inherently in the script before you even add McDowell's contribution.

NickSacco
09-20-2007, 10:47 AM
favorite part that made me laugh from loomis is like 15 years thats nearly half my marriage..i dk haha i laughed casue im like what is he talking about

Dr_Loomis02
09-21-2007, 08:31 AM
HE WAS OPTIONED BEFORE THEY KILLED HIM OFF IN RESHOOTS.

Seriously, people. Jeez.

It's left ambiguous IMO. We don't know for sure that he was killed And I'm sure they'll want his character to return if they make another, which we know they will.

101ant101
09-21-2007, 10:55 AM
i thought he was alright. but i dont really care for both of them. i started to get tired of mr loomis in halloween ,4,5,6

jaquen
09-21-2007, 06:49 PM
It's left ambiguous IMO. We don't know for sure that he was killed And I'm sure they'll want his character to return if they make another, which we know they will.

Ultimately it doesn't really matter does it? Loomis' demise was anything but ambiguous after Halloween 2, and yet there he is some 10 years later limping along, spouting on about pure evil and such. Somehow the events of this remake make a Loomis return far more plausible than what we're use to. Not that I'm exactly hoping for a follow up.

Todd
09-22-2007, 05:39 AM
It wasn't Malcolms performance that I didn't like, but I didn't care for the way Loomis was portrayed in this movie. No longer was he the one guy who saw Michael for what he is, but now he actually called Michael his best friend.
WTF???

BlackenedHeart
09-22-2007, 05:45 AM
It wasn't Malcolms performance that I didn't like, but I didn't care for the way Loomis was portrayed in this movie. No longer was he the one guy who saw Michael for what he is, but now he actually called Michael his best friend.
WTF???


Thats what I thought when watching the movie.....his best friend? I think Malcolm did a fine job, but I'm old school so I prefer Donald Pleasence

MrShape666
09-22-2007, 11:25 AM
I liked how Malcom's Loomis went more into the toll his obsession with Micheal was taking on him. Serveral marriges apparently crumbled, I'm sure it was because of that.

jaquen
09-22-2007, 11:49 AM
I liked how Malcom's Loomis went more into the toll his obsession with Micheal was taking on him. Serveral marriges apparently crumbled, I'm sure it was because of that.

I doubt it. I never once got the impression that this new Loomis was obsessed with Michael. Just seemed your run of the mill patient/doctor relationship that was close knit because Loomis got to him at such a young age. I don't see obsession on any level, just dedication. And when the chips were down and Loomis could no longer help Michael, he cashed in on his experience with him.

Joker
09-22-2007, 12:00 PM
McDowell was plain awful as Loomis. And that's not comparing him with Donald's version either. The dialogue was awful and he just seemed so fake and it was generally a bad performance.

I cant help to think that not seeing any of the films hampered his chances of doing a good job. He didnt have to copy Pleasence but atleast he would of been able to see the kinda of obsessive emotion needed and just the general feel for the character. Let the film down for me, to be honest.

Hawkwind
09-22-2007, 04:23 PM
I voted yea, I think he did a really great Job as Dr.Looms not as good as Donald's but there not the same people so I never expected him to do the role the same way.

myers5fan
09-23-2007, 06:02 PM
I liked Malcolm as Dr. Loomis because in this version of the film you see their interaction as it progressed. In the original there was no allusion to why Loomis began to think of Michael as "it". You do see some in the television version of the original but that is it.

Reaper43
09-23-2007, 07:46 PM
He did an okey job. Nowhere NEAR Donald's standards. He seemed like a pussy to me. Very whisy washy.

As if Donald wasn't in the original :bastard:

I think he did a good job; he didn't mimic or shadow Pleasence which is always nice. I came to see Rob Zombie's Halloween, not John Carpenter's. He really made his character work.

*wanted*
09-30-2007, 02:35 PM
abit of a joke to be honist anytime he came onscreen i had to laugh...i couldent hold it back..
at one point he was messing with his hair i had to question his sexuality...no wonder he has had 3 faild marrages

Captain Mal
09-30-2007, 03:18 PM
I liked how Malcom's Loomis went more into the toll his obsession with Micheal was taking on him. Serveral marriges apparently crumbled, I'm sure it was because of that.

I agree with this. I got the impression that Loomis' working on MM had ruined his private life. I also loved the 'best friend' thing and the line that followed was great fun. I also loved the 'it's me Samuel' scene. Loomis was still trying to reach his 'friend'. I was surprised at the emotion in this scene and the 'I've failed you' line was also was said with a lot of regret and I give great credit to Malcolm for this. There was more to his performance than I expected.

punkrocklove
09-30-2007, 10:13 PM
I didnt like him.
To me, he always had an expression of confusion/annoyance on his face. As though he was constantly feeling those two things.

His dialogue was bad, which isnt his fault, but he could have worked on it better.
i dont know..but its bad

MichaelJrdnMyrs
09-30-2007, 11:56 PM
i dont know..but its bad


Heh, killer spoiler there. Thank God for those tags.

ThornMember83
10-06-2007, 10:41 AM
He did a ok job, seemed very bland tough at times. I didnt want him to be a exact copy of Donald but there just seemed to be no emotion his is performance. No one will ever RRRRRRRRRRRRRR come close to Donald Pleasence in this role.

WhiteZombie
10-06-2007, 12:49 PM
It wasn't Malcolms performance that I didn't like, but I didn't care for the way Loomis was portrayed in this movie. No longer was he the one guy who saw Michael for what he is, but now he actually called Michael his best friend.
WTF???

I dont think he ment it literally. He ment it as in, hes spent so much time trying to reach him that he became like his bestfriend. He obviouslty dident mean there buddys.

metallicabowler
10-06-2007, 01:27 PM
Malcolm McDowell's Loomis is a different character, and it shows in his performance. The first thing I thought when I saw McDowell's Loomis on-screen was "Ok, this guy's kind of an asshole." And that showed throughout the movie that he's pretty much a prick. That's my take on it.

renee30152
10-06-2007, 02:34 PM
I agree with you. He played the character in a whole new light in that of Donald's. His Dr. Loomis was a self-centered, spineless asshole who seemed more into helping himself then others. Not to mention the dialoge was HORRIBLE. When asked if that was the boogeyman he replies "I do believe it was." WTF?? Donald's performace was MUCH better imho.

hall-o-ween
10-06-2007, 04:53 PM
I guess for me Malcolm McDowall delivered an okay performance as Loomis. I will always associate Dr. Loomis with Donald Pleasance, but I have to remember that this was Rob Zombie's movie. Watching the second half of the movie, picking up where the original started, there were times it felt awkward hearing McDowall deliver the same lines Pleasance had once done.

metallicabowler
10-07-2007, 12:13 PM
Yeah Hall-o-ween it was weird hearing those lines come out of another voice, especially "Two road blocks and an all-points bulliten wouldn't stop a 5 year-old."

Loomis saying "What the...FUCK?" as Laurie's pulled out of the car will always stick with me as a classic line from the franchise, the acting there was perfect.

Muse
10-10-2007, 04:13 AM
Personally, I loved Malcom as Loomis. He was probably my favourite part about the movie. I thought he was awesome. Because he was a different character to the one in which DP portrayed, I may even go as far as saying I prefer MM's portrayal of him *prepares to be attacked by angry DP fans*. Seriously, I thought he was great. I don't really know what else to add, other than I thought the way he worked with the character he had was just great. Thought he pulled it off fantastically.

BunnyMcNibbnles
10-25-2007, 07:45 PM
HORRIBLE.

McDowell (or however you spell it) turned the film into a joke. As I stated in another thread, he is a watered down version of Pleasence's Loomis.

I don't understand why people claim that Carpenter's Loomis is 'a different character' than Zombie's Loomis. It's the same character - it's just that one was written brilliantly with a really awesome actor and one was written really horribly -with lines ripped off directly from the first version - and with a really shitty performance by a usually great actor.

If the two Loomis versions were completely different - i.e., not looking almost identical, not speaking almost identically and not saying almost identical things, I'd have a different view. But, Zombie didn't do one original thing with Loomis. All he did was take the great character of Dr. Loomis and turn him into more of an asshole. Yeah, that's originality.

RachelFan88
10-27-2007, 09:23 PM
Even though Malcolm's performance wasn't as good as Donald's, he did a very good job.

HALLOWEENSHAPE7
10-30-2007, 04:16 PM
No one will ever beat Donald Pleasance. Halloween was a movie of 1978 by John Carpenter. Donald Pleasance IS Dr. Loomis.

Malcom is a guy attempting to live out Dr. Loomis, so figurativly he is trying to BE donald pleasance himself, so say to yourself this- "How can Malcom be a better Donald Pleasance than Donald Pleasance?"

Maybe they should create some new personallities or something.

Masked Madman
10-30-2007, 05:38 PM
No one will ever beat Donald Pleasance. Halloween was a movie of 1975 by John Carpenter. Donald Pleasance IS Dr. Loomis.

Malcom is a guy attempting to live out Dr. Loomis, so figurativly he is trying to BE donald pleasance himself, so say to yourself this- "How can Malcom be a better Donald Pleasance than Donald Pleasance?"

Maybe they should create some new personallities or something.
1978.

While i think he did a good job, Malcom McDowell just wasn't as good as DP imo. If they had made MM's Loomis his own and they didnt recycle old DP Loomis lines, i would have liked him alot better.

HALLOWEENSHAPE7
10-30-2007, 05:50 PM
Sorry! Edited error! I was thinking of JAWS 1975. Really its 1978

Thanks

jaquen
10-30-2007, 05:58 PM
Malcom is a guy attempting to live out Dr. Loomis, so figurativly he is trying to BE donald pleasance himself, so say to yourself this- "How can Malcom be a better Donald Pleasance than Donald Pleasance?"

Ummm, no.

mcilroga
10-30-2007, 06:04 PM
I wrote 1978

No you didn't.

HALLOWEENSHAPE7
10-31-2007, 09:01 AM
Why don't we attempt to acually focus on the thread instead of errors, mcilroga?


Trying to give the lines of a classic horror movie in a new way could be a good thing, but not in the case of Donald Pleasance, because he created the character. Donald Pleasance made the doctor Loomis we know. So, while Malcom is trying to be "Dr. Loomis" He is always going to be critizized for not being DOnald Pleasance. Maybe a new outlook on loomis would be better. I don't see an opportunity for another actor to recreate the roll of a classic actor. Thats my opinion, so please don't attempt to bash me and insert your own opinion, please.

Halloween444
12-19-2007, 04:42 PM
When Mcdowell appear near the end of the film in an attempt to save Laurie from The Shape Hands in the Pool of the myers House I really liked when He start pointing that gun on Michael and start yelling Michael Stoooop Stop Michael man that was so Intense when I first saw this 2 day before everybody on the 29 of august I was just breathless this Quote from Loomis is by far my favorite of the entire FILM.

Danny Strode
12-19-2007, 05:00 PM
When that scene happened, a few people in the theater said, "Don't go down there!" after he shot Michael.

PatientX
12-19-2007, 07:08 PM
I thought he did a great job with young Michael. I didn't much care for him in the rest of the film.
His facial expressions in a few scenes were really good.
Like after Michael stabs the nurse with the fork and they run in slow motion - he was just distgusted and didn't want to believe what had just happnened.

1978 COLLECTOR
12-19-2007, 07:28 PM
I though he was good, ALMOST comparable to Pleasense, but I used the word almost. So far, I have only seen the theatrical version and I have not bought any of the dvds yet...

He is good at explaining things and he brings new life into the character, and it is fresh. Same style as the original but diffrent feeling. And I like how he deals with young Michael. It was oscar deserving. And when that scene came where he looked like he was giving a lecture was especialy good-I liked the closeup on the eyes...

I would give him an academy award for just being one of the only people to put quality into this movie...

DoomsdayFAN
12-20-2007, 07:58 PM
I voted "bad". Malcom McDowell did a bad job at acting as Dr. Loomis. Maybe he's just a sucky actor, IDK. But he really sucked.

Maybe Rob should have let Malcom watch JC Halloween. because then McDowell could've at least mimiced Donald (Which I would have prefered)

Severed
12-21-2007, 04:38 AM
I voted "bad". Malcom McDowell did a bad job at acting as Dr. Loomis. Maybe he's just a sucky actor, IDK. But he really sucked.

Maybe Rob should have let Malcom watch JC Halloween. because then McDowell could've at least mimiced Donald (Which I would have prefered)

Trust me, that would have totally sucked. Donald Pleasance is the only one that can do Donald Pleasance. Malcom needed to play the part his way. IMO, I think he is the only one that could have pulled off the Dr. Loomis part and I thought he did it very well.

slasher
12-26-2007, 07:14 PM
Watching Malcolm play the role of Loomis made me miss Donald Pleasence that much more. I thought he did a terrible job.

tama_drummer91
12-26-2007, 09:10 PM
I liked him a lot. No, hes not Donald, but he made the role his own. I liked how he was more charming and less crazy. The scenes where he is with young Michael are really great. Also, by watching the bloopers you can tell he had a great time making the film. He acted like a 20 year old! I never would have thought that. He seems to be a good guy and I did enjoy his performance. He is totally different than Donald. Theres hardly any comparison between the two. I think that if he tried to copy Donald it would have come out very shitty.

mannylb88
12-26-2007, 10:05 PM
i didn't like the Loomis character in the new movie, but it wasn't Malcolm's fault, he played the part very well.

i just didn't like the way the character was written. i didn't like Loomis cursing, and the whole author trying to sell his book angle they took for him.

i think at the end that's why they killed him off.

tama_drummer91
12-26-2007, 10:17 PM
i didn't like the Loomis character in the new movie, but it wasn't Malcolm's fault, he played the part very well.

i just didn't like the way the character was written. i didn't like Loomis cursing, and the whole author trying to sell his book angle they took for him.

i think at the end that's why they killed him off.


Except they didn't kill him off. At least not in the Directors Cut.

Khan
12-26-2007, 10:18 PM
They haven't said which version is official, so it will be interesting to find that out.

mannylb88
12-26-2007, 10:19 PM
i bought the DVD today, so i have to sit down and watch it. atleast in the theatrical cut they did, and that really is all that matters in the continuity.

kinda like when people bust out with the H6 P-cut discussion...yeah its better and all, but doesn't count.

Khan
12-26-2007, 10:25 PM
Same with the Halloween 2 TV cut, which has Jimmy surviving but is unofficial.

MyersHunter20
12-27-2007, 05:36 PM
I thought Donald Pleasance made a better Dr. Loomis. it just seems weird not having the sam loomis that we all know and love. Malcom did okay though. not the greatest but okay

mannylb88
12-28-2007, 12:01 PM
by the way...let me go off on a tangent real quick. that scene of the mental patient being raped in Michael's room which supposedly was taken off the script...but then added on the Director's cut...totally tasteless of Zombie's behalf.

i heard the commentary during the scene...and regardless of how realistic the scenario might be in real life, thats either something you don't do, or atleast not show as graphically as he did.

have some fucking dignity in your film...and this is from someone that supported the film...so no bias from me.

discvader
12-30-2007, 10:23 AM
by the way...let me go off on a tangent real quick. that scene of the mental patient being raped in Michael's room which supposedly was taken off the script...but then added on the Director's cut...totally tasteless of Zombie's behalf.

i heard the commentary during the scene...and regardless of how realistic the scenario might be in real life, thats either something you don't do, or atleast not show as graphically as he did.

have some fucking dignity in your film...and this is from someone that supported the film...so no bias from me.
I agree.

I thought Malcolm was alright...although when Laurie says, "was the boogeyman" and he says something like..."indubitably it was" lol(that's what he should have said), I wanted to skull-f*ck...myself!

Bearscubsfan87
12-30-2007, 08:30 PM
While I think Malcolm did a nice job, he isn't Donald. Let's face it, no matter what actor they cast in the role, odds are he wouldn't have lived up to the standard set by his predecessor.

I couldn't help but think, the whole time I was in the theater, how Malcolm's character in Star Trek Generations killed off Captain Kirk, and now he was cast as the arch nemesis of a maniac basically wearing a William Shatner mask. I just found that funny.

Ravenheart
12-31-2007, 09:36 AM
Seeing Malcolm play the role,who I thought did a pretty good job,it reminded me of something I hear in almost all the documentaries based on the original movie.When Carpenter is talking about the final scene and how he wasn't sure how it should be played.Having Loomis be all emotional and do the whole, "Oh my god!He's gone" or like he actually was in the movie,"I knew this would happen".
Malcolm's version of Loomis is very much the "Oh my god he's gone" one.I like both though.

tombennett91
01-01-2008, 08:06 AM
I thought he did okay he was a bit too laid back though, when Michael escaped he wasn't too worried about the situation like Donald was.

First half he did really well though, minus the hair.

By the way, are the workprint and uncut edition the same?

renee30152
01-01-2008, 09:36 AM
I didn't think he was that good. After watching it several times, I wish they show a better actor.

mannylb88
01-01-2008, 02:51 PM
By the way, are the workprint and uncut edition the same?

no...here are the two differences i've seen so far.

Michael's escape in the uncut consists of two orderlies raping a mentally ill girl in Michael's room and then him going crazy.

and secondly...Loomis survives in the uncut.

there's probably more, i just haven't sat through the entire thing yet.

cloud2795
01-02-2008, 03:02 PM
hey played loomis very well but no matter what there is not way he can compare with Pleasence but he did do a good job with loomis and made him seem more of Michael's friend instead of someone trying to kill Michael

Todd
01-02-2008, 04:12 PM
Loomis referring to Michael as his best friend was way too much.
I know Rob Zombie wanted to make this movie his own and couldn't have everything be the same as in the original, but eliminating the nemisis dynamic between Loomis and Michael wasn't good. It stripped the movie of one of its most important elements. I know Malcolm didn't watch the original version before acting in the new one, but perhaps he should have. He wouldn't have needed to channel Donald Pleasence, but he could have retained some aspects of the original character.

tama_drummer91
01-02-2008, 07:55 PM
Loomis referring to Michael as his best friend was way too much.
I know Rob Zombie wanted to make this movie his own and couldn't have everything be the same as in the original, but eliminating the nemisis dynamic between Loomis and Michael wasn't good. It stripped the movie of one of its most important elements. I know Malcolm didn't watch the original version before acting in the new one, but perhaps he should have. He wouldn't have needed to channel Donald Pleasence, but he could have retained some aspects of the original character.

I respect Malcolm more for not trying a bit to act like Donald. Donald was the only one who could act like himself. The man is a legend. Malcolm is a totally different actor. Totally different personality too. I really hope he returns for a sequel. I also liked how they seemed more like friends and not true enemies. It showed me that Loomis actually cared.

BONES
01-03-2008, 06:43 AM
I think he did ok..not enough intencety for me and Zombie could have wrote the part better I think loomis was to hip acting in this one

Dr Hoffman
01-03-2008, 06:56 AM
I liked Malcolm's Loomis in the first half of the film when he tries to unlock Michael's problems and as he realised that he was going to be unable to reach Michael. I thought he captured that part of the role very well.

Halloween444
01-05-2008, 02:14 PM
In the Third Act Malcolm Was So Phenomenal I just like His Way To Play Loomis Pleasance will Alway's be the Man But Malcolm Own it in the remake no doubt about that.

coryorton
01-15-2008, 11:29 AM
I'm an insane fan of McDowell (I have him ink'd on me permanently from Clockwork Orange for crying out loud), and had HUGE expectations for him to shake things up in a positive way in this flick...just didn't happen.

But I don't know if it was him (and his lack of enthusiasm for this project which I think personally is made clear by interviews,could just be me), or the terrible script material and directing he had to work with.

MaDMaNMaRz
01-15-2008, 04:19 PM
I thought Malcolm was alright as Dr. Loomis.

His delivery on some lines were a bit.....strange, I guess you could say. Especially the lines that Rob used as an homage to the original.

Rage_Virus
01-19-2008, 07:33 AM
I thought he did pretty well, I mean besides Donald I can't picture another actor who could have done it



maybe Gabriel Byrne

renee30152
01-19-2008, 07:49 PM
While I think Malcolm did a nice job, he isn't Donald. Let's face it, no matter what actor they cast in the role, odds are he wouldn't have lived up to the standard set by his predecessor.

I couldn't help but think, the whole time I was in the theater, how Malcolm's character in Star Trek Generations killed off Captain Kirk, and now he was cast as the arch nemesis of a maniac basically wearing a William Shatner mask. I just found that funny.

So true. No one could replace Donald or even come close to his Dr. Loomis.
They could have found a better actor though IMHO. He was just so deadpan and not the greatest fella. His lines were aweful and that wasn't his fault, but I felt he didn't give it his all.

Michael Voorhees
07-30-2009, 12:38 AM
Malcom was fucking awesome as Loomis, I loved every moment of his performance, and hope he reappears throughout the entirety of the new franchise.

myersh4
08-09-2009, 02:06 PM
He was a joke. No one is better than Pleasence as loomis:bow:

lopli
08-10-2009, 03:32 PM
No one can beat the performance of Pleasence, but I thought he did ok.

Zombie_Myers
08-11-2009, 07:27 AM
Malcolm was perfectly cast as Loomis, his performance was great.

Michael Voorhees
08-12-2009, 08:25 AM
It stands to reason anyone saying Malcom was a joke as Dr. Loomis likely doesn't have a brain. I understand respecting and favoriting the originals, but also show respect for other good actors who enter the fray.

srf nz
08-12-2009, 08:43 AM
It stands to reason anyone saying Malcom was a joke as Dr. Loomis likely doesn't have a brain. I understand respecting and favoriting the originals, but also show respect for other good actors who enter the fray.

Exactly. Even the biggest critics of RZH have to admit that Malcolm was great. You simply can't compare him to Pleasence, it isn't fair to McDowell when everyone here has built up Donald Pleasence as practically a God, nobody could live up to those expectations, not even the best of actors. McDowell is as good of an actor as you'll find, and his role as Loomis was one of the best things of the film.

Pandaz
08-12-2009, 08:48 AM
I have mixed feelings about Malcolm McDowell as Loomis. During the first half, I thought he turned in a pretty solid performance - probably because it was original material. Throughout the second half, however, I thought Zombie tried to make him too much like Pleasence's Loomis. I don't think the rants about pure evil really suit Malcolm. I cringed when he uttered dialogue about how evil Michael was. As such, I'm pretty happy to hear that the follow-up will give us a completely new approach on Loomis.

jaquen
08-12-2009, 09:51 AM
I have mixed feelings about Malcolm McDowell as Loomis. During the first half, I thought he turned in a pretty solid performance - probably because it was original material. Throughout the second half, however, I thought Zombie tried to make him too much like Pleasence's Loomis. I don't think the rants about pure evil really suit Malcolm. I cringed when he uttered dialogue about how evil Michael was. As such, I'm pretty happy to hear that the follow-up will give us a completely new approach on Loomis.

My view exactly. M. McDowell is a powerful actor, every bit as good as Donald was. But Rob did him zero favors at all with that tired rehash of classic Loomis. McDowell should have been allowed to take that character in a radically different direction.

But that's an overall complaint I have about the film. It truly fell apart when it exceeded it's own original material, and just came off as a shoddy, over directed mess wearing a cheap mask that looked kinda like the original Halloween.

Buckyspowerline
08-16-2009, 04:11 PM
Honestly, I didn't know what to expect concerning the Loomis character in RZH. I was glad that Mcdowell portrayed the character of Dr. Loomis perfectly. I was impressed.

Michael Voorhees
08-18-2009, 08:34 PM
I have mixed feelings about Malcolm McDowell as Loomis. During the first half, I thought he turned in a pretty solid performance - probably because it was original material. Throughout the second half, however, I thought Zombie tried to make him too much like Pleasence's Loomis. I don't think the rants about pure evil really suit Malcolm. I cringed when he uttered dialogue about how evil Michael was. As such, I'm pretty happy to hear that the follow-up will give us a completely new approach on Loomis.

Idk, I thought he shined through his entire performance. I thought he fit both sides of the character really well. The side that tried to reach Michael for 15-17 years, and the side of him that was trying to warn people of the evil that was walking around town.

Horror Kitten
08-21-2009, 07:10 AM
I voted good.

I think he did as good as anyone, besides Pleasance, could have done. Did I love him as Loomis? No. But that wasn't because of Malcolm, or anything he did/didn't do. It was because I loved Donald so much, that I never really wanted to see anyone else as Loomis. Thats not Mr McDowells fault, it's my own problem. Malcolm did a good job with what he had. It wasn't as amazing and memorable as DP's Sam, but noone will ever, in my mind, ever live up to that standard.

jaquen
08-21-2009, 07:29 AM
. It wasn't as amazing and memorable as DP's Sam, but noone will ever, in my mind, ever live up to that standard.

Well that pretty much sums up the entire film.

Michael Voorhees
08-21-2009, 08:24 AM
No, it really doesn't, but let's not go down that route.

DoomsdayFAN
08-27-2009, 04:06 PM
Blah! :mad:

This man would have been a better all around choice for Loomis. At least he can act, and make it seem real. Hopfully after we're done having to endure RZ's filth, they hire him to play Loomis in future installments. Maybe we could get back to the way things were before the trainwreck that is H5 ruined everything. (I dont mean start from H4, I just mean to get back to that kind of movie)

http://faussesvaleurs.unblog.fr/files/2009/07/jeffbridges.jpg



Right. :rolleyes:

Michael Voorhees
08-27-2009, 07:24 PM
God....please tell me you're joking.

DoomsdayFAN
08-28-2009, 11:38 AM
Well.... no. *runs*



Honestly though, I think he would have made the perfect Loomis, had thy coninued the Loomis character (ala James Bond; different actor same character) in the old series. But now.... IDK. I dont know what would work anymore. I just know that I didnt like MacDowell as Loomis. I thought he gave a forced performance.

SEXMACHINE
09-07-2009, 04:37 AM
I won't compare him to Donald Pleasence because that would be insane. I thought that he was okay in the first film. He didn't really do all that much but he did throw out a couple of Loomis type lines. In the sequel he's just a scumbag. I hated how his character was just pathetic and didn't do anything for the movie. His last scene was almost laughable when he throws away that line to Brackett. The only part I liked him in was the incident at the book signing but that really had nothing to do with him, and more to do with the unhappy camper.

jaquen
09-07-2009, 07:10 AM
At least he can act, and make it seem real.

At least he can act? The issues with Loomis in RZ's 2007 Halloween have nothing to do with McDowell, and everything to do with the piss poor writing for the character in the remake portion of that film. But it amazes me how little respect some Halloween fans show for an actor of Malcolm's history and caliber; most would be so lucky to be "saddled" with a talent of this level.

Since when can the fans of a mostly poorly acted slasher franchise stand in judgement of Malcolm McDowell?

RZLynda
09-07-2009, 07:24 AM
Usually I have a good attitude about all actors and characters in the Halloween franchise, but I can't stand McDowell as Loomis, especially now after seeing H2 twice. After just watching the first movie, I didn't really like him but I didn't hate him like I do now. I know he's not to blame for any of the deaths that occured like he was throughout H2, but I sort of wanted to see him get shot by Lynda's father or Sheriff Brackett and I was rooting them on. But I have to give him his props for the end of the movie though.

Nothing really against Malcolm McDowell, just his Loomis. I'm sure it's more Zombie's fault than his.

Like when he and Michael are in the hospital, he starts rambling about how black isn't a color and white is every color. I found that to be pointless.

jaquen
09-07-2009, 07:30 AM
Usually I have a good attitude about all actors and characters in the Halloween franchise, but I can't stand McDowell as Loomis, especially now after seeing H2 twice. After just watching the first movie, I didn't really like him but I didn't hate him like I do now. I know he's not to blame for any of the deaths that occured like he was throughout H2, but I sort of wanted to see him get shot by Lynda's father or Sheriff Brackett and I was rooting them on. But I have to give him his props for the end of the movie though.

Nothing really against Malcolm McDowell, just his Loomis. I'm sure it's more Zombie's fault than his.

Like when he and Michael are in the hospital, he starts rambling about how black isn't a color and white is every color. I found that to be pointless.

Exactly. Loomis in H2 is NOT a likeable character, but McDowell sure did play the hell out of him in this new movie.

spindrift68
09-08-2009, 09:49 PM
I love McDowell's version of Loomis.

Michael Voorhees
09-10-2009, 12:08 AM
I love McDowell's Loomis as much as the next cat, but please, let's not belittle others opinions of his performance and try to undermine the Halloween franchise in an attempt to make McDowell look better.

missvirginia91
09-10-2009, 05:14 AM
I liked him okay in RZH, but I didn't like him in RZH2.

TheThirdHalf
09-10-2009, 05:46 AM
I love McDowell's Loomis as much as the next cat, but please, let's not belittle others opinions of his performance and try to undermine the Halloween franchise in an attempt to make McDowell look better.

What?

Michael Voorhees
09-10-2009, 12:02 PM
Since when can the fans of a mostly poorly acted slasher franchise stand in judgement of Malcolm McDowell?

This part of the post speaks for itself.

MichaelMyers
09-10-2009, 12:17 PM
I liked in him H1 but Rob ruined Loomis in H2.

TheThirdHalf
09-10-2009, 01:16 PM
This part of the post speaks for itself.

Well, really man, he's right. I mean, we're all fans here, but some of the entries can't be defended haha

Michael Voorhees
09-10-2009, 05:46 PM
But what he's saying is because we're fans of the series, if we're against Malcolm, we have no right to judge, and honestly, he has absolutely no right to tell people what to judge and what not.

Btw, thought I'd post some pics of Malcolm's Loomis to liven up the thread:

http://images.fearnet.com/fearnetImages/imWpZuqUVJmoBnb1dGtx2Rng==.jpg

http://img182.imageshack.us/img182/6982/000472793475jw8.jpg

Thorni52
09-10-2009, 05:48 PM
I like Malcolm in RZH and RZH2. Some people are stupid though. They have no clue what Zombie was trying to do with the character.

Michael Voorhees
09-10-2009, 05:52 PM
Eh....no, that's not it at all. It has nothing to do with people being stupid. I'm sure everyone here perfectly understands what he was doing, but some just didn't like it.

I loved it, though, as you can see by the quote in my sig.

Thorni52
09-10-2009, 05:55 PM
Eh....no, that's not it at all. It has nothing to do with people being stupid. I'm sure everyone here perfectly understands what he was doing, but some just didn't like it.

I just think some people don't understand satire.

Michael Voorhees
09-10-2009, 05:59 PM
I think they do, but they wanted to see the same Loomis, and there's nothing wrong with that. I actually liked seeing a new take, because in a way, McDowell is right.

"Why do the same thing? Just put the same movie on repeat!"

Maybe not an exact quote but close enough, no less.

Thorni52
09-10-2009, 06:05 PM
I think they do, but they wanted to see the same Loomis, and there's nothing wrong with that. I actually liked seeing a new take, because in a way, McDowell is right.

Some people are kinda the same way about Annies death scene. They say "I wish they showed the full Fight scene. I thought that scene was done perfectly and a cliched fight seen wouldn't have had as much impact compared to the way zombie did it.

Malcolm was the same way. The Michael hunting Loomis would have just felt tired with this film. IMO.

Michael Voorhees
09-10-2009, 06:09 PM
You mean Loomis hunting Michael? And yeah, I preferred the way Annie's death was done. At first I went "what the hell" but after it all played out I was surprised at how great it was.

With Loomis, I thought this one was a realistic route for him to go, and it played out well. But, if Loomis returns in part 3, I want him to become more fixated on making sure Michael is dead, rather than selling a book.

Thorni52
09-10-2009, 06:14 PM
You mean Loomis hunting Michael?

Oops. lol


With Loomis, I thought this one was a realistic route for him to go, and it played out well. But, if Loomis returns in part 3, I want him to become more fixated on making sure Michael is dead, rather than selling a book.

I don't think loomis is coming back. I was okay with him coming back in RZH but he got pretty carved up in RZH2. I like the idea of sharif Brackett taking his spot, but I feel like It wouldn't work because of what happened to laurie. I can't begin to imagine what kind of relationship they would have.

EvilOnTwoLegs
09-10-2009, 06:26 PM
Usually I have a good attitude about all actors and characters in the Halloween franchise, but I can't stand McDowell as Loomis, especially now after seeing H2 twice. After just watching the first movie, I didn't really like him but I didn't hate him like I do now. I know he's not to blame for any of the deaths that occured like he was throughout H2, but I sort of wanted to see him get shot by Lynda's father or Sheriff Brackett and I was rooting them on. But I have to give him his props for the end of the movie though.

Nothing really against Malcolm McDowell, just his Loomis. I'm sure it's more Zombie's fault than his.

Like when he and Michael are in the hospital, he starts rambling about how black isn't a color and white is every color. I found that to be pointless.

***sigh***

That's not bad acting or bad directing. That's the POINT. You're not supposed to like Loomis in this movie. If you hate him, then everyone involved obviously did a very good job.



Some people are kinda the same way about Annies death scene. They say "I wish they showed the full Fight scene. I thought that scene was done perfectly and a cliched fight seen wouldn't have had as much impact compared to the way zombie did it.

Agreed here. Especially since we already saw that scene. In RZH. If Zombie had shown Myers chasing Annie, and Annie trying to defend herself, and Myers getting the upper hand, and all that jazz again, it would've felt like a retread, and wouldn't have had the kind of impact he obviously wanted...and undeniably achieved in the case of most viewers.



This part of the post speaks for itself.

It does speak for itself...and it's not untrue.

With a few exceptions, the Halloween franchise hasn't had a long list of great actors. To mention that fact as part of discussion, to counter claims that McDowell's a sub-par actor, is completely valid.

jaquen
09-10-2009, 06:29 PM
But what he's saying is because we're fans of the series, if we're against Malcolm, we have no right to judge, and honestly, he has absolutely no right to tell people what to judge and what not.

Btw, thought I'd post some pics of Malcolm's Loomis to liven up the thread:



Isn't that logic a bit circular, if not hypocritical? You're entitled your view of my view, but I'm not entitled to my view?

And I'll back it up 100%, with NO shame. I don't have any issue with someone thinking Malcolmn is miscast as Loomis, none at all (indeed I think the direction of Loomis in Zombie's first Halloween is AWFUL in the remake portion). But don't tell me McDowell isn't a damn fine actor, regardless of Halloween. Some of the posts in this thread about this master actor are lunacy, and down right disrespectful of the man's craft, which is impeccable. Indeed, MOST of the issues I'm seeing expressed are about Loomis' writing and Zombie's direction, but folks are just saying "Malcolm SUX!!!".

So no, I don't think fans of a franchise plagued with some pretty awful performances can stand in judgement of an actor like McDowell. And I don't have any qualms about saying so. He, like the great Donald Pleasence before him, IS better than this franchise.

Michael Voorhees
09-10-2009, 06:34 PM
I'm not saying I'm entitled to my opinion and you're not entitled to your's, it's just that everyone is allowed to judge Malcolm's performance as Loomis, not just the people who liked him.

jaquen
09-10-2009, 06:45 PM
I'm not saying I'm entitled to my opinion and you're not entitled to your's, it's just that everyone is allowed to judge Malcolm's performance as Loomis, not just the people who liked him.

I'm not talking about people liking, or disliking, Malcolm as Loomis. But saying 'I hate Loomis...Malcolm SUCKS", "I didn't like what Loomis did...Malcolmn can't act his way out a paper bag", "Why was Loomis such a douche...SCREW Malcolm" isn't valid on any level because we're talking about Zombie's and Dimension's view, with this great actor doing what he can. Take a look at the script, what else was Malcolm to do with the material? In this new Halloween especially, he was a master at executing Loomis exactly as intended; that so many people loath the new, selfish Loomis speaks volumes about what a damn fine job McDowell did.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that the new Loomis is the strongest, boldest portrait of Sam Loomis since Halloween II, if not the original. Does that mean I think he's the most likeable? No, not at all, he's the least likeable. But the character had clear, fresh direction, and Malcolm was alive in the role, he truly did a slam dunk on playing this new, nasty Loomis. There is no way anyone can look at Malcolm in this movie, and tell me he was a bad actor in it. If Malcolm is "bad" in this, what does that say about the other Halloween performances? As it stands, for my tastes, I've only seen three other Halloween performances to rival his in this new film; Donald in the original Halloween, Jamie in H20, and Brad Dourif in H2.

Michael Voorhees
10-26-2009, 09:54 PM
Still loving Malcolm as Dr. Loomis. It'd be nice to see more of him as the character in a more classical nature, but for some reason I doubt if that'll happen at all.

Stebob1984
10-27-2009, 04:00 PM
I loved Malcolm McDowell as Loomis. I hope he gets to play the role again.

Nibbz
10-27-2009, 04:06 PM
I loved Malcolm McDowell as Loomis. I hope he gets to play the role again.

have you seen RZH2? if he returns I will never be able to take the character seriously. He'd be as immortal as Michael. LOOMIS IS DEAD! D-E-A-D!!!

but I also loved McDowell's Loomis :D

Scarface
10-27-2009, 04:12 PM
I hate Malcolm as Loomis. I'm not fond of his acting in this film. I liked him much, much more in RZH2.

Stebob1984
10-27-2009, 04:27 PM
have you seen RZH2? if he returns I will never be able to take the character seriously. He'd be as immortal as Michael. LOOMIS IS DEAD! D-E-A-D!!!

but I also loved McDowell's Loomis :D

Yeah I was kinda hoping they might just ignore 2 but he is so dead its crazy lol

jaquen
10-27-2009, 04:33 PM
have you seen RZH2? if he returns I will never be able to take the character seriously. He'd be as immortal as Michael. LOOMIS IS DEAD! D-E-A-D!!!

but I also loved McDowell's Loomis :D


Coming back from a brutal stabbing is a touch more realistic than rematerializing your own charred husk of a corpse.

Just saying.

Scarface
10-27-2009, 04:38 PM
I'd hate to seem him back.

Nibbz
10-27-2009, 04:48 PM
Coming back from a brutal stabbing is a touch more realistic than rematerializing your own charred husk of a corpse.

Just saying.

with that logic the nurse should return, annie too, how about mya? the stripper and lou? maybe they oughta bring the 3 hicks back! and since RZH is in the same continuity why not bring back Bob, Joe Grizzly, and Mason Strode?

Bringing a character back after an attack like that takes away so much believability one way or another. Either I think it's ridiculous to believe Loomis survived, or I think it's ridiculous that all the characters I listed above died in their attack when loomis survived his.

i never saw loomis burn in H2. I saw Loomis get stabbed to fuck, throat slit, all fucked up in RZH2. plus they retconned his death in RZH so itd be just fucking ridiculous to bring him back for H3

A Dumb Question
10-27-2009, 05:23 PM
He did what he could with a role that fell short of its potential.

jaquen
10-27-2009, 06:26 PM
with that logic the nurse should return, annie too, how about mya? the stripper and lou? maybe they oughta bring the 3 hicks back! and since RZH is in the same continuity why not bring back Bob, Joe Grizzly, and Mason Strode?

Bringing a character back after an attack like that takes away so much believability one way or another. Either I think it's ridiculous to believe Loomis survived, or I think it's ridiculous that all the characters I listed above died in their attack when loomis survived his.

i never saw loomis burn in H2. I saw Loomis get stabbed to fuck, throat slit, all fucked up in RZH2. plus they retconned his death in RZH so itd be just fucking ridiculous to bring him back for H3


No, by ANY of this logic Loomis should be dead after both H2 and HII. That's my point. I do not want Loomis' death retconned in the next Halloween picture, because it was quite apparent that he wouldn't survive that.

However, Loomis exploded into what should have been many pieces in HII. There is no logical way to justify his return in H4.

None of this is "logical".

Michael Voorhees
10-28-2009, 10:04 PM
I was thinking and the one thing Rob really messed up on in regards to his films is that he could've had Malcolm truly make Loomis his own and be a character that was memorable, likeable, & all his own. I liked the versions represented in RZH & RZH2, but if Zombie would've characterized Loomis in RZH2 as he did in RZH (minus the repitition of Pleasence's lines), he could've been more accepted by fans.

Pleasence will always remain number one, though. No doubt about it.

tha shape
11-02-2009, 02:01 PM
Ehhh...i didnt mind Malcolm, But im glad rob killed him off lol.

Michael Voorhees
11-02-2009, 06:08 PM
Yeah, it was probably the right call. I mean, he could've done something great with him, but he didn't, so it was probably the best call to let the character leave the series for now.

CJ7
01-31-2010, 07:53 PM
I think that Malcolm did an excellent job in both of the films.I dont really compare him to Donald Pleasance although most people do.

scream33
05-19-2010, 08:24 PM
Okay.

I think the casting was spot on with McDowell. But he should have been given more of a flushed out character.

Scarface
05-19-2010, 08:43 PM
I think the casting was spot on with McDowell. But he should have been given more of a flushed out character.


I agree. Should have gave him some more fiber.

HalloweenHell17
05-31-2010, 09:23 AM
i thought Malcolm was perfect as Dr. Loomis.

Warlock44
06-07-2010, 07:41 AM
You cheered for Loomis in the original series. In the Zombie films, you prayed for Myers to kill him. :drool:

Diamond Wings
06-07-2010, 08:00 AM
You cheered for Loomis in the original series. In the Zombie films, you prayed for Myers to kill him. :drool:

Maybe you did...

Warlock44
06-07-2010, 09:00 AM
He served no purpose. He was just a fraudulent, greedy, little hack who exploited all of Meyer's victims. I think that was part of Zombie's point in the creation of Myers. He was essentially stating that Michael was just a product of his environment.

Diamond Wings
06-07-2010, 10:16 AM
Some might say, but I don't necessarily feel the way you do, as your statement suggested. I didn't even really want to see him die in RZH2. Yeah, he was a dick, but he spelled out a little comic relief, too. Didn't mind him in either flick.

EvilOnTwoLegs
06-07-2010, 12:42 PM
He served no purpose. He was just a fraudulent, greedy, little hack who exploited all of Meyer's victims.

See, you say he served no purpose, then immediately point out one of the purposes he served. Ironic?

CJ7
06-10-2010, 09:40 AM
I agree with you. He played the character in a whole new light in that of Donald's. His Dr. Loomis was a self-centered, spineless asshole who seemed more into helping himself then others. Not to mention the dialoge was HORRIBLE. When asked if that was the boogeyman he replies "I do believe it was." WTF?? Donald's performace was MUCH better imho.

Its not really Malcolm's fault that Loomis was such a jerk in RZH2 its how Rob wanted him to be.The thing is,when your in the role of a character who was played by someone else for so long you get compared to them.Michael Myers is a good example because every guy who played him always seem to get compared with Nick Castle because hes the original.I look at Malcolms Loomis as the NEW Loomis.Besides even though I think that hes a great actor hes not Donald Pleasance.This new A-Team movie for example,all of the guys involved are going to get compared to the original cast.Liam Neeson is a great actor to but hes not George Peppard so his John "Hannibal" Smith character isn't going to be the same.

Nightmareman88
09-06-2010, 12:00 PM
Brad Dourif should have played Loomis.

jaquen
09-06-2010, 12:29 PM
Malcom McDowell was pitch perfect in Zombie's Halloween during the prequel material, and in all of HII. In the material in both films what a strong, welcome departure from the Loomis of old. In fact the only time MM sank was when he was forced to do a bad Donald Pleasence rip in the remake portions of RZ's Halloween.

Was Loomis likeable in HII? Hell no. But since when does a character have to be "likeable" to be considered a success? Thankfully Zombie had the balls to reinvent Loomis, and in doing so delivered us the most relevant, alive version of Loomis since frankly the original Halloween.

Danny Strode
09-06-2010, 12:34 PM
I was more a fan of RZHII Loomis than I was in the remake, for the simple fact of because his Pleasence-like lines in the remake and how bad they were... likely not by his fault. I know a lot of fans are pissed about how against-the-grain the Loomis character was in RZHII, but I was a big fan. Kudos to Rob and Malcom.

jaquen
09-06-2010, 12:41 PM
See, you say he served no purpose, then immediately point out one of the purposes he served. Ironic?

Exactly. But isn't that the one major point so many RZHII detractors fail to see? That the movie is ultimately a very human story about how people cope with trauma (badly), set against a slasher backdrop? That point is made even more clear when you watch the deleted scenes and longer cut on the blueray.

Loomis' story isn't pertinent to Michael's killings, but his role is incredibly important in showing us the aftermath of the events from the previous massacre. That IS the story. It's not all about Michael this time around. It's about Michael, Laurie, Annie, Bracket, and Loomis, and how they're all responding to the events from Halloween. Loomis' story in and of itself IS the point.

blacksymbiote
07-13-2011, 06:39 PM
McDowell was a great Loomis for Rob's type of movies. He was the guy that hunted a monster, but also suffered the trauma from the experience. He was a jerk, but that's just Rob's vision of him in this series.

Michael Voorhees
07-20-2011, 09:56 PM
Like others, I'm glad Zombie reinvented Loomis & had him go down a different route. It would've been pointless to try to recreate the Pleasence incarnation of the character. Depending on who does it, change isn't always bad for a character, & in Zombie's case, changing Loomis helped to amplify the quality of H2 (especially in the director's cut).

CJ7
07-21-2011, 08:33 PM
Like others, I'm glad Zombie reinvented Loomis & had him go down a different route. It would've been pointless to try to recreate the Pleasence incarnation of the character. Depending on who does it, change isn't always bad for a character, & in Zombie's case, changing Loomis helped to amplify the quality of H2 (especially in the director's cut).

Agreed.The RZH Loomis was similar to the original, but RZH2 made a big change to the character.RZH2 shows how much Loomis had been corrupted with his greed of fame off of the deaths caused by his own former patient Michael Myers.Even though he failed to stop Michael, he managed to cash in on everything he had done to become famous but payed the ultimate price in the TC.

Danny Strode
07-21-2011, 09:41 PM
I think if Loomis' portrayal in RZH2 was the same or similar to that of RZH, there would be a number of people that wouldn't feel so strongly about a great performance by Malcolm, and I'd like to think the film would've suffered as a result.

Michael Voorhees
07-31-2011, 12:22 AM
^ It would have. I don't think these films were ever meant to have the same interpretation of Loomis as the original series. Although it was no way Zombie could've ever known he'd actually go on to direct another installment, there are a lot of small sequences within RZH that indicate he could've very well transformed into the asshole we see in H2.

For instance, during the graveyard sequence where his book is called trash & he rebuttals saying he read it & that it was a "masterpiece."

Pumpkin Slayer
11-01-2011, 07:53 AM
I liked McDowell as Loomis. He was very direct and to the point and became the jerk that Loomis in H5 showed he could be.

On a slight note, I always thought Sam Neil would play a good Loomis in a remake.

Cvlt ov Wolf
11-03-2011, 11:22 PM
I think Liam Neeson would've made a great Loomis, more akin to the original. I dislike McDowell's Loomis, he was fine in RZH1 but in two I felt he just strayed a bit too far from the source character.

Michael Voorhees
02-18-2013, 06:06 PM
The biggest thing that bothers me about Malcolm's performance is that awful wig he wears during Michael's childhood. I liked that this Loomis was different, even if some scenes came off too Pleasence-esque. Still, it set the stage for his evolution in H2, which I thought was a better interpretation for Malcolm to portray because the performance ended up being a lot more authentic.

Barrybgb
08-01-2013, 08:32 AM
He was okay. It was certainly a different Loomis, but it doesn't rile me as much as Tyler's Michael. The new version was certainly interesting, and Malcolm played it as well as he could. Not bad. Still, no comparison to the original version of Loomis or Donald Pleasance.

Michael Voorhees
08-16-2013, 03:14 PM
I think Liam Neeson would've made a great Loomis, more akin to the original. I dislike McDowell's Loomis, he was fine in RZH1 but in two I felt he just strayed a bit too far from the source character.

Don't know how I missed this before, but I agree with this casting suggestion, except if Neeson were in the role I'd want him to portray a slightly more physical interpretation of the character. He doesn't have to be a martial arts expert capable of breaking someone down in every way imaginable, but someone who can actually do something in the heat of the moment would suffice.

I feel like Donald's version of Loomis was just his own, & to redo a Halloween movie in modern times, I think Loomis would have to evolve for it to work completely.

Mortimur Grimm
08-26-2013, 10:00 PM
I thought it was extremely poor. I've never thought he was a good actor to being with, but hoped that he would do well with Loomis. I was wrong. I just didn't believe the emotions he was trying to convey throughout the film. The rest of that mess isn't his fault, but poor writing and directing.

ClassOf78
08-26-2013, 10:22 PM
I've never thought he was a good actor to being with

In roughly 24 hours I've seen someone say that Uwe Boll would be a better choice to direct a Halloween movie than Ti West and that Malcolm McDowell is a bad actor. Is it a full moon?

Roswell
08-26-2013, 10:33 PM
I might get flack for this, but...McDowell is a better actor than Pleasance was, even if Pleasance's Loomis is better. Then again, they both had very distinct styles, so it's difficult to compare them.

As far as his performance goes, I think he's rather underrated as Loomis. So he's not like Carpenter's Loomis. So what? His arc (or rather loop) really works. He starts out compassionate, slowly grows frustrated over the years, finds a way out, becomes corrupted by greed, comes face to face with what he left behind, goes into serious denial, then finally meets his fate as he has to deal with the consequences of what he has done.

Pleasance's Loomis, as much as I love him, never really had much of an arc. That's what I loved about the Sam story that was released a few years ago. It finally gave that version of Loomis more weight. He wasn't just a crazy doctor with a gun, but a human being. Flawed, but real.

EvilOnTwoLegs
08-26-2013, 10:35 PM
I've never thought he was a good actor to being with....

http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b390/jamesoblivion/ClockworkOrangeGIF1gifCROPoriginal-original_zpsc4138131.gif

Mortimur Grimm
08-27-2013, 09:51 PM
In roughly 24 hours I've seen someone say that Uwe Boll would be a better choice to direct a Halloween movie than Ti West and that Malcolm McDowell is a bad actor. Is it a full moon?

You think he is a good actor? In what film did he truly move you into believing and feeling whatever he was going through? He's been attached to films that did well, but did he really do anything that was great? No. I'm shocked that you're shocked by my statement. I'd figure that most would agree with this.

As far as Pleasance is concerned, he's not by any stretch much better. I'd say that his acting was better than McDowell's in playing Loomis. It is a shame that the original Loomis was never given a descent story arc, but I think Pleasance was still able to bring out a flat character better than McDowell could handle a more well-rounded character. I felt nothing from McDowell's performance.

EvilOnTwoLegs
08-27-2013, 10:35 PM
You think he is a good actor? In what film did he truly move you into believing and feeling whatever he was going through? He's been attached to films that did well, but did he really do anything that was great? No. I'm shocked that you're shocked by my statement. I'd figure that most would agree with this.

As far as Pleasance is concerned, he's not by any stretch much better. I'd say that his acting was better than McDowell's in playing Loomis. It is a shame that the original Loomis was never given a descent story arc, but I think Pleasance was still able to bring out a flat character better than McDowell could handle a more well-rounded character. I felt nothing from McDowell's performance.
Uhhhhhhhhhh...A Clockwork Orange? Hel-fucking-lo? haha Jesus!


http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b390/jamesoblivion/tumblr_lesrrtx1Hc1qe0eclo1_r1_500_zpsbe6a1e3f.gif


Beyond that? If...., O Lucky Man!, Time After Time, Look Back in Anger, Britannia Hospital, Gangster No. 1, Evilenko...and that's not even mentioning his voice work (including Superman: The Animated Series) and TV (including a great episode of Tales from the Crypt).

ClassOf78
08-28-2013, 12:41 AM
^^ My response. Minus Superman: TAS and TFTC. Wasn't aware of those.

EvilOnTwoLegs
08-28-2013, 01:18 AM
I gotta say, I'm actually a little disturbed by the notion that ol' Morty Grimm felt there would be a "Malcolm McDowell is a lousy actor" consensus. :bigeyes:

ClassOf78
08-28-2013, 01:43 AM
Grimm knows what's up. He came from a time where people earned things, not where everyone receives a participation trophy as done today.

EvilOnTwoLegs
08-28-2013, 03:08 AM
Like back in 1969, when Lindsay Anderson's if.... (Malcolm McDowell's film debut) won the Palme d'Or at Cannes?

ClassOf78
08-28-2013, 03:10 AM
Indeed.

Mortimur Grimm
08-28-2013, 09:56 PM
The guy has been apart of quite a few of good works, but yes, I don't think he's a strong actor. Though I stand alone on that, I've got to stand by it. James, I didn't think there would be a consensus of my opinion here. Everyone loves this guys work here. I just induced my opinion into the conversation of this thread that completely adores the man.

EvilOnTwoLegs
08-28-2013, 10:45 PM
The guy has been apart of quite a few of good works, but yes, I don't think he's a strong actor.
He's been central to quite a few good works, and is an integral part of what makes them good. Alex from A Clockwork Orange is one of the most iconic figures in 20th Century cinema, almost entirely due to McDowell's performance.



James, I didn't think there would be a consensus of my opinion here.

Really? That's weird, considering this:


You think he is a good actor? In what film did he truly move you into believing and feeling whatever he was going through? He's been attached to films that did well, but did he really do anything that was great? No. I'm shocked that you're shocked by my statement. I'd figure that most would agree with this.

Perhaps my English comprehension skills are rusting up a bit, but in what way does that post not indicate that you expected a consensus?

A Dumb Question
08-29-2013, 08:37 AM
If...., O Lucky Man!, Time After Time, Look Back in Anger, Britannia Hospital, Gangster No. 1, Evilenko...

Mr. Magoo, Firestarter 2, Silent Night, The First 9 1/2 Weeks, Fist of the North Star, Milk Money, I Spy, Tank Girl, Cyborg 3, Star Trek Generations, Silent Hill: Revelation...

wyatt s
08-29-2013, 10:47 AM
Because as we all know being in shitty movies nullifies every good thing you've ever done as an actor, ever. That's why De Niro is one of the worst actors in the history of the medium. Because Meet The Fockers totally wiped out The Deer Hunter, Taxi Driver, Raging Bull, and The Godfather Part 2. I can't believe people are actually trying to argue that giving a good performance in several movies even matters anymore after you've been in a lot of bad movies. Everybody knows that even a single bad movie drains every actor of all talent they ever had and retroactively makes their previously good performances automatically awful.

EvilOnTwoLegs
08-29-2013, 11:59 AM
Exactly. If starting to choose horrible roles later in your career automatically nullifies anything good you've ever done, I guess that means we were wrong all those years in thinking that De Niro, Pacino, and others of their ilk were actually giving great performances. Or that Eddie Murphy was ever funny, for that matter.

wyatt s
08-29-2013, 12:15 PM
As to the topic at hand, I don't think Malcolm McDowell was all that great in the second half of Rob's remake. He was being asked mostly to parrot lines from Carpenter's movie and he simply wasn't able to make those lines sound good in their new context. I don't blame that on him as an actor so much as I blame the movie and the script for awkwardly attempting force McDowell to play dialogue that had no place in that movie. On the other hand his work in the first half of that movie was great, and his work in the sequel as a man who deals with his guilt by becoming a vain self serving prick was pretty excellent and far more up McDowell's alleyway as an actor. Sometimes even the best actors can't do all that well with slapdash material and I think that's the problem with McDowell's Loomis during the Carpenter recreation sequences in RZH. He was being asked to play material that just didn't work in that movie, and nobody really could have made it work.

EvilOnTwoLegs
08-29-2013, 12:25 PM
Agreed. In RZH, McDowell was asked to deliver lines that couldn't be delivered well within the context of a film where they simply didn't belong.

He fared much better in the sequel, despite many viewers completely misunderstanding his character, even to the point of saying he wasn't integral to the plot.

A Dumb Question
08-29-2013, 01:54 PM
Young Malcolm McDowell was a great actor, but I've been generally unimpressed with him ever since he tried to play a white Mr. Roarke.

Stebob1984
11-06-2013, 11:56 AM
I think my favourite Loomis moment was when he was talking to the graveyard worker whose moaning about Loomis and his book, unaware the man he's speaking to is Loomis and Loomis says "yeah I've read that book, it's a master piece" :D

AquiredTasteMan
03-21-2014, 07:18 PM
I actually like to think that Malcom McDowell's Dr. Sam Loomis is a grown up Alex DeLarge from A Clockwork Orange.I know something about it doesn't make sense but I do love the idea.