PDA

View Full Version : Rob Zombie's Halloween: Discussion 3



Pages : [1] 2 3 4 5

Thurisaz
09-06-2007, 04:22 AM
Previous: http://www.ohmb.net/showthread.php?t=12286

nwiser
09-06-2007, 04:28 AM
haha @ "w/out Michael myers" :)


I saw this in the last thread and it made me wonder: aside from the fact that it fit in with the storyline, is there really a reason as to why Michael escaped when he did as opposed to earlier or later? If someone wanted to get out of there as bad as he apprently did, one would think that he would try to escape ASAP. Of course I guess its possible that him breaking out when he did was because it was the first opportunity he saw....

As an aside, I guess if at some point they did a sequel and they wanted Daeg to be in it they could add in scenes or a story of Michael breaking out prior to "15 years later", even if he didnt make it back to Haddonfield. As many others have already said, I think working him into a sequel would be great.


Another question I wanted to raise was, if something like the first act happened in real life, would they put a 10 year old child away in a mental hospital or would they just make them go to thereapy daily? On some level I think it was strange to lock Michael away considering how young he supposedly was. I can understand treating a 14 or 15 year old as an adult but a 10 year old is almost too young to understand the implications of their actions...which might be one reason why Michael thought they should/would let him go home.

Undrtkerkane
09-06-2007, 06:13 AM
I think something inside of him said " ok its time to find my sister and give her a hug lol " I also remeber seeing a clue why he only wanted to love her, even tho she was a baby she didnt do anything wrong, just like the mother, everyone else in the house treating him like shit

TheShape'78
09-06-2007, 07:05 AM
i think he chose to escape at that moment because everyone he (for lack of a better word) "cared" about was leaving him. his best friend at the hospital was retiring (Danny Trejo's character), dr. loomis was moving on, and his mother shot herself. so i think he felt it was time then to escape and find his sister cos it was the only person close(?) to him that he had left. just a thought. of course this makes alot more sense w/ the WP but i think it can still work w/ the theatrical as well.

i'm out!
-mitch-

Undrtkerkane
09-06-2007, 07:08 AM
its possible, but that wouldnt that make Micheal like EMOish because everyone was leaving him and he cried and killed just to get some love?

renee30152
09-06-2007, 07:11 AM
haha @ "w/out Michael myers" :)


I saw this in the last thread and it made me wonder: aside from the fact that it fit in with the storyline, is there really a reason as to why Michael escaped when he did as opposed to earlier or later? If someone wanted to get out of there as bad as he apprently did, one would think that he would try to escape ASAP. Of course I guess its possible that him breaking out when he did was because it was the first opportunity he saw....

As an aside, I guess if at some point they did a sequel and they wanted Daeg to be in it they could add in scenes or a story of Michael breaking out prior to "15 years later", even if he didnt make it back to Haddonfield. As many others have already said, I think working him into a sequel would be great.


Another question I wanted to raise was, if something like the first act happened in real life, would they put a 10 year old child away in a mental hospital or would they just make them go to thereapy daily? On some level I think it was strange to lock Michael away considering how young he supposedly was. I can understand treating a 14 or 15 year old as an adult but a 10 year old is almost too young to understand the implications of their actions...which might be one reason why Michael thought they should/would let him go home.

Well not many 10 year olds go and murder four people. I think he is the youngest mass murder to date. And after his actions, I think they locked him up with therapy sessions. Then after he killed the nurse they knew there was no hope for him.


I think something inside of him said " ok its time to find my sister and give her a hug lol " I also remeber seeing a clue why he only wanted to love her, even tho she was a baby she didnt do anything wrong, just like the mother, everyone else in the house treating him like shit


True. His sister loved him and laughed everytime he came near her.

renee30152
09-06-2007, 07:12 AM
its possible, but that wouldnt that make Micheal like EMOish because everyone was leaving him and he cried and killed just to get some love?


So instead of throwing a tantrum to get attention he kills people. :D

Undrtkerkane
09-06-2007, 07:14 AM
So instead of throwing a tantrum to get attention he kills people. :D

Yup " Nobody loves me AAAAAAAAAA, im going to kill people to make them love me " :D

ragethorn
09-06-2007, 07:23 AM
I think what you're all doing is treating Michael like he's a baby. He's evil and the word love doesn't belong in the same sentence as Michael Myers, except of course when you say "I love Michael Myers" cause I do. lol

But you're all analyzing it way too much. There's too much and then there's you guys analyzing it too much.

I don't know why Michael escaped 15 years later on Halloween when he could've easily escaped 14 years ago? I'm not sure. I don't know. Maybe he enjoyed Loomis' company and then he left and he got bored? He took on like 6 security guards armed with shotguns and other weapons. You gotta wonder, this guy could've escaped so long ago, why now?

At least in the original, you don't see much of him in the hospital and then when Marion & Sam drive up to the hospital and see the patients walking around outside, it comes as a shock. Then to hear Michael was responsible for letting out all the patients is huge. You want to over analyze things, think about how Michael escaped from Smith's Grive without killing anybody.

And if you want a real barn burner, think about how Laurie (in the remake) felt after the film takes place when she finds out the killer was her biological brother who was sent away to prison for killing her older biological sister. That would creep me the fuck out. :yar:

Undrtkerkane
09-06-2007, 07:27 AM
I think what you're all doing is treating Michael like he's a baby. He's evil and the word love doesn't belong in the same sentence as Michael Myers, except of course when you say "I love Michael Myers" cause I do. lol

But you're all analyzing it way too much. There's too much and then there's you guys analyzing it too much.

I don't know why Michael escaped 15 years later on Halloween when he could've easily escaped 14 years ago? I'm not sure. I don't know. Maybe he enjoyed Loomis' company and then he left and he got bored? He took on like 6 security guards armed with shotguns and other weapons. You gotta wonder, this guy could've escaped so long ago, why now?

At least in the original, you don't see much of him in the hospital and then when Marion & Sam drive up to the hospital and see the patients walking around outside, it comes as a shock. Then to hear Michael was responsible for letting out all the patients is huge. You want to over analyze things, think about how Michael escaped from Smith's Grive without killing anybody.

And if you want a real barn burner, think about how Laurie (in the remake) felt after the film takes place when she finds out the killer was her biological brother who was sent away to prison for killing her older biological sister. That would creep me the fuck out. :yar:

Well according to rob, he didnt want micheal being smart to let people out without anyone knowing, and two he didnt want micheal driving a car...to me he was more human and normal in the original

TheShape'78
09-06-2007, 07:29 AM
I think what you're all doing is treating Michael like he's a baby. He's evil and the word love doesn't belong in the same sentence as Michael Myers, except of course when you say "I love Michael Myers" cause I do. lol

But you're all analyzing it way too much. There's too much and then there's you guys analyzing it too much.

I don't know why Michael escaped 15 years later on Halloween when he could've easily escaped 14 years ago? I'm not sure. I don't know. Maybe he enjoyed Loomis' company and then he left and he got bored? He took on like 6 security guards armed with shotguns and other weapons. You gotta wonder, this guy could've escaped so long ago, why now?

At least in the original, you don't see much of him in the hospital and then when Marion & Sam drive up to the hospital and see the patients walking around outside, it comes as a shock. Then to hear Michael was responsible for letting out all the patients is huge. You want to over analyze things, think about how Michael escaped from Smith's Grive without killing anybody.

And if you want a real barn burner, think about how Laurie (in the remake) felt after the film takes place when she finds out the killer was her biological brother who was sent away to prison for killing her older biological sister. That would creep me the fuck out. :yar:



so what if we over analyze?

-mitch-

Undrtkerkane
09-06-2007, 07:33 AM
And if you want a real barn burner, think about how Laurie (in the remake) felt after the film takes place when she finds out the killer was her biological brother who was sent away to prison for killing her older biological sister. That would creep me the fuck out. :yar:

Yea im suprised laurie didnt end up in the nut bin after that when she found out that her brother killed her family, then stalked her cause he wanted a hug :D

ragethorn
09-06-2007, 07:44 AM
It bothers me knowing Michael didn't kill Laurie when he had the chance.

Undrtkerkane
09-06-2007, 07:45 AM
Cause he wanted a hug :p

TheShape'78
09-06-2007, 07:46 AM
i don't think it was his intention to kill her.

-mitch-

Undrtkerkane
09-06-2007, 07:47 AM
He wanted her to love him and go off into the sunset with him :D

krustytheklown
09-06-2007, 07:59 AM
halloween is doing well, but if it cant beat these remakes then something is very wrong6 The Amityville Horror (2005) MGM $65,233,369 3,323 $23,507,007 3,323 4/15/05
7 The Stepford Wives Par. $59,484,742 3,057 $21,406,781 3,057 6/11/04
8 Dawn of the Dead Uni. $59,020,957 2,748 $26,722,575 2,745 3/19/04
9 The Omen (2006) Fox $54,607,383 2,723 $16,026,496 2,723 6/6/06
10 When a Stranger Calls SGem $47,860,214 3,004 $21,607,203 2,999 2/3/06
11 Thirteen Ghosts WB $41,867,960 2,781 $15,165,355 2,781 10/26/01
12 The Hills Have Eyes FoxS $41,778,863 2,621 $15,708,512 2,620 3/10/06

Undrtkerkane
09-06-2007, 08:01 AM
I think cause RZ was attached to it, made alot of people go and alot of them didnt have a clue who these people or what the movie was originally about

ragethorn
09-06-2007, 08:55 AM
i don't think it was his intention to kill her.

-mitch-

So then, what was his intention? To turn into a teletubby when he finally got to her. You guys are crazy. lol

His intention should ALWAYS be to kill her. This is Halloween people.

What was his intention? To talk to her? So why didn't he? To hug her? Why didn't he?

Let me clarify myself, if he didn't want to kill her then why charge her off a balcony? Why bring the ceiling down when in fact she could've and did get very hurt?

I think the answer is that this version of Michael Myers is unstable and confused as well as fucked in the head.

It's very contradicting.

nwiser
09-06-2007, 09:29 AM
So then, what was his intention? To turn into a teletubby when he finally got to her. You guys are crazy. lol

His intention should ALWAYS be to kill her. This is Halloween people.

What was his intention? To talk to her? So why didn't he? To hug her? Why didn't he?

Let me clarify myself, if he didn't want to kill her then why charge her off a balcony? Why bring the ceiling down when in fact she could've and did get very hurt?

I think the answer is that this version of Michael Myers is unstable and confused as well as fucked in the head.

It's very contradicting.

In the original Michaels intent was likely to kill her. In this version he initially wants to simply reunite with her, but when she doesnt understand his actions and attacks him, he seems to feel like she is treating him like everyone else in his life did, and so he sees no reason to not kill her. Thats my take on it at least.

PG Soul
09-06-2007, 09:32 AM
In the original Michaels intent was likely to kill her. In this version he initially wants to simply reunite with her, but when she doesnt understand his actions and attacks him, he seems to feel like she is treating him like everyone else in his life did, and so he sees no reason to not kill her. Thats my take on it at least.

Yes maybe one day we'll be re-united like Marky Mark and Prince Ital Joe.

This movie was like whale on a bun, not that tasty.

Undrtkerkane
09-06-2007, 09:44 AM
Yes maybe one day we'll be re-united like Marky Mark and Prince Ital Joe.

This movie was like whale on a bun, not that tasty.

or like drinking a spoonful of drano, sure it will clean you out, but it will leave you hollow inside

Zombie
09-06-2007, 09:45 AM
Let me clarify myself, if he didn't want to kill her then why charge her off a balcony? Why bring the ceiling down when in fact she could've and did get very hurt?


He charges Laurie to give her a big grizzly bear hug. Except he was too powerful and accidently knocked her out the window. :(

"I luvs youz Boo!"

PG Soul
09-06-2007, 09:47 AM
or like drinking a spoonful of drano, sure it will clean you out, but it will leave you hollow inside

I heard that, right on!

What was with the bontempi style music score also?

It was as if Tyler Bates was cold rockin it with a bontempi plugged into a Commodore 64 or something.

Undrtkerkane
09-06-2007, 09:50 AM
I heard that, right on!

What was with the bontempi style music score also?

It was as if Tyler Bates was cold rockin it with a bontempi plugged into a Commodore 64 or something.


WHOA ... bringing it old school C64 ...DAMN ... but yea music blew

ragethorn
09-06-2007, 09:57 AM
In the original Michaels intent was likely to kill her. In this version he initially wants to simply reunite with her, but when she doesnt understand his actions and attacks him, he seems to feel like she is treating him like everyone else in his life did, and so he sees no reason to not kill her. Thats my take on it at least.

Best explaination I heard. So simple yet satisfying.

Undrtkerkane
09-06-2007, 10:00 AM
I think he wanted to touch her in places that he wasnt able to before :p just kidding ... seriously when I think he wants to be loved, the whole part of evil goes right out the window

Demonswrath
09-06-2007, 10:22 AM
I think he wanted to touch her in places that he wasnt able to before :p just kidding ... seriously when I think he wants to be loved, the whole part of evil goes right out the window

Very true. I suppose he is only pure evil to an extent. Evil has a destiny...... to become a sissy-assed softy.

Undrtkerkane
09-06-2007, 10:24 AM
Very true. I suppose he is only pure evil to an extent. Evil has a destiny...... to become a sissy-assed softy.


ZOMBIEWEEN II

"The Night He Bought A Tutu"

PG Soul
09-06-2007, 10:50 AM
WHOA ... bringing it old school C64 ...DAMN ... but yea music blew

In fact I'm sure that's how the score would sound if you programmed it on Commodore 64's music maker programme. Maybe, he did, hmm.

BTW, where was everybody on Lampkin Lane, I doubt very much that they all go to bed that early on in the night. Can't have been past 10pm, no way.

All that screaming and yelling and nobody noticed, just like the original version. I guess somethings will never change, and that's just the way it is, like Bruce Hornsby once said.

The Frightmaster
09-06-2007, 02:52 PM
It bothers me knowing Michael didn't kill Laurie when he had the chance.

Yeah that bothered me too. I was like WTF! when he dropped to his knees and didn't want to kill her. I mean it reminded me of H5 cry baby Michael. As a matter of fact, do you think that he even wanted to kill her at all???? Because I don't think he did. Now he might of wanted to after she stapped him in the shoulder, but before I don't think he wanted to hurt her at all and that bothered me because I think that humanized Michael to much, it gave him to much emotion for my liking.


In the original Michaels intent was likely to kill her. In this version he initially wants to simply reunite with her, but when she doesnt understand his actions and attacks him, he seems to feel like she is treating him like everyone else in his life did, and so he sees no reason to not kill her. Thats my take on it at least.

I like your take on it. Very good!!!

Myers-89
09-06-2007, 05:00 PM
Well, I for one liked that Rob Zombie made Michael more human, which was his original intention to begin with. I loved the scene where Michael drops down on his knees in front of Laurie and shows her the picture of them together. It showed he had emotions and that he was actually capable of loving. Now, some of you will argue that Michael Myers shouldn't be portrayed that way, but remember, this isn't John Carpenter's Michael.

Undrtkerkane
09-06-2007, 06:21 PM
Well, I for one liked that Rob Zombie made Michael more human, which was his original intention to begin with. I loved the scene where Michael drops down on his knees in front of Laurie and shows her the picture of them together. It showed he had emotions and that he was actually capable of loving. Now, some of you will argue that Michael Myers shouldn't be portrayed that way, but remember, this isn't John Carpenter's Michael.

That is why I cant see him as an evil monster, when you want to love and snuggle with someone " hi laurie , I killed everyone you loved ... can you hold me? "

Micheal..the monster we enjoyed went EMO

4BarrelHemi
09-06-2007, 07:00 PM
Good god emo Myers :question:

Frazetta
09-06-2007, 07:14 PM
So then, what was his intention? To turn into a teletubby when he finally got to her. You guys are crazy. lol

His intention should ALWAYS be to kill her. This is Halloween people.

What was his intention? To talk to her? So why didn't he? To hug her? Why didn't he?

Let me clarify myself, if he didn't want to kill her then why charge her off a balcony? Why bring the ceiling down when in fact she could've and did get very hurt?

I think the answer is that this version of Michael Myers is unstable and confused as well as fucked in the head.

It's very contradicting.Because he had no concept of right or wrong, life or death. I think that after she stabbed him his intentions changed from wanting to be reunited with her to I wanna kill this ungrateful Bitch.

The Dark Shape
09-06-2007, 07:40 PM
Well, I for one liked that Rob Zombie made Michael more human, which was his original intention to begin with. I loved the scene where Michael drops down on his knees in front of Laurie and shows her the picture of them together. It showed he had emotions and that he was actually capable of loving. Now, some of you will argue that Michael Myers shouldn't be portrayed that way, but remember, this isn't John Carpenter's Michael.

You're right, it's Dominique Othenin-Girard's. Danielle Harris should've popped in to say, "Let me see..."

MichaelMyers04
09-06-2007, 07:48 PM
So then, what was his intention? To turn into a teletubby when he finally got to her. You guys are crazy. lol

His intention should ALWAYS be to kill her. This is Halloween people.

What was his intention? To talk to her? So why didn't he? To hug her? Why didn't he?

Let me clarify myself, if he didn't want to kill her then why charge her off a balcony? Why bring the ceiling down when in fact she could've and did get very hurt?

I think the answer is that this version of Michael Myers is unstable and confused as well as fucked in the head.

It's very contradicting.


This is Rob Zombie's HalloweeN, so things are allowed to be different.
His first intention was NOT to kill her, it was only to 'reunite' with her. But when she stabbed him with the knife, then his feelings changed and he then tried like hell to kill her.

The Dark Shape
09-06-2007, 07:51 PM
The scene annoys me for two reasons -- one, it really is just Halloween 5 redux. And two, why the fuck doesn't he just talk to her?

Frazetta
09-06-2007, 08:06 PM
The scene annoys me for two reasons -- one, it really is just Halloween 5 redux. And two, why the fuck doesn't he just talk to her?
It did have an H5 feel to it although I thought this was more effective. I just figured that Michael assumed Laurie would just know who he was espically after showing her the picture. Or maybe he ate some bad Sanitarium food & it messed up his vocal chords?????

MichaelJrdnMyrs
09-06-2007, 08:38 PM
It did have an H5 feel to it although I thought this was more effective. I just figured that Michael assumed Laurie would just know who he was espically after showing her the picture. Or maybe he ate some bad Sanitarium food & it messed up his vocal chords?????

Or maybe he forgot how, or physically couldn't anymore. I mean, if you hadn't walked in fifteen years and you start trying to hoof around again, I doubt you could right away.

I'd go with the explanation that he "went into his own mind" too far for too long that he couldn't.

The Dark Shape
09-06-2007, 08:39 PM
I'd go with the explanation that Zombie's interpretation of Myers didn't gel with the shoe-horned Halloween scenes, making everything awkward.

MichaelJrdnMyrs
09-06-2007, 09:17 PM
I'd go with the explanation that Zombie's interpretation of Myers didn't gel with the shoe-horned Halloween scenes, making everything awkward.

Yeah, total shoehorn. When the 3rd act starts, there's nothing written differently [nothing of importance, anyway] to remind everybody this is not the same movie as the original. It's all old Shape stuff and talk.

Feels like two different movies. All the "pure evil boogeyman" talk comes out of left field and feels awkward, probably because in the first and second act MM didn't exactly look like a heartless devil, just a kid with some mental problems.

I think Zombie's interpretation could've gelled just fine with the original. Even Carpenter didn't have Loomis right away spouting his "pure evil" jargon without an explanation why he felt that way first.

Zombie
09-06-2007, 09:25 PM
I'd go with the explanation that Zombie's interpretation of Myers didn't gel with the shoe-horned Halloween scenes, making everything awkward.

Exactly. He took Halloween and made it some silly soap opera.

Like blood dripping from a wound, these are the Halloweens of our Lives.

http://www.thebestlinks.com/images/thumb/0/05/300px-Days2004logo.jpg

Dr_Loomis02
09-07-2007, 12:22 AM
A soap opera? That's a bit of a stretch. He wanted to be reunited with his "boo." It wasn't until she stabbed him that he went mental on her.

jbyrd123
09-07-2007, 12:42 AM
i don't think it was his intention to kill her.

-mitch-

I agree with you, and thats what got him in the end was his need to be loved morale of the story...... LOVE SUCKS,,, especialy when the one you love shoots you in the face point blank with a .357 magnum.

Man In Black
09-07-2007, 12:51 AM
H'ween gets an 18 cert in the UK.
http://www.bbfc.co.uk/website/Classified.nsf/0/22023D77672B01E08025734F002835C7?OpenDocument

Death By Myers
09-07-2007, 02:30 AM
i feel that RZ's style was probably better suited to do a Friday remake than Halloween. Here is why.

1. he seems to have a thing for his characters being byproducts of trashy, inbred unbringing, giving his characters a certain "look". RZ could easily make jason a really freaky mongoloid-back woods killer which i think would be great.

2. his style of gore and brutality would go well with Friday, which was always known to have some pretty gruesome death scenes.

3. tyler mane would have made a better jason than michael. although his portrayal of michael was one of the few things in the movie i didn't have a problem with.

of course i read that one of the reasons he didn't want to remake Friday was that he considered it a "body count" franchise. but his remake of Halloween had just as many kills as some of the Friday movies, and probably surpassed a couple of those movies all together.

thoughts?

4BarrelHemi
09-07-2007, 04:24 AM
Ok as much as I hate remakes and wish they wouldn't do anymore. I do think he would have made a better Friday one.

Just the whole body language or Michael in this one reminded me alot of Jason. I could see that working alot better along the lines with Jason than Myers.

Rz's style just doesn't work well with the Halloween movies.

Kinick
09-07-2007, 04:55 AM
I think it's funny how Rob disregards all the sequels and everything and what he ended giving us wasn't much better than half the sequels.

The only thing that puts it ahead of all of the others is the mask. Michael was good, similar to H20. There are scenes that were done just as good... or more effective, as they included much more suspense in previous entries.

ragethorn
09-07-2007, 04:55 AM
I disagree. I think Michaels body language had nothing to do w/ Jason in this one.

He updated the character to NOW! He stalks, he charges, he breaks down doors, etc. It's awesome and it makes sense. If Michael Myers was going to be the same voyeur as in the original, i'm sure Rob could've picked a smaller actor to play the part. He picked Tyler Mane. The guy is huge. Take advantage of that. That's exactly what he did.

He had the best of both worlds. At times, he was creepy and sitting back and watching from behind a tree or whatever and at times he was all out balls, guts and fury. I thought both suited the character.

EvilOnTwoLegs
09-07-2007, 05:27 AM
And two, why the fuck doesn't he just talk to her?
Fans pissed and moaned about Myers talking, and Zombie took it out...

...so that fans could piss and moan about Myers not talking. :p


And I'm glad to see that the "OMG...this Myers isn't Myers, he's Jason!" thing has now found its way into pretty much every thread in this forum. Keep on truckin', Halloweenies. :yeah:

zombie commando
09-07-2007, 06:00 AM
You just can't please staunch fans. They bitch about this but then forget that most of the franchise is utter leaping lizard shit. They ignore the faults and inconsistencies of the original but psycho-analyze everything in this right down to the shirt that young Myers was sporting. Fuck me sideways.

The Dark Shape
09-07-2007, 06:02 AM
Fans pissed and moaned about Myers talking, and Zombie took it out...

...so that fans could piss and moan about Myers not talking. :p

Fuck the fans. Make your movie. In the world of Rob Zombie's Halloween, where Michael is nothing more than a fucked up kid, it doesn't make sense that he wouldn't just talk to Laurie.

zombie commando
09-07-2007, 06:04 AM
...because he was obviously operating with a full deck of cards.

EvilOnTwoLegs
09-07-2007, 07:28 AM
Fuck the fans. Make your movie. In the world of Rob Zombie's Halloween, where Michael is nothing more than a fucked up kid, it doesn't make sense that he wouldn't just talk to Laurie.
Personally, I agree...fuck the fans, make your movie. But the fans generally don't wanna hear that.

And for the record, if you didn't speak at all for fifteen years, it wouldn't be very easy. Vocal chords atrophy with disuse...like anything else. He could make noises, but I doubt he could articulate much. I liked the idea of him saying a single, monosyllabic word...but the idea of anyone, after fifteen years of silence, sitting down with someone and having a chat is just patently absurd. Particularly if he's...oh, I dunno...batshit fucking insane.

Franchise
09-07-2007, 07:31 AM
Is that a psychology term?

Myers-89
09-07-2007, 07:36 AM
You know what I just realized? People were going to bitch and moan about this movie no matter what. If Rob Zombie kept the workprint ending as the theatrical ending, then people would be bitching that he didn't use the reshot ending. If this film had no cursing in it, then people would have been bitching that there wasn't enough language. If Michael didn't show any emotion, then people would have been bitching that he wasn't human enough. So the moral of the story is that no matter Rob Zombie did with this film, there would still be people pissing and moaning about it. It's all basic psychology.

EvilOnTwoLegs
09-07-2007, 07:40 AM
Is that a psychology term?
Yes...yes it is.

Well, my psychologist told me it was, anyway.

The Dark Shape
09-07-2007, 08:56 AM
You know what I just realized? People were going to bitch and moan about this movie no matter what. If Rob Zombie kept the workprint ending as the theatrical ending, then people would be bitching that he didn't use the reshot ending. If this film had no cursing in it, then people would have been bitching that there wasn't enough language. If Michael didn't show any emotion, then people would have been bitching that he wasn't human enough. So the moral of the story is that no matter Rob Zombie did with this film, there would still be people pissing and moaning about it. It's all basic psychology.

I see. It's not that people didn't like the movie, it's the fact nobody gave it a chance. You're right. Thank you for being inside my head.


And for the record, if you didn't speak at all for fifteen years, it wouldn't be very easy. Vocal chords atrophy with disuse...like anything else. He could make noises, but I doubt he could articulate much. I liked the idea of him saying a single, monosyllabic word...but the idea of anyone, after fifteen years of silence, sitting down with someone and having a chat is just patently absurd. Particularly if he's...oh, I dunno...batshit fucking insane.

I don't expect him to have a well-versed, "Perhaps a chat over coffee?" conversation, but the scene screamed for something, even if it's just the "Boo... Boo..." as scripted.

MichaelJrdnMyrs
09-07-2007, 09:37 AM
I don't expect him to have a well-versed, "Perhaps a chat over coffee?" conversation, but the scene screamed for something, even if it's just the "Boo... Boo..." as scripted.

Maybe. By the time we get to that part though we've been back in the original Halloween for over half an hour, and even just the showing of the baby picture looked very strange and out of place.

ragethorn
09-07-2007, 09:39 AM
What are you guys bantering on about?

This isn't the best horror movie in the last 10 years, so we all have a reason to bitch. I'm happy with what Zombie did but it does have its flaws. I'm biast. I could honestly say I enjoyed 90% of this movie because my favourite movie of all-time is the original. It's not fair.

Let us bitch. This messageboard would be out of order if all 9 movies were solid. lol All of us dorks would have to actually do some work.

Let's bitch, let's complain, let's.....

Shall we?

:smoke:

renee30152
09-07-2007, 09:44 AM
I think if he remade Friday the 13th, it would be awesome. Now that movie can get as bloody and gory as he likes. :D

PG Soul
09-07-2007, 09:46 AM
He should make his own movie

The Kilted One
09-07-2007, 09:46 AM
I think if he remade Friday the 13th, it would be awesome. Now that movie can get as bloody and gory as he likes. :D

I think Rob could actually do a lot with remaking Friday the 13th part II. Now that sounds like a pretty good fit.

nwiser
09-07-2007, 10:11 AM
I think Rob could actually do a lot with remaking Friday the 13th part II. Now that sounds like a pretty good fit.

yeah, though if he did take on a Friday project I would be hoping for a complete reboot (did I just say that?) instead of a remake. I think he could do a reasonable job, and honestly I would like to see a little more about the origins of Jason, but I think if he did that everyone would whine and say he just copied his idea for Halloween.

Zombie
09-07-2007, 10:14 AM
I wouldn't want him to speak, but I also don't think you have to do the entire love scene, either. It just didn't feel right.

As for the person that's trying to compare this to the sequels, I believe there really is a difference. Generally, sequels are ass and only there to make money (ok, most movies today are, but you get the point). I go into a sequel expecting as much and know I probably won't be blown away. It's a sequel for Christ's sakes! When you're pushing the sixth, seventh and eight installment, it's not expected to be great.

This is different, because this wasn't just a sequel, it was something bigger. It was a restart of a movie that had fallen on hard times over the past ten years and this movie was taken far more seriously than any other sequel outside of maybe H20. That's the point, it was supposed to be above those sequels and in my opinion, the only sequel this was better than was Halloween: Resurrection. Yes, I felt it was equal -- maybe a bit better -- than Halloween 5 and worse than H20, which I hate.

Zombie
09-07-2007, 10:19 AM
yeah, though if he did take on a Friday project I would be hoping for a complete reboot (did I just say that?) instead of a remake. I think he could do a reasonable job, and honestly I would like to see a little more about the origins of Jason, but I think if he did that everyone would whine and say he just copied his idea for Halloween.

If they are going to remake the original Friday, Jason will have to be involved, so I expect a complete reboot. Making a movie without the most iconic horror figure out there (and yes, I think Jason is more known and bigger than Michael), which a remake of the original would have to be, since Pamela Voorhees was the killer, would be an utter failure.

krustytheklown
09-07-2007, 11:02 AM
I think if he remade Friday the 13th, it would be awesome. Now that movie can get as bloody and gory as he likes. :D

i really didnt find rz halloween gory. brutal, yes, uncompromising, controversial. im enjoying it more each time i see it

Reobeem
09-07-2007, 11:39 AM
right idea Rob Zombie wrong series

Undrtkerkane
09-07-2007, 11:41 AM
If they are going to remake the original Friday, Jason will have to be involved, so I expect a complete reboot. Making a movie without the most iconic horror figure out there (and yes, I think Jason is more known and bigger than Michael), which a remake of the original would have to be, since Pamela Voorhees was the killer, would be an utter failure.

I can see RZ do a jason movie, since he loves the character but hated the movies, anyone think Tyler mane as Jason?? how would that look or is Tyler too thin

PG Soul
09-07-2007, 12:06 PM
I didn't like the fact that the token black actors were killed off like that.
Actually, Big Joe deserved to die for uttering such appalling lines, terrible!

Trooper#4
09-08-2007, 03:40 AM
I want Zombie to make original films. Before Halloween, he hated remakes and slasher films. Then he did both. Do we really need white trash counselors and campers in Friday the 13th?

Undrtkerkane
09-08-2007, 08:33 AM
I want Zombie to make original films. Before Halloween, he hated remakes and slasher films. Then he did both. Do we really need white trash counselors and campers in Friday the 13th?

Probably say white trash family and cursing is drove jason to fall in the water :p

EvilOnTwoLegs
09-08-2007, 09:27 AM
Probably say white trash family and cursing is drove jason to fall in the water :p
Probably say improbable syntax is make EOTL to shake head in disbelief.

Monte
09-08-2007, 11:15 AM
Just talked to a friend of mine who is not a Halloween fan at all. He said he liked how "Michael was scary this time" and not like "the one where they were in the house with the Internet cameras." He took issue with Dr. Loomis's fate, though.

D Adams
09-08-2007, 01:58 PM
So then, what was his intention? To turn into a teletubby when he finally got to her. You guys are crazy. lol

His intention should ALWAYS be to kill her. This is Halloween people.

What was his intention? To talk to her? So why didn't he? To hug her? Why didn't he?

Let me clarify myself, if he didn't want to kill her then why charge her off a balcony? Why bring the ceiling down when in fact she could've and did get very hurt?

I think the answer is that this version of Michael Myers is unstable and confused as well as fucked in the head.

It's very contradicting.


Go look at the 78' original, then rewatch RZ's rendition. JC's version - it was blatant that Michael wants to KILL Laurie and tries at every opportunity.

In RZ's version, he had chances to kill her, but didn't. He could have killed her when he pulled her out the tub away from the kids, not CARRY her down the street to his house unharmed.

You come on' ... why didn't he kill her then?

RZ's Michael seem to want Laurie to know who he is , and maybe, accept him. That is not what was going to happen since Laurie had no clue who he is/was .... and she definitely wasn't ever going to accept had she known. Her stabbing him was an ulimate betrayal, so maybe then , the anger/evil takes over.

But, RZ's MM did not intend to kill Laurie, which was a definite break in character from JC's MM.

D Adams
09-08-2007, 02:08 PM
RZ was damned no matter what ... just because it is a remake and would be compared to JC's original.

Had he made it more like the 78' , except with updated actors, dialogue, and enviroment, then people would have bitched that he added nothing unique or original and trashed it. Now, the changes he did make, which WERE toned down from the WP, people are still bitching ... He even changed Bob's death to be more like the 78' original, and I personally didn't mind the death scene from the WP (at least it was different). So, RZ was damned no matter what ....

In the end, I would have released what I wanted, (minus the rape), and at least go down doing it the way I wanted, lol :p

Myers-89
09-08-2007, 05:54 PM
One thing I will say is that I didn't really think it was necessary to see inside Big Joe Grizzly's copy of "Swank".

The Dark Shape
09-08-2007, 05:58 PM
"Naughty girl. Naughty, naughty."

wyatt s
09-08-2007, 07:58 PM
So a very interesting thing happened today. My girlfriend went to see the movie today while I was at work, she liked it by the way, and I picked her up when it was over. As I stood in the lobby of the theatre and waiting for her to come out I saw a man who looked like he may be about 40ish come out and I couldn't help but over here him say to his friend "wow that may be scarier than the original!" At this point I was curious. I felt compelled to ask him why he thought that. He responded by saying that the idea of what Michael really is beyond the simple "pure evil" of the original was much more terrifying. That intrigued me and I ended up debating with him about the series and the original for a good half an hour, much to my girlfriend's dismay of course. It was very cool.

D Adams
09-08-2007, 08:24 PM
I just saw it again, and I must say Brad Dourif's performance was appalling ..... His reaction when he saw his daughter half-naked and near death was horrid. It was one for rottentomatoes nomination ... worst ever. He showed no emotion whatsoever. The original Sheriff Brackett from the 78' film was fantastic -- You actually felt his pain. With Brad Dourif .... you felt nothing, absolutely nothing --- I"m surprised Zombie didn't recast him or reshoot that scene - it was bad!

TOO MUCH BS
09-08-2007, 08:25 PM
So a very interesting thing happened today. My girlfriend went to see the movie today while I was at work, she liked it by the way, and I picked her up when it was over. As I stood in the lobby of the theatre and waiting for her to come out I saw a man who looked like he may be about 40ish come out and I couldn't help but over here him say to his friend "wow that may be scarier than the original!" At this point I was curious. I felt compelled to ask him why he thought that. He responded by saying that the idea of what Michael really is beyond the simple "pure evil" of the original was much more terrifying. That intrigued me and I ended up debating with him about the series and the original for a good half an hour, much to my girlfriend's dismay of course. It was very cool.

lol so may i ask who won the debate?

The Dark Shape
09-08-2007, 08:27 PM
I just saw it again, and I must say Brad Dourif's performance was appalling ..... His reaction when he saw his daughter half-naked and near death was horrid. It was one for rottentomatoes nomination ... worst ever. He showed no emotion whatsoever. The original Sheriff Brackett from the 78' film was fantastic -- You actually felt his pain. With Brad Dourif .... you felt nothing, absolutely nothing --- I"m surprised Zombie didn't recast him or reshoot that scene - it was bad!

You felt Brackett's pain in the original Halloween? ...really?

D Adams
09-08-2007, 08:31 PM
You felt Brackett's pain in the original Halloween? ...really?

Well, that's the difference between good & bad actors/performances. Good actors are able to "draw you in" , connect you to that moment, to the emotions they are bringing forth.... You don't usually get that with horror films, but you did with the actors/actresses from H1 ---

Dourif sucked so bad!! :(

SLAB
09-08-2007, 08:32 PM
You felt Brackett's pain in the original Halloween? ...really?

I did, and something caused it. Probably kids. :)

Frazetta
09-08-2007, 09:03 PM
I did, and something caused it. Probably kids. :)
I think that is the reason he yelled all the time.

The Dark Shape
09-08-2007, 10:39 PM
Dourif sucked so bad!! :(

Okay. But Brackett didn't find out Annie died until Halloween II.

EvilOnTwoLegs
09-08-2007, 11:11 PM
Okay. But Brackett didn't find out Annie died until Halloween II.
Yeah...and all he really did was yell "YOU LET HIM OOOOOOUUUUUUUTTTTTT!!!!!" Which was completely the opposite of the truth. I didn't feel for him as much as I felt for Loomis...haha...who was basically being accused of opening up Myers's door and saying "There you are, Michael...go to Haddonfield and kill the Sheriff's daughter."

As for Dourif's performance, people don't always react to that kind of experience the way they do in most movies. Shock can basically shut down a person's emotional response. And police are trained to calm victims down...not turn all hysterical. Annie, still being alive, probably wouldn't have reacted well to her father completely wigging the fuck out. The last thing you want to do with a person who's been through a traumatic experience is give them more reason to panic.

HannibalBEATNGU
09-08-2007, 11:13 PM
Yeah...and all he really did was yell "YOU LET HIM OOOOOOUUUUUUUTTTTTT!!!!!" Which was completely the opposite of the truth. I didn't feel for him as much as I felt for Loomis...haha...who was basically being accused of opening up Myers's door and saying "There you are, Michael...go to Haddonfield and kill the Sheriff's daughter."

I think in that emotional state, people are just full of anger and looking for someone to blame, Loomis was the closest thing to that for Bracket, even if it wasn't well placed.

MyersFan75
09-08-2007, 11:18 PM
:bastard:
Yeah...and all he really did was yell "YOU LET HIM OOOOOOUUUUUUUTTTTTT!!!!!" Which was completely the opposite of the truth. I didn't feel for him as much as I felt for Loomis...haha...who was basically being accused of opening up Myers's door and saying "There you are, Michael...go to Haddonfield and kill the Sheriff's daughter."

As for Dourif's performance, people don't always react to that kind of experience the way they do in most movies. Shock can basically shut down a person's emotional response. And police are trained to calm victims down...not turn all hysterical. Annie, still being alive, probably wouldn't have reacted well to her father completely wigging the fuck out. The last thing you want to do with a person who's been through a traumatic experience is give them more reason to panic.


That's a good point.

As I sat there in the theater, I was thinking, "she must not be worth much to him, look at how he is handling it."

Thanks for clearing my mind now. Makes sense.

dbzguy
09-08-2007, 11:35 PM
Does anyone know if Rob has posted on here since the movie came out ?



I would like to tell him good job ! :D

EvilOnTwoLegs
09-08-2007, 11:36 PM
I think in that emotional state, people are just full of anger and looking for someone to blame, Loomis was the closest thing to that for Bracket, even if it wasn't well placed.
"You let him OOOUUUUUUTTTTTTT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" :p



That's a good point.

As I sat there in the theater, I was thinking, "she must not be worth much to him, look at how he is handling it."

Thanks for clearing my mind now. Makes sense.
Yeah. Dourif can play panic really well, so that isn't an issue. He obviously did what Zombie wanted him to do...and I'd imagine those would be Zombie's reasons. Hell, if you're Sheriff, you've got a responsibility...and certainly, he has a responsibility to his daughter. People act like he doesn't seem to care...but I think it shows a lot of caring to hold back your own emotions so as not to do further damage to your daughter. I mean, if she saw her father...who also happens to be the Sheriff...just lose it, I can't imagine what good that would do her, in her state.

MyersFan75
09-08-2007, 11:39 PM
Yeah. Dourif can play panic really well, so that isn't an issue. He obviously did what Zombie wanted him to do...and I'd imagine those would be Zombie's reasons. Hell, if you're Sheriff, you've got a responsibility...and certainly, he has a responsibility to his daughter. People act like he doesn't seem to care...but I think it shows a lot of caring to hold back your own emotions so as not to do further damage to your daughter. I mean, if she saw her father...who also happens to be the Sheriff...just lose it, I can't imagine what good that would do her, in her state.


I don't see how I didn't think of that situation before. It all makes sense now.

Well, I guess Dourif isn't a bad thing as far as Halloween goes, like I had originally stated.

I didn't really like the portrayal too much, but the character was written interestingly enough, and had some importance to the story.

EvilOnTwoLegs
09-08-2007, 11:42 PM
I don't see how I didn't think of that situation before. It all makes sense now.

Well, I guess Dourif isn't a bad thing as far as Halloween goes, like I had originally stated.

I didn't really like the portrayal too much, but the character was written interestingly enough, and had some importance to the story.
I don't think Dourif had enough screentime. He didn't get a chance to develop his character. I've always been a fan of the guy, ever since I saw One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest. It's a pity he didn't have more to do here. I would've especially liked more scenes between Dourif and McDowell.

MyersFan75
09-09-2007, 05:04 AM
I don't think Dourif had enough screentime. He didn't get a chance to develop his character. I've always been a fan of the guy, ever since I saw One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest. It's a pity he didn't have more to do here. I would've especially liked more scenes between Dourif and McDowell.


I believe it was said there will be more on the DVD. I could be wrong.

Anyway, whenever McDowell and Dourif were on screen it really made me think of the original, in a good way. It was great seeing them on screen together.

Kinick
09-09-2007, 06:50 AM
Does anyone know if Rob has posted on here since the movie came out ?



I would like to tell him good job ! :D

No, he hasn't. I doubt he will any time soon. He just wanted to hear from the fans before he went ahead, asking what their favourite scenes were and all. Let's hope he does us proud and gets a director's cut for DVD.

TheShape'78
09-09-2007, 07:58 AM
I think in that emotional state, people are just full of anger and looking for someone to blame, Loomis was the closest thing to that for Bracket, even if it wasn't well placed.

yeah but brackett was blaming loomis for michaels escape way before he found out about his daughters death.

-mitch-

The Dark Shape
09-09-2007, 09:01 AM
Dourif is an incredible actor and was wasted here. I almost hope for a Halloween 2 just so he has something of consequence to do.

Kinick
09-09-2007, 09:02 AM
After checking for release dates on a few Irish sites i noticed one had the release date for September 28th.

Then i went to Carlton Screen Advertsing where the UK date is also down for Sept 28th, where previously it had been romoured for October 19th. I hope so this is correct...http://www.carltonscreen.com/at-movies/film-search.aspx?filmId=955

Man In Black
09-09-2007, 09:10 AM
Thanks for the link. That would be a quite a decent date indeed.

Love how accurate the synopsis is:)
Friendly neighbourhood serial slasher, Michael Myers is mistakenly released from a mental institution where he was committed as a ten-year-old. Possessed by the Curse of Thorn the mask-wearing murderer heads back to his home town of Haddonfield to slaughter yet more members of his family. After eight films, can there be any left?

Kinick
09-09-2007, 09:35 AM
Yes, it's here. My local cinema has it listed for the 28th... what a great treat.

EvilOnTwoLegs
09-09-2007, 09:49 AM
yeah but brackett was blaming loomis for michaels escape way before he found out about his daughters death.
Very true. From H1: "If you are right...damn you for letting him go."

I'd also like to point out to those who singled out some of Malcolm McDowell's lines in Zombie's Halloween, that Donald's line, "They could be," in this same scene always gets a laugh out of me.



Dourif is an incredible actor and was wasted here. I almost hope for a Halloween 2 just so he has something of consequence to do.
I'll settle for some good deleted scenes...I don't want another film at this point. Even for Dourif's benefit.

Though Halloween: The Revenge of Sheriff Brackett would be pretty cool...a little too much like TDR, though. haha



Love how accurate the synopsis is:)
Friendly neighbourhood serial slasher, Michael Myers is mistakenly released from a mental institution where he was committed as a ten-year-old. Possessed by the Curse of Thorn the mask-wearing murderer heads back to his home town of Haddonfield to slaughter yet more members of his family. After eight films, can there be any left?
Wow...that's just........................wow.

hahahaha

Myers Insurance
09-09-2007, 10:39 AM
The Bracket/Annie scene in RZH > The Bracket/Annie scene in Halloween II.

TheShape411
09-09-2007, 10:39 AM
Can't believe what RZ did with the Loomis character...my God, sickened me to be honest.

Also has it been explained here or anywhere else how exactly Mikey knew what Laurie looked like??? All he had was a baby picture FFS...at least in the orginial it was explained. Just one of many plot holes.

Roswell
09-09-2007, 10:42 AM
...at least in the orginial it was explained.

It was?

EvilOnTwoLegs
09-09-2007, 10:43 AM
Also has it been explained here or anywhere else how exactly Mikey knew what Laurie looked like??? All he had was a baby picture FFS...at least in the orginial it was explained. Just one of many plot holes.
Really? I was under the impression that they weren't related in the original. :p

TheShape411
09-09-2007, 10:43 AM
It was?

Maybe I'm mistaken but I could've sworn that it was?

Roswell
09-09-2007, 10:45 AM
EOTL speaks the truth (once again).

Man In Black
09-09-2007, 10:48 AM
As EOTL said, they weren't related in the original. Nor were they for three years until Halloween II. One thing I've wondered about this movie is...would anyone accept a Laurie Strode character who was not Michael Myers sister in the remake? Since pretty much every sequel was based around the "Laurie is Michael's sister" premise.

Myers Insurance
09-09-2007, 10:49 AM
Maybe I'm mistaken but I could've sworn that it was?

Funny considering they weren't related in the original. That didn't come along til the second one. The first one simply was Michael stalking baby-sitters and Laurie was the one he saw.

TheShape411
09-09-2007, 10:53 AM
Wow, ok they aren't techincally related in the original...I was just going on the premise that they were because it's widely accepted that they are later in the series and in general.

Sorry that's just the way I look at it.

EvilOnTwoLegs
09-09-2007, 10:54 AM
This is why retcons are dangerous things.

Myers Insurance
09-09-2007, 10:55 AM
That is why SEQUELS are dangerous things.

TheShape411
09-09-2007, 10:55 AM
This is why retcons are dangerous things.

True but like I've said, that's just the way I've always looked at it.

Still doesn't answer my original question. :)

Myers Insurance
09-09-2007, 10:57 AM
Brother/sister bond. She was all that Michael had cared for next to his mom, and he spent the most time with her. Another way of explaining it is when she sticks the thing in the slot, Michael smells it and recognizes her scent.

TheShape411
09-09-2007, 10:57 AM
That is why SEQUELS are dangerous things.

Agreed but it's still odd that in the original, Laurie seems to be the sole focus of Michael even though they aren't related (at that time in the series) and everyone else just is in the way.

TheShape411
09-09-2007, 10:57 AM
Another way of explaining it is when she sticks the thing in the slot, Michael smells it and recognizes her scent.

So he's a bloodhound now? Kidding. :bigeyes:

Myers Insurance
09-09-2007, 10:57 AM
Because she was at the Myers house when he was there. That's how I see it.


So he's a bloodhound now? Kidding. :bigeyes:

He's been locked up for 17 years. He probably didn't smell much.

HannibalBEATNGU
09-09-2007, 11:01 AM
Considering that the movie started with Michael killing his sister, then showed him specifically target another young woman in the same area when he grew up, I always found it rather obvious that Laurie was his sister whether it was stated or not.

It wasn't the least bit surprising to me when it was stated in Halloween 2.

EvilOnTwoLegs
09-09-2007, 11:02 AM
He's been locked up for 17 years. He probably didn't smell much.
Just looking at the condition of his hair, I'd say he probably smelled plenty. :p

And the way I see it, there's probably an explanation (or at least a hint at one) to be found somewhere in Deleted Sceneland. If he was able to find out her adoptive surname through some means, he could have easily deduced her identity and home address when she dropped off the Strode Realty key at the Myers house.

TheShape411
09-09-2007, 11:04 AM
Considering that the movie started with Michael killing his sister, then showed him specifically target another young woman in the same area when he grew up, I always found it rather obvious that Laurie was his sister whether it was stated or not.

It wasn't the least bit surprising to me when it was stated in Halloween 2.

Exactly.

I mean it's not spelled out but you kinda get the hint that's the case.

That and also like I said earlier, she seems to be his sole focus once he escapes.

EvilOnTwoLegs
09-09-2007, 11:05 AM
Well, had John Carpenter not consumed so much beer in the early '80s, they never would've been related.

Khan
09-09-2007, 11:06 AM
If he had been drinking vodka, she would have been his mother from an alternate universe. :bastard:

TheShape411
09-09-2007, 11:08 AM
Also I'll just add this in...

Little Mikey wearing the clown suit + the Shatner mask = CLASSIC!

:roflmao:

EvilOnTwoLegs
09-09-2007, 11:10 AM
If he had been drinking vodka, she would have been his mother from an alternate universe. :bastard:
And that alternate universe is called Ukraine. :nodsmile:

Myers Insurance
09-09-2007, 11:11 AM
Had he been drinking absenthe, we'd have found out that she was his third cousin twice removed who had accidentally made out with him once.

EvilOnTwoLegs
09-09-2007, 11:12 AM
Had he been drinking absenthe, we'd have found out that she was his third cousin twice removed who had accidentally made out with him once.
No...he just would've cut his ear off and mailed it to Debra Hill.

Sidenote: Absinthe is fantastic. :yeah:

Myers Insurance
09-09-2007, 11:13 AM
So he'd have gone Vincent Van Gogh on us, huh?

EvilOnTwoLegs
09-09-2007, 11:14 AM
So he'd have gone Vincent Van Gogh on us, huh?
Hell yeah...well, a dash of temporal lobe epilepsy would help, as well. haha But I think the absinthe would've been sufficient.

TheShape411
09-09-2007, 11:16 AM
Did the jump scene where Mikey clotheslined the hell outta Mason Strode get anyone else?

LOL it did me.

I figured they were going to get it, but I didn't expect it to come like that. Thought it might be more drawn out.

Myers Insurance
09-09-2007, 11:17 AM
It was drawn out in the workprint.

EvilOnTwoLegs
09-09-2007, 11:18 AM
Did the jump scene where Mikey clotheslined the hell outta Mason Strode get anyone else?

LOL it did me.

I figured they were going to get it, but I didn't expect it to come like that. Thought it might be more drawn out.
It was more drawn out in the workprint...which is why it shocked me even more being so sudden in the theatrical cut.

Femanizer
09-09-2007, 11:32 AM
I jumped at the Mason Strode scene BOTH times I saw it haha.

freethy
09-09-2007, 11:52 AM
Agreed but it's still odd that in the original, Laurie seems to be the sole focus of Michael even though they aren't related (at that time in the series) and everyone else just is in the way.

It was said by Carpenter or Hill or someone at one point that Laurie reminded him of Judith. End of the day she dropped the keys at his old house and from there he sets about stalking her and her friends. he didn't simply kill Annie, Linda, and Bob because they were in his way because they clearly wasn't in his way. He stalked babysitters, again maybe reliving the killing of Judith when she was babysitting him.

There was no reasoning to "IT" as Loomis would call him. A blank slate, no real rational reason as to why he killed his sister or goes about stalking young girls and that was the point. Eliminating his bloodline was the furthest thing from anyone's mind when halloween was written and shot. Therefore, no, they are in no way related. When you watch halloween you must see it for what it is. Not for what they would have you believe in the sequels which basicly don't mean shit.,

The Dark Shape
09-09-2007, 12:39 PM
It was said by Carpenter or Hill or someone at one point that Laurie reminded him of Judith. End of the day she dropped the keys at his old house and from there he sets about stalking her and her friends. he didn't simply kill Annie, Linda, and Bob because they were in his way because they clearly wasn't in his way. He stalked babysitters, again maybe reliving the killing of Judith when she was babysitting him.

There was no reasoning to "IT" as Loomis would call him. A blank slate, no real rational reason as to why he killed his sister or goes about stalking young girls and that was the point. Eliminating his bloodline was the furthest thing from anyone's mind when halloween was written and shot. Therefore, no, they are in no way related. When you watch halloween you must see it for what it is. Not for what they would have you believe in the sequels which basicly don't mean shit.,

I love you.

TheShape411
09-09-2007, 01:03 PM
When you watch halloween you must see it for what it is. Not for what they would have you believe in the sequels which basicly don't mean shit.,

I understand what you're saying and I agree but damn if isn't hard to do that. :laugher:

HannibalBEATNGU
09-09-2007, 03:07 PM
Regardless of what Carpenter said or intended, I thought the first time I watched Halloween, without knowledge of the sequels, that Laurie was Michael's sister.

freethy
09-09-2007, 03:14 PM
But he wasn't.

Todd 78
09-09-2007, 03:18 PM
But he wasn't.

lIf you first watched it after 1981 he was

Pug-a-Licious
09-09-2007, 04:37 PM
I jumped at the Mason Strode scene BOTH times I saw it haha.

Pussy ;)

Okay..fine I jumped at that scene in the theaters too...haha! I wasn't the only one either..chick next to me about had a heart attack.

Khan
09-09-2007, 04:38 PM
To he honest, I knew that he would be slashing fodder, so when he was left alone, I expected Michael to appear.

HannibalBEATNGU
09-09-2007, 04:52 PM
But he wasn't.

It may not have been the intention, but that doesn't mean that it wasn't fairly obvious.

Frazetta
09-09-2007, 04:53 PM
Regardless of what Carpenter said or intended, I thought the first time I watched Halloween, without knowledge of the sequels, that Laurie was Michael's sister.
Word. Carpenter can claim whatever he wants but I do think he intended it to be left open for Laurie to be later revealed as Michael's baby Sister.

Todd 78
09-09-2007, 04:56 PM
Word. Carpenter can claim whatever he wants but I do think he intended it to be left open for Laurie to be later revealed as Michael's baby Sister.

While why we are at it. I do think Carpenter definitely left it open with the ending regardles of what he says

Todd
09-09-2007, 04:57 PM
Maybe I can solve this quandry.
If you view the original Halloween as a stand alone, then Laurie was just some girl that Michael became infatuated with.
If you view it as one movie in a series, then Laurie is his sister.

Todd 78
09-09-2007, 05:01 PM
Maybe I can solve this quandry.
If you view the original Halloween as a stand alone, then Laurie was just some girl that Michael became infatuated with.
If you view it as one movie in a series, then Laurie is his sister.

I think my solution is better. If you watch the movie before 1981, she wasn't his sister

Any viewing after the sequel came out in 81, they are siblings

Todd
09-09-2007, 05:03 PM
I think my solution is better. If you watch the movie before 1981, she wasn't his sister

Any viewing after the sequel came out in 81, they are siblings
Nah, my idea is da bomb.....

HannibalBEATNGU
09-09-2007, 05:19 PM
Maybe I can solve this quandry.
If you view the original Halloween as a stand alone, then Laurie was just some girl that Michael became infatuated with.
If you view it as one movie in a series, then Laurie is his sister.

But like I said, I always found it obvious she was his sister, even with no prior knowledge of Halloween 2.
I would've found it obvious regardless of whether I'd ever watched another Halloween movie again or not.

Reobeem
09-09-2007, 05:21 PM
when I first saw Halloween I thought Laurie looked like Judith and that's why he was after her, adding the family angle didn't make it worse for me

scoob
09-09-2007, 06:23 PM
According to Rob, Michael could tell Laurie was his sister because he smelt the package she dropped off at the house - Michael being more of an animal instinct kind of guy. That was in an interview somewhere before the film came out. Not quite this one but close enough:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

RS: Michael's search for Laurie is a little bit supernatural, isn't it? I mean, he just finds her. When I was watching the movie I sort of imagined that there's a deleted scene of Michael at the library, Googling or looking through records or something to find out where this girl lives.

RZ: Well, there are certain things you've got to take artistic license, and one thing was, I just wanted to play it like as if he had animal instincts. You always hear stories -- it's uncommon, but it happens -- when somebody drives across the country and they leave their cat at a rest stop, let's say. Then the cat somehow finds its way home, 3,000 miles. It makes no sense at all that one day the cat reappears. And that's basically how I was playing Michael -- his instinct to do these things is so strong. I mean, obviously, it's a movie so you've gotta suspend disbelief on some things, but that was the only thing that seemed to make sense with the character, how he's always been set up, you know. How else would he know anything? I played it too like he's very cunning and aware. When he's in Smith's Grove, he seems like this harmless lump that no one pays attention to for fifteen years. But he's always listening, he's always aware, he's always watching. 'Where did they put the keys? What door is the door ...' You know. He's totally aware, totally manipulative. It's believable that over that time he could have paid attention to what was happening, overheard things, found things out.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
About the non speaking Myers:

RS: Do you think he could speak if he wanted to?

RZ: Well, I played it like ... he just degenerates until his only personality is the mask. He is a person who has ceased to exist. You see, with little Michael, that he starts talking less and less and less and relying more on hiding behind the mask. Until he doesn't speak at all. But he, I mean, he has a voice box, so he could speak if he wanted to, but he's also so crazy that maybe he doesn't remember how, you know? He's so degenerated into such a mental state ... which end is up?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And his motives:

RS: What is Michael's plan? Is he trying to erase all record of his existence?

RZ: No, his plan is clearly to reunite. I see Michael Myers as this, the way he's always been described. He has no sense of right or wrong, or remorse, conscience, anything. Even when little Michael is in the sanitarium, he doesn't even know why he's there. He doesn't remember killing his family, he doesn't remember anything. He doesn't even know what he's doing there. That's sort of his way through the whole movie. He has no understanding of life or death. That's why if you think back to adult Michael killing somebody, he looks at it like 'Why did he stop moving? I don't get it.' So really, the master plan we find out at the end of the movie, basically Michael is trying to reunite his entire family. He's searching for his baby sister, who was a baby when he got locked away. And the only way he can reunite the rest of his family, because they're all dead, is symbolically, with a gravestone or another corpse. So, without giving it all away, that's sort of how it all plays out.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.cinematical.com/2007/08/27/interview-rob-zombie-talks-to-cinematical-about-understanding-m/

Mind you, he said he also never realised Laurie was Michael's sister until the second film and that he had just written that in by coincidence. Apparently he has not seen Halloween II since it came out in 1981 and watched it once.

Femanizer
09-09-2007, 07:14 PM
To he honest, I knew that he would be slashing fodder, so when he was left alone, I expected Michael to appear.

Yeah but you also found Hatchet to be so innovative and it was trash.

wyatt s
09-09-2007, 08:06 PM
lol so may i ask who won the debate?

Sorry, didn't catch the question earlier.

I don't know if it was really a debate that one could win. It was more a debate on various things such as what the good and bad aspects of the new film were, which film began the decline, and blah blah blah. It was basically like being on this board :nodsmile:

HannibalBEATNGU
09-09-2007, 08:20 PM
Yeah but you also found Hatchet to be so innovative and it was trash.

I doubt it's more befitting of the trash label than Trashoween is.

Femanizer
09-09-2007, 08:21 PM
I doubt it's more befitting of the trash label than Trashoween is.

You would have to see it to make that judgment but it seems you're too busy following me around and quoting me.

HannibalBEATNGU
09-09-2007, 08:26 PM
Yes, I would have to say it to make a decision on it, hence why I said, "I doubt."

You just quoted me btw, which you did in another thread not too long ago...

stop following me around and quoting me.;)

Femanizer
09-09-2007, 08:27 PM
Yes, I would have to say it to make a decision on it, hence why I said, "I doubt."

You just quoted me btw, which you did in another thread not too long ago...

stop following me around and quoting me.;)

you are wrong btw....move on with the discussion.

HannibalBEATNGU
09-09-2007, 08:28 PM
So you admonish another poster for presenting opinion as fact, and repeatedly tell other posters that their opinions are wrong...nice.

Femanizer
09-09-2007, 08:29 PM
I told you you were wrong about Hatchet not being trashier than Halloween. I've seen Hatchet, I would know...it's not an opinion.

Pug-a-Licious
09-09-2007, 08:31 PM
ugh...Hatchet sucked...I don't know if it was trashier, but it sure sucked...

I love RZ's Halloween, trashy or not...I still love it. :D

Femanizer
09-09-2007, 08:33 PM
It was an alright movie, nowhere near as bad as Hatchet was Kelly.

EvilOnTwoLegs
09-09-2007, 08:51 PM
It was said by Carpenter or Hill or someone at one point that Laurie reminded him of Judith. End of the day she dropped the keys at his old house and from there he sets about stalking her and her friends. he didn't simply kill Annie, Linda, and Bob because they were in his way because they clearly wasn't in his way. He stalked babysitters, again maybe reliving the killing of Judith when she was babysitting him.

There was no reasoning to "IT" as Loomis would call him. A blank slate, no real rational reason as to why he killed his sister or goes about stalking young girls and that was the point. Eliminating his bloodline was the furthest thing from anyone's mind when halloween was written and shot. Therefore, no, they are in no way related. When you watch halloween you must see it for what it is. Not for what they would have you believe in the sequels which basicly don't mean shit.,
I would argue that he killed Bob essentially to get him out of the way before killing Lynda...but other than that, right on. :yeah:



The sequels are fun entertainment.

The first film is a work of art.
I would argue that some of the sequels are neither fun nor entertaining...haha...but other than that, right on. :yeah:



I think my solution is better. If you watch the movie before 1981, she wasn't his sister

Any viewing after the sequel came out in 81, they are siblings
See, the reason that doesn't work for me is that I first watched H1 in the early '90s...and they weren't fucking related. :p

scoob
09-09-2007, 08:57 PM
Im guessing that if Rob had made the film sister-less related then there would be more complaints.

Its not a bad film its own right, but I can see why people are complaining.
It wasnt the ideal kick off to a new franchise that maybe a lot were expecting.

The Dark Shape
09-09-2007, 09:15 PM
But like I said, I always found it obvious she was his sister, even with no prior knowledge of Halloween 2.
I would've found it obvious regardless of whether I'd ever watched another Halloween movie again or not.

Except that she wasn't, Bret. At all. She's a random girl who walked up to the house and had a hellacious night because of it. Laurie being his sister hurts the first film to a great degree and turns everything into a giant coincidence.

MichaelJrdnMyrs
09-09-2007, 09:22 PM
Except that she wasn't, Bret. At all. She's a random girl who walked up to the house and had a hellacious night because of it. Laurie being his sister hurts the first film to a great degree and turns everything into a giant coincidence.

Which is why her wandering up to the old house's front door on Halloween with that sister logic is ridiculous.

Should've been rewritten for this one.

dbzguy
09-09-2007, 09:22 PM
When first seeing JC's Halloween , I never got the impression that Lauire was Michaels sister... just a freak encounter when she dropped off the keys at the Myers house...

Pug-a-Licious
09-09-2007, 09:23 PM
When first seeing JC's Halloween , I never got the impression that Lauire was Michaels sister... just a freak encounter when she dropped off the keys at the Myers house...

That's how I saw it too :)

Zombie
09-09-2007, 11:56 PM
Except that she wasn't, Bret. At all. She's a random girl who walked up to the house and had a hellacious night because of it. Laurie being his sister hurts the first film to a great degree and turns everything into a giant coincidence.

Not only just a random girl, but one that reminded him of Judith.

Zombie
09-10-2007, 12:00 AM
According to Rob, Michael could tell Laurie was his sister because he smelt the package she dropped off at the house - Michael being more of an animal instinct kind of guy. That was in an interview somewhere before the film came out. Not quite this one but close enough:


So I was half-right when I said Michael smelled the fact she didn't douche? Nice! :D

Inhumane
09-10-2007, 12:15 AM
It was said by Carpenter or Hill or someone at one point that Laurie reminded him of Judith. End of the day she dropped the keys at his old house and from there he sets about stalking her and her friends. he didn't simply kill Annie, Linda, and Bob because they were in his way because they clearly wasn't in his way. He stalked babysitters, again maybe reliving the killing of Judith when she was babysitting him.

There was no reasoning to "IT" as Loomis would call him. A blank slate, no real rational reason as to why he killed his sister or goes about stalking young girls and that was the point. Eliminating his bloodline was the furthest thing from anyone's mind when halloween was written and shot. Therefore, no, they are in no way related. When you watch halloween you must see it for what it is. Not for what they would have you believe in the sequels which basicly don't mean shit.,


:bow: Well said.

ALDO
09-10-2007, 06:47 AM
When first seeing JC's Halloween , I never got the impression that Lauire was Michaels sister... just a freak encounter when she dropped off the keys at the Myers house...

Same here. The first time i saw the original it never crossed my mind at all that Laurie may have been his sister. When i saw it for a second time a few year's later i still never once got the impression they were somehow related.

Even now i can still view John Carpenter's Halloween knowing full well that Laurie Strode is not his sister. Because that fact of the matter is they are not related at all.

Three year's and a pack of Budweiser's later is not going to change that.:crazy:

freethy
09-10-2007, 07:09 AM
I would argue that he killed Bob essentially to get him out of the way before killing Lynda...but other than that, right on. :yeah:


Ah, well I would have to agree with you there. As long as we ain't agreeing with Mr BeAtINGU then all is well...lol Because that guys is wronger than cream on toast.


But like I said, I always found it obvious she was his sister, even with no prior knowledge of Halloween 2.
I would've found it obvious regardless of whether I'd ever watched another Halloween movie again or not.

How is it obvious when it's not even whats happening? You either are psychic having not seen H2 at the time, or you are talking abosolute rubbish because there was nothing at all to suggest they were brother and sister in H1.

Todd
09-10-2007, 07:24 AM
But like I said, I always found it obvious she was his sister, even with no prior knowledge of Halloween 2.
I would've found it obvious regardless of whether I'd ever watched another Halloween movie again or not.
The reason I have no problem accepting Laurie as Michaels sister while watching H1 (even though I know that wasn't the original intent) is that nothing in the original contradicts it and the story actually makes sense. It doesn't take a suspension of disbelief in order to believe that Laurie is Michaels sister. Well, I guess one could wonder why Lauries adoptive father would have her drop off keys at the Myers house if he knew that she was in fact the sister of the kid who had murdered his other sister there, but we could always suppose that he was an insensitive bastard or that he just thought that since Laurie (and no one else in town, apparently) knew she was related to Michael, it wouldn't matter if she stopped by the house for a few seconds just to drop off a key.

nwiser
09-10-2007, 07:35 AM
The reason I have no problem accepting Laurie as Michaels sister while watching H1 (even though I know that wasn't the original intent) is that nothing in the original contradicts it and the story actually makes sense.

It definately provides an explanation of why Michael chose to escape, stalk, and then kill/attempt to kill THOSE particular babysitters. If one ignores the brother/sister relationship established in H2, the question arises as to why he chose to go after those specific babysitters when it's unlikely that they were the only ones babysitting someone in the entire town of Haddonfield...there had to be something special about them. Laurie being his sister is a much tidier and sensical explantion than say, "she was the one who happend to drop off the keys to the house" or something.

My guess is Laurie didnt know about Michael being her brother until we knew (in H2) so her dropping off the keys was probably no big deal for her(supposedly she visitied him as a kid while he was in Smiths Grove...but I think that was revealed in one of the novelizations...not sure). Are we supposed to assume that Laurie even existed when Michael committed the original Murder, as we didnt see a baby in the opening of the original? I'm guessing she came afterwards.

I both like and dislike the fact that RZ explained it in the new film. Because it makes sense for them to be related, and as an homage to the storyline of the old series, I like it. However, with RZ establishing it in the new film, should a sequel be made the brother/sister relationship is commited to the storyline of the new series which means it will likely be a plot device, which could end up taking us down a road similar to that of the last series with the sequels.

Todd
09-10-2007, 07:46 AM
It definately provides an explanation of why Michael chose to escape, stalk, and then kill/attempt to kill THOSE particular babysitters. If one ignores the brother/sister relationship established in H2, the question arises as to why he chose to go after those specific babysitters when it's unlikely that they were the only ones babysitting someone in the entire town of Haddonfield...there had to be something special about them. Laurie being his sister is a much tidier and sensical explantion than say, "she was the one who happend to drop off the keys to the house" or something.
Yeah, I honestly think making Laurie be Michaels sister helped the series. I honestly don't see how it harmed it in any way.
I mean, anyone who watched the prequels to Star Wars could easily see that Lucas came up with certain ideas after the original three movies were already made. There are so many inconsistencies between the original three movies and the prequels, I don't even know where to get started. Yet not many people seem to complain about them. Here, with the Halloween series, Carpenter added something in H2 that didn't ask us to forget anything we had seen in the original, and it's supposed to be such a big deal. Laurie being Michaels sister is totally believeable, and the only reason people complain about it is that Carpenter made it public that he didn't come up with the idea until writing Halloween 2.

The Kilted One
09-10-2007, 07:49 AM
Yeah, I honestly think making Laurie be Michaels sister helped the series. I honestly don't see how it harmed it in any way.
I mean, anyone who watched the prequels to Star Wars could easily see that Lucas came up with certain ideas after the original three movies were already made. There are so many inconsistencies between the original three movies and the prequels, I don't even know where to get started. Yet not many people seem to complain about them. Here, with the Halloween series, Carpenter added something in H2 that didn't ask us to forget anything we had seen in the original, and it's supposed to be such a big deal. Laurie being Michaels sister is totally believeable, and the only reason people complain about it is that Carpenter made it public that he didn't come up with the idea until writing Halloween 2.

In fact, some say that Carpenter (with the help of a case of Bud) got the idea to make Laurie Michael's sister from "Luke, I am your Father".

nwiser
09-10-2007, 07:55 AM
I mean, anyone who watched the prequels to Star Wars could easily see that Lucas came up with certain ideas after the original three movies were already made.


Midichlorians anyone? :erm:

Todd
09-10-2007, 07:57 AM
In fact, some say that Carpenter (with the help of a case of Bud) got the idea to make Laurie Michael's sister from "Luke, I am your Father".
He might have.
What I wonder is would people complain about Laurie being Michaels sister if Carpenter hadn't admitted that he didn't come up with the idea until writing H2? What if he lied and said it was his intent all along, or simply remained silent about the subject?

Zombie
09-10-2007, 08:10 AM
It definately provides an explanation of why Michael chose to escape, stalk, and then kill/attempt to kill THOSE particular babysitters. If one ignores the brother/sister relationship established in H2, the question arises as to why he chose to go after those specific babysitters when it's unlikely that they were the only ones babysitting someone in the entire town of Haddonfield...there had to be something special about them. Laurie being his sister is a much tidier and sensical explantion than say, "she was the one who happend to drop off the keys to the house" or something.


He started following Laurie because he became transfixed with her, she was essentially a Judith-like character to Meyer. I think Michael went back to Haddonfield with one purpose on his mind: to kill. Maybe when he saw Laurie, his actions changed a bit, but I don't think there really needs to be an explanation outside of that as to why he started stalking her and subsequently her friends.

In my mind, Michael was always setting Laurie up. Slowly circling her like animals do to their prey in the wild. Because really, he could have just slit her throat at the house when she dropped off the key if he wanted to, or killed her when she was all alone at home after school. But he didn't. Why? Because it's like a game to Michael, a cat and mouse chase and ultimately that would not have worked had he not killed Lynda, Annie and Bob.

Look, Michael wanted to draw Laurie over to the Wallace house. This is clear when he turns the lights off and then "models" the bodies. It's his trap and Laurie falls for it, just like the prey normally would. The difference here is that Laurie was a fighter and escaped the trap, rather than succumbed to it.

So I look at that entire event, where Michael kills Annie, Lynda and Bob, as his way of doing away with possible threats before going after Laurie. Then displaying them for the sole purpose of showing Laurie what she was in for after she arrived at the Wallace house. He set her up, but she prevailed.

At least that's how I always interpreted the movie.

EvilOnTwoLegs
09-10-2007, 08:27 AM
Ah, well I would have to agree with you there. As long as we ain't agreeing with Mr BeAtINGU then all is we
hahahaha

Yeah, that to me seemed like the one instance in the film where Myers was really taking someone out just for the sake of getting to someone else...and it wasn't to get to Laurie, but Lynda. Myers likes the ladies. haha And killing Bob pretty much seems like means to an end...i.e. getting to Lynda with no interruptions.


And I think many people miss the greater significance of Laurie dropping off the key in H1. Stef...you wanna field this one? haha I know it's something we've discussed a few times, and you always tend to articulate it best. :nodsmile:

Frazetta
09-10-2007, 10:22 AM
Ah, well I would have to agree with you there. As long as we ain't agreeing with Mr BeAtINGU then all is well...lol Because that guys is wronger than cream on toast.



How is it obvious when it's not even whats happening? You either are psychic having not seen H2 at the time, or you are talking abosolute rubbish because there was nothing at all to suggest they were brother and sister in H1.Mr. BeatingU makes more sense than most of this board on many occasions so I really don't have a problem agreeing with him.

I've always thought that Carpenter was smart enough to insert little things into Halloween that, while they aren't obvious, would be benefical if the film was successful enough to warrant a sequel. In the back of his mind I've always thought that while he was making Halloween Carpenter had the Brother/Sister idea ready to go for Halloween II.

The Dark Shape
09-10-2007, 10:35 AM
You'd be wrong.

MichaelJrdnMyrs
09-10-2007, 10:36 AM
And I think many people miss the greater significance of Laurie dropping off the key in H1. Stef...you wanna field this one? haha I know it's something we've discussed a few times, and you always tend to articulate it best. :nodsmile:


Greater significance? Is she dropping off her soul?

Frazetta
09-10-2007, 10:36 AM
You'd be wrong. On what? That Bret makes sense.......:bastard:

The Dark Shape
09-10-2007, 10:44 AM
Bret was also born after Halloween II came out, and I tend to think he was aware of the plot twist before he actually saw the first film.

Frazetta
09-10-2007, 11:00 AM
Bret was also born after Halloween II came out, and I tend to think he was aware of the plot twist before he actually saw the first film.
As was I. That could be the reasoning behind my thinking I suppose. Had I watched Halloween in 78 I might have a different thinking.

wyatt s
09-10-2007, 11:14 AM
I never watch the original with the thought of Michael and Laurie being related in any way. It doesn't even occur to me to think that.

Zombie
09-10-2007, 11:15 AM
Mr. BeatingU makes more sense than most of this board on many occasions so I really don't have a problem agreeing with him.

I've always thought that Carpenter was smart enough to insert little things into Halloween that, while they aren't obvious, would be benefical if the film was successful enough to warrant a sequel. In the back of his mind I've always thought that while he was making Halloween Carpenter had the Brother/Sister idea ready to go for Halloween II.

Halloween was supposed to be just one movie, I believe as Carpenter had not intended any sequel when he sat down and wrote the script for it. The only reason there was a sequel was because of the success it originally had. He was even reluctant at the idea of a sequel, I think, so I don't see how he had the sister idea in the back of his mind when writing the original. In fact, I seem to recall he said he was stuck with plot development while writing Halloween II when he finally came up with the idea to make Laurie Michael's sister.

MichaelJrdnMyrs
09-10-2007, 11:20 AM
Halloween was supposed to be just one movie, I believe as Carpenter had not intended any sequel when he sat down and wrote the script for it. The only reason there was a sequel was because of the success it originally had. He was even reluctant at the idea of a sequel, I think, so I don't see how he had the sister idea in the back of his mind when writing the original. In fact, I seem to recall he said he was stuck with plot development while writing Halloween II when he finally came up with the idea to make Laurie Michael's sister.


Yeah. I mean, he turned down directing it. That's not what somebody who was hungry for sequelizing would do.

freethy
09-10-2007, 11:30 AM
And I think many people miss the greater significance of Laurie dropping off the key in H1. Stef...you wanna field this one? haha I know it's something we've discussed a few times, and you always tend to articulate it best. :nodsmile:

There is a real fairy tale aspect to this. I think it was Stef that likened it to Little Red Riding Hood, and that to me is hitting the nail right on the head. Laurie was a victim of circumstance and nothing more.

As I have also said before, what are the fucking chances of killing your sister, spending 15 years away in smiths grove, and getting back to haddonfield just in time for your other sister who was adopted long ago to drop of the keys. Not only that, but to be adopted by the Strodes, (the father being the guy in charge of selling the house) and then told to drop off some key's (on halloween no less) at the house she was born in where here brother once killed her sister on halloween night.

Thats something I think JC was just too drunk to realize when he probably just finished watching The Empire Strikes Back.


Mr. BeatingU makes more sense than most of this board on many occasions so I really don't have a problem agreeing with him.

Then we are all fucked.


I've always thought that Carpenter was smart enough to insert little things into Halloween that, while they aren't obvious, would be benefical if the film was successful enough to warrant a sequel. In the back of his mind I've always thought that while he was making Halloween Carpenter had the Brother/Sister idea ready to go for Halloween II.

He only came up with the idea three years later while downing some alcohol. You can think what you like, but if you EVER get the chance, ask Carpenter...

Inhumane
09-10-2007, 11:36 AM
Are people seriously trying to make arguments that the sister thing was somehow alluded to in part one? I mean, really?!?

Fuck me. We are indeed in the end times.

Still, whatever gets you thru the night I guess... dream away...


I agree. It's pretty comical.

Zombie
09-10-2007, 11:37 AM
Are people seriously trying to make arguments that the sister thing was somehow alluded to in part one? I mean, really?!?

Fuck me. We are indeed in the end times.

Still, whatever gets you thru the night I guess... dream away...

I guess so?

Hey, maybe Thorn was alluded to in the original. I think, if you look closely enough when Michael is staring down Annie through the back door, the moon light hits the window in a way that it casts a shadow forming the shape of Thorn.

Spooky shit.

freethy
09-10-2007, 11:39 AM
EOTL / Freethy...

A little bit busy just this moment, but rest assured, a rant is coming forthwith...

Haha, no worries man. A busy man has got to do what a busy man has got to do. But I shall await and look foward to your rant because Me and EOTL seem to be out numbered...Which is unnerving to say the least LMAO! :D

ALDO
09-10-2007, 11:40 AM
Are people seriously trying to make arguments that the sister thing was somehow alluded to in part one? I mean, really?!?

Fuck me. We are indeed in the end times.

Still, whatever gets you thru the night I guess... dream away...

I've been thinking the same thing. Strange isn't it?

MichaelJrdnMyrs
09-10-2007, 11:48 AM
I agree. It's pretty comical.


Dude, I totally knew just from watching the original that Michael and Loomis were gonna die in an explosion in the sequel.

C'mon. It's right there.

The Kilted One
09-10-2007, 11:51 AM
He might have.
What I wonder is would people complain about Laurie being Michaels sister if Carpenter hadn't admitted that he didn't come up with the idea until writing H2? What if he lied and said it was his intent all along, or simply remained silent about the subject?

No, I don't think they would. It's all a big mental game, where people think that Carpenter had his shit together during H1, but lost his Halloween touch by the time H2 came around. It's all creepy psychological stuff.:crazy:

ALDO
09-10-2007, 11:53 AM
I guess so?

Hey, maybe Thorn was alluded to in the original. I think, if you look closely enough when Michael is staring down Annie through the back door, the moon light hits the window in a way that it casts a shadow forming the shape of Thorn.

Spooky shit.

Thorn was alluded to in the original. Remember Dr Wynn is seen talking to Dr Loomis after The Shape escapes. He's The Man In Black y'know, who's in charge of the Thorn cult in which Myer's is a part of.:bastard:

Inhumane
09-10-2007, 11:56 AM
Dude, I totally knew just from watching the original that Michael and Loomis were gonna die in an explosion in the sequel.

C'mon. It's right there.

LOL ... very true.

Todd
09-10-2007, 12:23 PM
No, I don't think they would. It's all a big mental game, where people think that Carpenter had his shit together during H1, but lost his Halloween touch by the time H2 came around. It's all creepy psychological stuff.:crazy:
True, but my point is that if Carpenter had said that he always intended for Michael and Laurie to be siblings, would people still be saying that it's problematic for the series? Would anyone have been able to cite any solid evidence from the first film that shows JC didn't always have the brother/sister angle in mind?
Yeah, someone could say that it's a mighty big coincidence that Laurie just happened to drop off the key to the Myers house on the day that her big bro was inside, but if we're going to play that game, there are a lot of other implausabilities that could be pointed out as well.

MichaelJrdnMyrs
09-10-2007, 12:26 PM
Sums it up perfectly.


There is a real fairy tale aspect to this. I think it was Stef that likened it to Little Red Riding Hood, and that to me is hitting the nail right on the head. Laurie was a victim of circumstance and nothing more.

As I have also said before, what are the fucking chances of killing your sister, spending 15 years away in smiths grove, and getting back to haddonfield just in time for your other sister who was adopted long ago to drop of the keys. Not only that, but to be adopted by the Strodes, (the father being the guy in charge of selling the house) and then told to drop off some key's (on halloween no less) at the house she was born in where here brother once killed her sister on halloween night.

Thats something I think JC was just too drunk to realize when he probably just finished watching The Empire Strikes Back.


He only came up with the idea three years later while downing some alcohol. You can think what you like, but if you EVER get the chance, ask Carpenter...

freethy
09-10-2007, 01:06 PM
True, but my point is that if Carpenter had said that he always intended for Michael and Laurie to be siblings, would people still be saying that it's problematic for the series? Would anyone have been able to cite any solid evidence from the first film that shows JC didn't always have the brother/sister angle in mind?

If JC and DH had originally intended them to be siblins then they would have worked it into the story at the time, no? They only made another halloween movie because people were making money cashing in on the idea. Movies like Terror Train and Prom Night for example. Straight out of the mouth of Mr Yablins.

"A movie about babbysiiters to be killed by the bogeyman" - Akkad.

What is happening here is one of the sole reasons I don't pay attention to any of the sequels. They ended up turning the original mythos on it's head and now millions of halloween fans are now missing the point where it comes to halloween as a stand alone movie.


Yeah, someone could say that it's a mighty big coincidence that Laurie just happened to drop off the key to the Myers house on the day that her big bro was inside, but if we're going to play that game, there are a lot of other implausabilities that could be pointed out as well.

I await your list of implausabilities.

And I promise not to mention the "17 connection" :bastard:

Zombie
09-10-2007, 01:55 PM
Right, I mean the original name for the movie was going to be The Babysitter Murders. Not, The Bogeyman Chases Around His Sister and Kills Her Friends on Halloween Night When They Babysit.

Now THAT'S a title, bitch. :D

MichaelJrdnMyrs
09-10-2007, 01:59 PM
Right, I mean the original name for the movie was going to be The Babysitter Murders. Not, The Bogeyman Chases Around His Sister and Kills Her Friends on Halloween Night When They Babysit.

Now THAT'S a title, bitch. :D


Nope, the original title was actually supposed to be The Babysister Murders.

Common mistake.

Zombie
09-10-2007, 02:01 PM
Nope, the original title was actually supposed to be The Babysister Murders.

Common mistake.

The Night HE He Came Home, Saw His Young Sister and Decided to Kill Her.

Monte
09-10-2007, 02:04 PM
I've always been partial to "Babysitter to be Killed by de Bogeyman."

Pug-a-Licious
09-10-2007, 02:05 PM
The Night HE He Came Home, Saw His Young Sister and Decided to Kill Her.

You sure it wasn't supposed to be "Run, Bitch! RUN!" ??

Zombie
09-10-2007, 02:11 PM
You sure it wasn't supposed to be "Run, Bitch! RUN!" ??

Very good.

Also, a little known plot development that was supposed to come out in Halloween II was the fact Dr. Loomis was actually Michael's uncle. Apparently, Carpenter had dropped some hints in the original movie and decided to abandon the storyline after Donald Pleasence objected to the idea of being related to Michael.

In an interview with the BBC in 1983, Pleasence had this to say about the decision. "I went up to John and I said, you crack whore dumb fuck! You're drunk on the cheapest, shittiest whisky this side of a dive in west Gary, Indiana if you think I'm going to play Uncle Tom Cobley to Michael Myers!," John was taken aback by the comment, scrapped the idea and decided to go with Laurie as his sister instead.

Todd
09-10-2007, 02:12 PM
If JC and DH had originally intended them to be siblins then they would have worked it into the story at the time, no? They only made another halloween movie because people were making money cashing in on the idea. Movies like Terror Train and Prom Night for example. Straight out of the mouth of Mr Yablins.

"A movie about babbysiiters to be killed by the bogeyman" - Akkad.

What is happening here is one of the sole reasons I don't pay attention to any of the sequels. They ended up turning the original mythos on it's head and now millions of halloween fans are now missing the point where it comes to halloween as a stand alone movie.



I await your list of implausabilities.

And I promise not to mention the "17 connection" :bastard:
I think you're misunderstanding what I'm trying to say.
I KNOW that John Carpenter didn't come up with the brother/sister angle until writing the sequel. That isn't in dispute, at least not as far as I'm concerned.
All I'm saying is that there is nothing in the original that truly contradicts the idea of Michael and Laurie being related. Some people say that making them be siblings was somehow problematic for the series, but I wonder if they would feel that way if Carpenter had claimed he always intended to toss in that twist in a sequel. Like I said, I know that he didn't come up with that idea until after the original was already made and I also know that he never even intended to make a sequel. I'm just wondering if people who don't like Laurie being Michaels sister instead of some random girl would have such a problem with it if they thought that had been the plan all along.
As far as implausabilities in the original go, here are just a few.
1. Michael not only driving, but making it all the way to Haddonfield.
No need to elaborate on that one.
2. Loomis stopping at a phone booth that is only a few feet away from the body of someone Michael had killed after escaping.
3. Laurie feels as if she's being watched all day, even actually seeing Michael a few times, yet in the evening when Tommy Doyle insists he sees the "boogeyman" outside, she dismisses him without a second thought.
None of those are big deals to me, but if someone wanted to nitpick (much as many are doing with the new movie), it wouldn't be hard to find things.

Pug-a-Licious
09-10-2007, 02:13 PM
Very good.

Also, a little known plot development that was supposed to come out in Halloween II was the fact Dr. Loomis was actually Michael's uncle. Apparently, Carpenter had dropped some hints in the original movie and decided to abandon the storyline after Donald Pleasence objected to the idea of being related to Michael.

In an interview with the BBC in 1983, Pleasence had this to say about the decision. "I went up to John and I said, you crack whore dumb fuck! You're drunk on the cheapest, shittiest whisky this side of a dive in west Gary, Indiana if you think I'm going to play Uncle Tom Cobley to Michael Myers!," John was taken aback by the comment, scrapped the idea and decided to go with Laurie as his sister instead.

OMFG....that was too funny! :roflmao:

The Dark Shape
09-10-2007, 02:14 PM
Laurie being related to Michael makes the Shape less scary and the entire film a huge illogical coincidence. There ya go -- it's as simple as that.

Monte
09-10-2007, 02:15 PM
"I went up to John and I said, you crack whore dumb fuck! You're drunk on the cheapest, shittiest whisky this side of a dive in west Gary, Indiana if you think I'm going to play Uncle Tom Cobley to Michael Myers!,"

That sounds more like something the Malcom McDowell Loomis would say.

Pug-a-Licious
09-10-2007, 02:17 PM
Laurie being related to Michael makes the Shape less scary and the entire film a huge illogical coincidence. There ya go -- it's as simple as that.

For you maybe, it didn't make it any less scary for me.

Femanizer
09-10-2007, 02:21 PM
For you maybe, it didn't make it any less scary for me.

Kelly don't argue with him on a topic that he knows much better than you. Which would be everything according to him... :bastard:

The Dark Shape
09-10-2007, 02:22 PM
You're that bitter that you don't understand a thing about box office?

Pug-a-Licious
09-10-2007, 02:25 PM
Kelly don't argue with him on a topic that he knows much better than you. Which would be everything according to him... :bastard:

Ohh gotcha... I should always listen when someone tells me that I find something scary if I don't, and I don't find it scary even when I do *writes this all down for future reference* Thanks ;)

The Dark Shape
09-10-2007, 02:26 PM
Hey, if you want to support brain-dead entertainment, that's your choice. But it's still an absurd plot twist.

Zombie
09-10-2007, 02:28 PM
1. Michael not only driving, but making it all the way to Haddonfield.

I keep hearing people discuss Michael's driving as a problematic issue, but is it really? How hard is it to drive a car? I've heard about five year olds driving cars before. Unless it was a stick, which clearly the station wagon was not, then I don't see the issue here. You get in, the car is already running, you throw it into drive and push on the gas. Not that difficult, especially for someone whose smart like Michael is supposed to be.

As for finding Haddonfield, that could be an issue, unless Smith's Grove is located on the same highway as Haddonfield, then it would be a fairly easy drive. I mean, that's what highway signs are for...



2. Loomis stopping at a phone booth that is only a few feet away from the body of someone Michael had killed after escaping.

Of course, though the odds are higher when you realize Loomis is probably driving down the same highway Michael had just driven down hours before. Again, there is probably one highway connecting Smith's Grove to Haddonfield and then to Russellville, or something like that. Loomis was returning back to Haddonfield (40 miles, the sign says) from Smith's Grove, as was Michael. Not a big stretch that he would happen upon a phone where Michael had been. I mean, for all we know the mechanic was using that same phone and it's the lone phone on that desolate stretch.


3. Laurie feels as if she's being watched all day, even actually seeing Michael a few times, yet in the evening when Tommy Doyle insists he sees the "boogeyman" outside, she dismisses him without a second thought.
None of those are big deals to me, but if someone wanted to nitpick (much as many are doing with the new movie), it wouldn't be hard to find things.

Laurie never called him the bogeyman until he attacked her. Frankly, I think you see Laurie lighten up a bit realizing that maybe she's making too big of a deal out of seeing something and finally heeds Annie's advice. That and this happens quite a few hours later, with no sign of Michael being around throughout the night up until she finally realizes something is wrong. I think most of us would generally just ignore such cries, especially on Halloween, when people are dressed up in costumes and walking around in the night.

Femanizer
09-10-2007, 02:32 PM
Ohh gotcha... I should always listen when someone tells me that I find something scary if I don't, and I don't find it scary even when I do *writes this all down for future reference* Thanks ;)

He also knows ALL about what is suspenseful and what is not so next time you watch a horror film be sure to ask him what to look for in it.

The Dark Shape
09-10-2007, 02:33 PM
Yep, bitter about box office. Get over it.

Femanizer
09-10-2007, 02:35 PM
Oh yeah I'm bitter cause it's made a shitload of money at the box office, get over yourself, you really are a huge joke....a HUGE one.

The Dark Shape
09-10-2007, 02:36 PM
Now, see... wouldn't that be a personal insult? Haven't they talked to you about these sorts of things?

Femanizer
09-10-2007, 02:38 PM
Now, see... wouldn't that be a personal insult? Haven't they talked to you about these sorts of things?

And they've talked to you about baiting people but that's all you ever do, you were told to take it to PM so do it.

SLAB
09-10-2007, 02:38 PM
I told you both yesterday to drop it, and if you continue you both get warnings.

No more off topic personal talk, and don't contact me to explain, or complain.

Just stop.

Todd
09-10-2007, 03:02 PM
I keep hearing people discuss Michael's driving as a problematic issue, but is it really? How hard is it to drive a car? I've heard about five year olds driving cars before. Unless it was a stick, which clearly the station wagon was not, then I don't see the issue here. You get in, the car is already running, you throw it into drive and push on the gas. Not that difficult, especially for someone whose smart like Michael is supposed to be.

As for finding Haddonfield, that could be an issue, unless Smith's Grove is located on the same highway as Haddonfield, then it would be a fairly easy drive. I mean, that's what highway signs are for...
So you knew how to drive a car before anyone taught you? You just jumped in and took off? Riding a bicycle is easy, too, once you learn how. Keep in mind that Michael didn't just drive a little ways. Haddonfield was a hundred miles away from Smiths Grove. How did he even know how to get there?
Highway signs? That's pushing it.




Of course, though the odds are higher when you realize Loomis is probably driving down the same highway Michael had just driven down hours before. Again, there is probably one highway connecting Smith's Grove to Haddonfield and then to Russellville, or something like that. Loomis was returning back to Haddonfield (40 miles, the sign says) from Smith's Grove, as was Michael. Not a big stretch that he would happen upon a phone where Michael had been. I mean, for all we know the mechanic was using that same phone and it's the lone phone on that desolate stretch.
So that phone booth was the only one between Smiths Grove and Haddonfield? In over a hundred miles of highway, only one phone booth?


Laurie never called him the bogeyman until he attacked her. Frankly, I think you see Laurie lighten up a bit realizing that maybe she's making too big of a deal out of seeing something and finally heeds Annie's advice. That and this happens quite a few hours later, with no sign of Michael being around throughout the night up until she finally realizes something is wrong. I think most of us would generally just ignore such cries, especially on Halloween, when people are dressed up in costumes and walking around in the night.
I know that Laurie never called him the boogeyman until after Loomis shot him, but that's neither here nor there.
Tommy said he saw someone outside the house. He absolutely insisted on it. As for Laurie just easing up and thinking her imagination was getting the best of her, keep in mind that she also saw Michael stalking her, and more than once. Either she convinced herself that she was hallucinating, or she shouldn't have been so quick to dismiss the possibility that Tommy really did see someone outside of his house, and that the someone in question could very well be the guy she herself had been seeing all day.

Like I said, these things don't bother me.
I was just pointing out there existence.
I actually couldn't care less about any of them because they don't take anything away from the movie.

EvilOnTwoLegs
09-10-2007, 03:16 PM
Mr. BeatingU makes more sense than most of this board on many occasions so I really don't have a problem agreeing with him.

I've always thought that Carpenter was smart enough to insert little things into Halloween that, while they aren't obvious, would be benefical if the film was successful enough to warrant a sequel. In the back of his mind I've always thought that while he was making Halloween Carpenter had the Brother/Sister idea ready to go for Halloween II.
He's stated millions of times that a sequel never even crossed his mind...until he was essentially forced into it. He hated the idea of even doing H2. And 1978 wasn't really a time when movies like that generally got sequels...so it's easy to see why he wouldn't even consider it. It wasn't the '80s yet.

Bottom line...Carpenter was smart...smart enough to realize H1 didn't need a sequel.



There is a real fairy tale aspect to this. I think it was Stef that likened it to Little Red Riding Hood, and that to me is hitting the nail right on the head. Laurie was a victim of circumstance and nothing more.

As I have also said before, what are the fucking chances of killing your sister, spending 15 years away in smiths grove, and getting back to haddonfield just in time for your other sister who was adopted long ago to drop of the keys. Not only that, but to be adopted by the Strodes, (the father being the guy in charge of selling the house) and then told to drop off some key's (on halloween no less) at the house she was born in where here brother once killed her sister on halloween night.

Thats something I think JC was just too drunk to realize when he probably just finished watching The Empire Strikes Back.
Nail, you've just been hit on the head.



Are people seriously trying to make arguments that the sister thing was somehow alluded to in part one? I mean, really?!?

Fuck me. We are indeed in the end times.
hahaha Ain't it the truth, man...ain't it the truth?




EOTL / Freethy...

A little bit busy just this moment, but rest assured, a rant is coming forthwith...
Yeah, man...I understand your "Busy" situation.

But, that said....

Fucking...sweet. I look forward to the unleashing party. :D




I've heard about five year olds driving cars before.
Well, yeah...obviously. I mean, if two roadblocks and an all points bulletin wouldn't stop a five-year-old, surely said five-year-old would be able to drive.

The Frightmaster
09-10-2007, 03:17 PM
Sound familiar to anyone http://youtube.com/watch?v=KrSs7gfLDjc

Why was it even in the movie???? :confused:

freethy
09-10-2007, 03:18 PM
I think you're misunderstanding what I'm trying to say.
I KNOW that John Carpenter didn't come up with the brother/sister angle until writing the sequel. That isn't in dispute, at least not as far as I'm concerned.
All I'm saying is that there is nothing in the original that truly contradicts the idea of Michael and Laurie being related. Some people say that making them be siblings was somehow problematic for the series, but I wonder if they would feel that way if Carpenter had claimed he always intended to toss in that twist in a sequel. Like I said, I know that he didn't come up with that idea until after the original was already made and I also know that he never even intended to make a sequel. I'm just wondering if people who don't like Laurie being Michaels sister instead of some random girl would have such a problem with it if they thought that had been the plan all along.

Ah I see, well there is nothing to suggest they are brother or sister. The simple thing is the siblin connetion was an after thought and a way out of a bad case of writers block. It shits in the face of the original mythos that has unfortunatly distorted in a lot of people's minds thanks to the sequels.


As far as implausabilities in the original go, here are just a few.
1. Michael not only driving, but making it all the way to Haddonfield.
No need to elaborate on that one.
2. Loomis stopping at a phone booth that is only a few feet away from the body of someone Michael had killed after escaping.
3. Laurie feels as if she's being watched all day, even actually seeing Michael a few times, yet in the evening when Tommy Doyle insists he sees the "boogeyman" outside, she dismisses him without a second thought.
None of those are big deals to me, but if someone wanted to nitpick (much as many are doing with the new movie), it wouldn't be hard to find things.


Oh I know all that. I badly miss understood your post as I thought you was gonna bring foward some evidence that alluded to them being blood relatives. Not little flubs that we all know so very much about.


As for Laurie's dismissle of Tommy when he claimed the bogeyman was outside, she took a look and no fucker was their. She probably thought he was just spooked about all this bullshit Lonnie was spouting in order to creep out Tommy.

Yeah, she saw some guy in a mask watching her a few times during the day. The guy was a creep, enough said. I can't see how her not linking that to all this fansical talk of bogeymen can be considered a flub.


He's stated millions of times that a sequel never even crossed his mind...until he was essentially forced into it. He hated the idea of even doing H2. And 1978 wasn't really a time when movies like that generally got sequels...so it's easy to see why he wouldn't even consider it. It wasn't the '80s yet.

Bottom line...Carpenter was smart...smart enough to realize H1 didn't need a sequel.

Hell yeah. Preach it brother.


Nail, you've just been hit on the head.

Said nail is getting quite a hammering today haha!


Well, yeah...obviously. I mean, if two roadblocks and an all points bulletin wouldn't stop a five-year-old, surely said five-year-old would be able to drive.

Hahahahaha! I love it. :D

Monte
09-10-2007, 03:18 PM
The Love Hurts scene is so bizarre it's actually enjoyable.

Pug-a-Licious
09-10-2007, 03:23 PM
Sound familiar to anyone http://youtube.com/watch?v=KrSs7gfLDjc

Why was it even in the movie???? :confused:

Of course it sounds familiar :) Damn good song!

And the question I have is... Why isn't in MORE movies?????

:D

The Frightmaster
09-10-2007, 03:26 PM
Of course it sounds familiar :) Damn good song!

And the question I have is... Why isn't in MORE movies?????

:D

I love the song, but I don't think that it belongs in a halloween movie. Maybe a romantic comedy but not in a halloween movie. Actually when it started to play during the movie I started to laugh but I also sang along because I really like the song.

Zombie
09-10-2007, 03:27 PM
So you knew how to drive a car before anyone taught you? You just jumped in and took off? Riding a bicycle is easy, too, once you learn how. Keep in mind that Michael didn't just drive a little ways. Haddonfield was a hundred miles away from Smiths Grove. How did he even know how to get there?
Highway signs? That's pushing it.

Yes, actually. How did you learn how to drive? And when you first drove, did you crash? I doubt it. I drove fairly easily my first time, because it's rather basic. Now whether he followed the rules of the road, I do not know, but it isn't that difficult to get behind the wheel of a car and drive. It just isn't. And comparing it to a bicycle doesn't wash, because the problem when riding a bike is balance. You don't need much balance to drive a car.

As for "getting" there, every town has signs pointing to a place. Now did Michael know how to read? Hard to say, but if he did, it wouldn't be that hard. So how is it pushing it? The area is rural, not much between Haddonfield and Smith's Grove (as shown in the movie), so it isn't a stretch to assume that there were signs pointing to Haddonfield. Just as I see signs all around Salt Lake pointing to Cheyenne, Reno, Ogden and other cities located off of I-80 and I-15.


So that phone booth was the only one between Smiths Grove and Haddonfield? In over a hundred miles of highway, only one phone booth?

Have you ever driven on a rural highway? You're lucky to find a phone booth, let alone a bunch. It's not that hard to believe there is only one pay phone between Smith's Grove and the 40-mile point outside Haddonfield.

It's completely realistic to assume that phones are scarce on a rural highway. Most anything is scarce, even gas stations. Like I said, for all we know, maybe this was the only phone up until that point and the mechanic stopped to use it the night Michael escaped. Michael, driving down the highway toward Haddonfield, sees the man, stops, kills him and takes his jumpsuit. Then the next day Dr. Loomis is driving down the same highway, which is perfectly logical, since there is just one highway between Smith's Grove and Haddonfield, sees the phone and decides to call whomever he talked to on the phone. That's not a big stretch by any means.


I know that Laurie never called him the boogeyman until after Loomis shot him, but that's neither here nor there.
Tommy said he saw someone outside the house. He absolutely insisted on it. As for Laurie just easing up and thinking her imagination was getting the best of her, keep in mind that she also saw Michael stalking her, and more than once. Either she convinced herself that she was hallucinating, or she shouldn't have been so quick to dismiss the possibility that Tommy really did see someone outside of his house, and that the someone in question could very well be the guy she herself had been seeing all day.

Except it's Halloween and people are dressed up and some even are out for the sole purpose of scaring people. Laurie never saw what Tommy was looking at and Tommy never said he had a white mask on.

Look, the last time Laurie sees Michael prior to watching Tommy is earlier that day, probably about 3. It isn't until 9 or 10 that she finally has her confrontation with Michael. That's roughly 6 to 7 hours of nothing and that's AFTER she appears to lighten up once she talks to Annie. It's not that hard to believe that maybe Laurie realized it was Halloween and someone was trying to scare her. And it's not hard to believe that she just assumed that what Tommy saw was nothing more than high school kids playing games.


Like I said, these things don't bother me.
I was just pointing out there existence.
I actually couldn't care less about any of them because they don't take anything away from the movie.

You care enough to make it an issue and obviously you've thought enough about them to disect each and every situation that you state does not bother you.

freethy
09-10-2007, 03:28 PM
Sound familiar to anyone http://youtube.com/watch?v=KrSs7gfLDjc

Why was it even in the movie???? :confused:

Be glad we got that version of Love Hurts. I have heard some really awful covers of it over the years.

ragethorn
09-10-2007, 03:31 PM
And they've talked to you about baiting people but that's all you ever do, you were told to take it to PM so do it.

I agree w/ your cause but trust me on this, everybody has different tastes.

To me, personally, Michael just chasing Laurie because she's the first person he saw by his house dropping off the keys is less creepy then them being siblings.

Just take it and move on.

freethy
09-10-2007, 03:32 PM
Like I said, for all we know, maybe this was the only phone up until that point and the mechanic stopped to use it the night Michael escaped. Michael, driving down the highway toward Haddonfield, sees the man, stops, kills him and takes his jumpsuit. Then the next day Dr. Loomis is driving down the same highway, which is perfectly logical, since there is just one highway between Smith's Grove and Haddonfield, sees the phone and decides to call whomever he talked to on the phone. That's not a big stretch by any means.
.

That is exactly what I have always thought. Michael may have seen him parked up and on the phone and see his chance to get some new threads.

The scene might have played out better if Loomis didn't clock the van and when he leaves the camera just pans over to the truck and the dead mechanic. But Loomis got lucky I suppose. haha!

Femanizer
09-10-2007, 03:35 PM
I agree w/ your cause but trust me on this, everybody has different tastes.

To me, personally, Michael just chasing Laurie because she's the first person he saw by his house dropping off the keys is less creepy then them being siblings.

Just take it and move on.

haha wasn't even about that topic.

Inhumane
09-10-2007, 03:35 PM
Like I said, these things don't bother me.
I was just pointing out there existence.
I actually couldn't care less about any of them because they don't take anything away from the movie.



You care enough to make it an issue and obviously you've thought enough about them to disect each and every situation that you state does not bother you.

:nodsmile:

You beat me to it.

Todd
09-10-2007, 04:07 PM
Ah I see, well there is nothing to suggest they are brother or sister. The simple thing is the siblin connetion was an after thought and a way out of a bad case of writers block. It shits in the face of the original mythos that has unfortunatly distorted in a lot of people's minds thanks to the sequels.

There's nothing in the original to either suggest Michael and Laurie are related, but nothing makes it implausible either. I personally don't see how having them be related is problematic, but to each his own.




Oh I know all that. I badly miss understood your post as I thought you was gonna bring foward some evidence that alluded to them being blood relatives. Not little flubs that we all know so very much about.


As for Laurie's dismissle of Tommy when he claimed the bogeyman was outside, she took a look and no fucker was their. She probably thought he was just spooked about all this bullshit Lonnie was spouting in order to creep out Tommy.

Yeah, she saw some guy in a mask watching her a few times during the day. The guy was a creep, enough said. I can't see how her not linking that to all this fansical talk of bogeymen can be considered a flub.

Laurie saw Michael watching her several different times. That's more than just creepy. She was being stalked. As far as her looking outside and seeing nothing after Tommy told her someone was there, did she not have that same thing happen to her when she saw Michael behind a large bush and told Annie? Annie didn't see him when she ran up to look, but Laurie knew he had been there. If I had seen someone stalking me (especially some dude in a white mask) several times during the day, you best believe it would be on my mind if someone, even a kid, told me there was someone outside the house I was in. I sure as shit wouldn't just automatically dismiss it.
As I have said before, though, these things do not bother me.
I was just pointing out that if someone wanted to be picky, there are things that could be pointed out.

MichaelJrdnMyrs
09-10-2007, 04:19 PM
The Love Hurts scene is so bizarre it's actually enjoyable.

Yeah, hearing beforehand people describing and skewering it to death, I was surprised that it worked for me.

That song's something a stripper would dance to in the 70s, and was a good quick way to show how his mama cared, what she had to do to pay the bills.

nwiser
09-10-2007, 04:23 PM
There's nothing in the original to either suggest Michael and Laurie are related, but nothing makes it implausible either. I personally don't see how having them be related is problematic, but to each his own.

Agreed. I think the revelation in H2 that they are siblings makes the first movie more enjoyable because as I said it makes more sense with respect to providing Michaels motivation in H1, and I find it more logical than the "she just happened to be the one who dropped off the keys" explanation...but not everyone likes having things explained.

Todd
09-10-2007, 04:37 PM
Agreed. I think the revelation in H2 that they are siblings makes the first movie more enjoyable because as I said it makes more sense with respect to providing Michaels motivation in H1, and I find it more logical than the "she just happened to be the one who dropped off the keys" explanation...but not everyone likes having things explained.
I liked the brother/sister explanation of Michaels obsession with Laurie, but I have no problem with people who don't. I do have an issue as to exactly why it created a problem for the series. That, I don't understand.

jigsaw_dude
09-10-2007, 04:38 PM
The Love Hurts scene is so bizarre it's actually enjoyable.

I actually thought this scene was somewhat emotionable, I don't understand why everyone hates it.

nwiser
09-10-2007, 04:58 PM
I actually thought this scene was somewhat emotionable, I don't understand why everyone hates it.

With that music, I found it to be somewhat cheesy...Michael just sitting there on the curb looking all down in the mouth like he just got dumped by a girl. Seems kind of like a scene out of a bad 80's teen movie.

I think the scene of Sherri pole dancing would have been easier on the eyes if she was about the same age as or a little younger than she was when she played Baby Firefly the first time...but then the scenes of her as Michael's Mother might not have been as plausible.

freethy
09-10-2007, 05:02 PM
Agreed. I think the revelation in H2 that they are siblings makes the first movie more enjoyable because as I said it makes more sense with respect to providing Michaels motivation in H1, and I find it more logical than the "she just happened to be the one who dropped off the keys" explanation...but not everyone likes having things explained.


I think it reeked of stale shit. Was Son Of Sam logical? There was supposed to be no fucking logic behind his madness or his actions. Like I said, the revelation flies in the face of the originals mythos.


There's nothing in the original to either suggest Michael and Laurie are related, but nothing makes it implausible either. I personally don't see how having them be related is problematic, but to each his own.

It's simple. It's a tone of shit dumped all over the original. You obviously have never understood what halloween was originaly supposed to symbolize.


Laurie saw Michael watching her several different times. That's more than just creepy. She was being stalked. As far as her looking outside and seeing nothing after Tommy told her someone was there, did she not have that same thing happen to her when she saw Michael behind a large bush and told Annie? Annie didn't see him when she ran up to look, but Laurie knew he had been there. If I had seen someone stalking me (especially some dude in a white mask) several times during the day, you best believe it would be on my mind if someone, even a kid, told me there was someone outside the house I was in. I sure as shit wouldn't just automatically dismiss it.

I'm sure bogeymen where the last thing on Laurie's mind while learning how Annie is setting her up with Ben. It's halloween, lot's of people out there with masks, trick or treating, getting high, there's a whole world out there.Would you say it's implausable that she would NOT make the comparison?

Todd
09-10-2007, 05:18 PM
Yes, actually. How did you learn how to drive? And when you first drove, did you crash? I doubt it. I drove fairly easily my first time, because it's rather basic. Now whether he followed the rules of the road, I do not know, but it isn't that difficult to get behind the wheel of a car and drive. It just isn't. And comparing it to a bicycle doesn't wash, because the problem when riding a bike is balance. You don't need much balance to drive a car.

As for "getting" there, every town has signs pointing to a place. Now did Michael know how to read? Hard to say, but if he did, it wouldn't be that hard. So how is it pushing it? The area is rural, not much between Haddonfield and Smith's Grove (as shown in the movie), so it isn't a stretch to assume that there were signs pointing to Haddonfield. Just as I see signs all around Salt Lake pointing to Cheyenne, Reno, Ogden and other cities located off of I-80 and I-15.
So you're telling me you were able to just get in a car the very first time and drive like the wind? Pardon me for not believing that. There is no way in hell that someone who has never driven before will be able to get in a car and navigate to a destination that many miles away.



Have you ever driven on a rural highway? You're lucky to find a phone booth, let alone a bunch. It's not that hard to believe there is only one pay phone between Smith's Grove and the 40-mile point outside Haddonfield.
It's completely realistic to assume that phones are scarce on a rural highway. Most anything is scarce, even gas stations. Like I said, for all we know, maybe this was the only phone up until that point and the mechanic stopped to use it the night Michael escaped. Michael, driving down the highway toward Haddonfield, sees the man, stops, kills him and takes his jumpsuit. Then the next day Dr. Loomis is driving down the same highway, which is perfectly logical, since there is just one highway between Smith's Grove and Haddonfield, sees the phone and decides to call whomever he talked to on the phone. That's not a big stretch by any means.
Have you ever driven on a rual highway back in 1978?
Of course there aren't that many phone booths along highways anymore. We didn't have cellphones back in the seventies, though, so there's no way you were going to drive that far on a highway back then without finding several phone booths. Besides, there were surely rest stops where Michael could have gone to whack someone and steal their clothing.



Except it's Halloween and people are dressed up and some even are out for the sole purpose of scaring people. Laurie never saw what Tommy was looking at and Tommy never said he had a white mask on.

Look, the last time Laurie sees Michael prior to watching Tommy is earlier that day, probably about 3. It isn't until 9 or 10 that she finally has her confrontation with Michael. That's roughly 6 to 7 hours of nothing and that's AFTER she appears to lighten up once she talks to Annie. It's not that hard to believe that maybe Laurie realized it was Halloween and someone was trying to scare her. And it's not hard to believe that she just assumed that what Tommy saw was nothing more than high school kids playing games.
So Laurie thought that the guy who had been following her was just somoene playing a prank? She was scared shitless of him for awhile and definitely had a bad feeling about things. If you had noticed someone following you all day and then at night some kid told you that he saw someone outside, you're telling me that you wouldn't even think about the possibility that it could be the same person? Not even for a second would that cross your mind?
Oooookay.





You care enough to make it an issue and obviously you've thought enough about them to disect each and every situation that you state does not bother you.
Once again, for the third time now, I brought up what I believe to be implausabilites in the original Halloween simply to make the point that if you nitpick enough, there are things about any movie that can be pointed out as far fetched. I said that the things I brought up do not bother me, and I meant that. The only reason I even noticed these things is that I've seen the movie so many times that I've lost count. They aren't any big fucking deal and I never said they were.

Todd
09-10-2007, 05:26 PM
I think it reeked of stale shit. Was Son Of Sam logical? There was supposed to be no fucking logic behind his madness or his actions. Like I said, the revelation flies in the face of the originals mythos.

The original mythos? Were we told in the original that Laurie definitely wasn't Michaels sister? We aren't told either way.



It's simple. It's a tone of shit dumped all over the original. You obviously have never understood what halloween was originaly supposed to symbolize.
Please, then, enlighten me. What was the original supposed to symbolize? I thought it was about some crazy guy who killed his sister one Halloween and then returned to his hometown years later one Halloween to kill some more.
Why does it matter if it's just some random girl or his little sister? You don't like the brother/sister angle, and that's fine, but I honestly don't understand what the big deal is.




I'm sure bogeymen where the last thing on Laurie's mind while learning how Annie is setting her up with Ben. It's halloween, lot's of people out there with masks, trick or treating, getting high, there's a whole world out there.Would you say it's implausable that she would NOT make the comparison?
I would say that if I had seen someone stalking me during the day and then at night someone told me they saw someone outside the house I was in, I would at very least consider the possibility that whoever had been following me around might well be outside.

Zombie
09-10-2007, 06:55 PM
So you're telling me you were able to just get in a car the very first time and drive like the wind? Pardon me for not believing that. There is no way in hell that someone who has never driven before will be able to get in a car and navigate to a destination that many miles away.

Oh please. It doesn't take a genius to freaking drive a car. What's dramatically different from driving on a busy street and a mostly desolate highway? Because I drove, for the first time ever, on a fairly busy street and did well. It isn't that hard and God knows we've heard stories about people younger than 21, or even 16, driving in high speed chases without a bit of experience.

Yeesh, you're making it sound like it's impossible for someone to get behind the wheel and drive away. It is not, it's fairly easy. The mechanics of driving a car are not that difficult to grasp and it's rather basic. You start the car (that was already done for Michael), put your foot on the gas and press downward. The car goes, you steer the wheel in the direction you want to go. If you want to stop, you press down on the break and...the car comes to a stop. Not hard at all. Now whether Michael abided by the rules of the road, I cannot say, but it's not implausible to believe Michael could drive without any lessons. I mean, he was doing very well that night. Maybe someone around there gave him lessons. ;)



Have you ever driven on a rual highway back in 1978?
Of course there aren't that many phone booths along highways anymore. We didn't have cellphones back in the seventies, though, so there's no way you were going to drive that far on a highway back then without finding several phone booths. Besides, there were surely rest stops where Michael could have gone to whack someone and steal their clothing.

Well since I wasn't born in 1978, I can't say that I did. But I remember highways from the early 90s, when cell phones were in limited use, and phone booths weren't just lined up and down the roads.

And obviously Michael wasn't just searching for "clothes", he was looking for something specific. Just like he was with his mask, because I bet there were more than just one mask at the hardware store. He clearly wanted a jumpsuit, not just a freaking flannel shirt and jeans.


So Laurie thought that the guy who had been following her was just somoene playing a prank? She was scared shitless of him for awhile and definitely had a bad feeling about things. If you had noticed someone following you all day and then at night some kid told you that he saw someone outside, you're telling me that you wouldn't even think about the possibility that it could be the same person? Not even for a second would that cross your mind?
Oooookay.

Not early on, obviously. But when she talked to Annie on the phone after spotting Michael for the final time, she seemed far more at ease than she did when she arrived home. Maybe she thought it was some friend from school, possibly Ben Tramer? Hm, I mean yeah it's creepy, but it's also Halloween.

And he hadn't been following her all day. She saw him during school and then shortly after school and that was it. She didn't see Michael again until inside the Wallace house.

And if I heard a kid, that had been obsessed with the bogeyman prior to me seeing Michael, I would probably chalk it up to him being a scared boy on Halloween. He didn't tell Laurie who was outside, rather that the "bogeyman" was out there. Well do you honestly believe Laurie thought it was the bogeyman stalking her earlier in the day? Probably not. The connection, after a few hours had passed, probably didn't hit. To her, it was just Tommy Doyle freaking out about the bogeyman, something he had done all day. He discussed it when she dropped the key off at the Myers' house, he wanted to know about him when Laurie found his comic books and then saw something outside, that may or may not have been a kid in a costume.

If Laurie had seen Michael at all that night, maybe saw him following the girls to the Doyle house or saw him outside the Wallace house, then your point would hold some water. But it didn't happen that way and it's perfectly reasonable to suggest she didn't feel threatened when a little boy was screaming out about the bogeyman. Especially after he was trying to scare the shit out of Lindsey prior to doing it.


Once again, for the third time now, I brought up what I believe to be implausabilites in the original Halloween simply to make the point that if you nitpick enough, there are things about any movie that can be pointed out as far fetched. I said that the things I brought up do not bother me, and I meant that. The only reason I even noticed these things is that I've seen the movie so many times that I've lost count. They aren't any big fucking deal and I never said they were.

And yet, you're really getting defensive about these "minor" implausibility’s. If they don't bother you, why are you so enthralled in this debate? If I didn't care, I'd just say "eh, whatever..." and go on my way. Yet you're here trying to convince me that there are these unbelievable situations. Well, if they're minor, why do you care what I think and how I defend them?

sherlock
09-10-2007, 09:26 PM
Just an opinion. Just saw the new Halloween. I am disappointed.

TheShape411
09-10-2007, 10:10 PM
The driving part doesn't bother me as much as the actual escape...why in the friggin' hell are mental patients out wandering around in a field, in a storm nonetheless lol?!??? Ok.

Also, wonder where Mikey gassed up the car lol. :D

4BarrelHemi
09-10-2007, 10:17 PM
I always assumed Michael broke out killed the guards and let the other patients out to wander around as a diversion until someone with a vehicle came along.

Dr_Loomis02
09-10-2007, 10:25 PM
I think it reeked of stale shit. Was Son Of Sam logical? There was supposed to be no fucking logic behind his madness or his actions. Like I said, the revelation flies in the face of the originals mythos.

It's simple. It's a tone of shit dumped all over the original. You obviously have never understood what halloween was originaly supposed to symbolize.


Personally, despite the success of the original Halloween, and it being the daddy of all horror flicks, the revelation that Laurie was Michaels sister did not screw up anything. I've always called Halloween the "Star Wars" of horror films and the revelation that they were related was like Luke finding our Vader was his father, it was huge. It's common knowledge that Michael Myers is after his little sister. Even though never mentioned in the original (although the TV cut is awesome) it has become part of Halloween because of HII. Whatever the original intentions, keeping them brother and sister in RZH was the only way to go. It wouldn't have felt right to me otherwise. A "tone" of shit? Hardly. The brother sister connection makes the films stronger to me, and is one of the reasons it became the success it was. It might not have ever been Carpenter's original intention, but I'm glad he wrote that into the story with HII. To me, that has ALWAYS been what the Halloween films have symbolized. And even with my distaste for H:20, at least it brought the story back to its roots, to the simplicity. Michael wants his sister dead, and no one knows how to stop him.
That was one of the things I enjoyed in RZH. We all know Michael killed his sister Judith in the original (one of the other reasons I like the sister connection). RZ expanded, hence the death of the boyfriend and Ronnie White, which showed Michael's brutality...but it also kept it connected to the family angle. We see a lot of Michael's early years and what his family went through, and that is awesome.
I can't wait to see what happens in the next chapter of this new series.

krustytheklown
09-11-2007, 07:09 AM
I actually thought this scene was somewhat emotionable, I don't understand why everyone hates it.

i love that scene. it is like he just got dumped or something, so when he goes back in and butchers his family it really comes off as creepy as hell. anyone else dig the part where michael is staring out the window with his clown mask and knife? that alone was worth the eight bucks.