Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345
Results 101 to 117 of 117

Thread: The Halloween movie series

  1. #101
    Heroic Warrior King Kahn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    nashville, tn
    Posts
    6,471
    Quote Originally Posted by Megalodon View Post
    I liked them all but I always wanted to see some big kill off type movie between Jason,Michael,Freddy.Leatherface,Candyman & Victor Crowley....

    Sorta like a contract who kills the most can be the devil's killer on Earth (What the concept of Freddy V Jason was SUPPOSED to be)
    yeah a battle royale is whatI wanted ever since I was a kid and would be at slumber parties and we would fight over who would win in a fight or kill more people.
    cogito ergo doleo

  2. #102
    President of Primus Ornclown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    The Tri-Solar System
    Posts
    8,317
    Quote Originally Posted by King Kahn View Post
    yeah a battle royale is whatI wanted ever since I was a kid and would be at slumber parties and we would fight over who would win in a fight or kill more people.
    A 1984 issue of Fangoria included this awesome comic that had a battle-royale of sorts:



    I still have this issue somewhere in my house...
    We need the POWER of the GOOD and the WAY of the MAGIC !!!

    **Staunch FILMation lover!!! **** Uber NEW ADVENTURES Fan!!!**

    >>Glad supporter of the Netflix Era<<

  3. #103
    Heroic Warrior
    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Posts
    465
    I went to see the new one last night. I definitely does not live up to its predecessors but I still enjoyed it nonetheless

  4. #104
    President of Primus Ornclown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    The Tri-Solar System
    Posts
    8,317
    Finalized package for the new Neca Ultimate set:





    We need the POWER of the GOOD and the WAY of the MAGIC !!!

    **Staunch FILMation lover!!! **** Uber NEW ADVENTURES Fan!!!**

    >>Glad supporter of the Netflix Era<<

  5. #105
    Heroic Warrior King Kahn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    nashville, tn
    Posts
    6,471
    Saw the new film.

    Overall I liked it. I will need to watch it again to separate what I wanted from what we got.

    Also knowing there is another one coming next year to wrap this trilogy up lessened some of the drama as well knowing this is the 'middle chapter'.
    cogito ergo doleo

  6. #106
    ‹ber Fan Adam_Prince of Eternia's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    7,353
    Quote Originally Posted by King Kahn View Post
    Saw the new film.

    Overall I liked it. I will need to watch it again to separate what I wanted from what we got.

    Also knowing there is another one coming next year to wrap this trilogy up lessened some of the drama as well knowing this is the 'middle chapter'.
    I just watched it. The writing is bad. Scott Teems is tryingóand failingóto make the dialogue seem profound. I was entertained, even though I hated every decision that was made in the film. Kills is to the 2018 film what Resurrection is to H20. The only thing it killed was my desire to see the next film. So so bad.

  7. #107
    Heroic Warrior Mark M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Location
    Northern Ireland
    Posts
    3,114
    The first two Halloween movies are good the rest are not and the more recent ones are terrible. The Rob Zombie movies are the worst.

  8. #108
    Council Elder zodak74's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Point Dread
    Posts
    15,699
    Rob Zombie's Halloween II is a work of art and one of my favorites in the franchise.
    I really really loved watching Halloween Kills, even if I don't think it's as good as the 2018 film. There was just something about it that was thrilling to watch - and, yeah, I know there's some cringey dialogue and it doesn't have the serious emotional weight that 2018 had (for me, at least)... but holy moly what a bloodbath! I had no idea what was going to happen from one minute to the next and, to me, that was exciting. Is it goofy? Yes. Over the top? You betcha! As bad as some folks are saying it is? No way. Halloween fans have... endured quite a bit over the decades I've fallen in and out of love (and back in again) with several of the sequels over the years, having seen every one in a theatre since Part 4 (with the exception of Kills, thank you Peacock!). The only one I don't really revisit much or have come around to is Resurrection. But I like most of the others for what they are, love love love the first 3 in the series, still love H20 with it's Scream-vibes and all, think Rob Zombie's entries are fascinating as a pair, and put 2018 right there with the original. This new one is... not quite what I was expecting. I never thought I'd get a Friday the 13th-infused Halloween sequel, but this is what it felt like... and even though I thought they were trying to pivot away from the Zombie aesthetic, his level of ultra-violence that he introduced with his movies is cranked up to 11 here. I loved the prologue portion, was surprised to see Jim Cummings show up (his Wolf Of Snow Hollow was a recent favorite), and knew something unpleasant was probably going to happen at the end- but didn't think it would be "that", per se. I can't wait for Ends next year and have no idea where this could possibly go next.
    Clearing out Classics, Super7 and vintage MOTU & PoP figures... check out my threads in the Marketplace for Fisto, Sorceress, BA variants, SDCC exclusives and more!

  9. #109
    Heroic Warrior Thrawn29's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,894
    Quote Originally Posted by zodak74 View Post
    Rob Zombie's Halloween II is a work of art and one of my favorites in the franchise.
    I wouldn't go that far.

    I heard that initially Zombie wasn't going to do the sequel, and then when he was told he could do anything, this was actually the story he wanted to tell in the first. He was free from the restrictions of having to remake Carpenter's film. I think it shows. I think this was undoubtedly a stronger effort and a better film than the first.

    For all of this film’s faults, I feel there is some damn fine story telling buried in there if you look for it. When it was good, it was damn good. When it was bad, it was bad. I haven't watched it in years though.

    think Rob Zombie's entries are fascinating as a pair
    I think they are terrible Halloween films, but as a pair of horror films I find them fascinating as well. The problem with them is that I watched them with the expectations to see another typical Halloween movie, which we got in the first one, for the most part (even with all of its problems). I will give Zombie props for trying to do something different, even if it was done so poorly. Thatís why I'll give Zombie a little more credit; he at least tried to give a fresh take to Michael Myers

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

    I had a conversation a decade ago in 2011 where I gave my thoughts on the Zombie Halloween entries. My thoughts haven't changed.

    This is a pieced together version of my side of the conversation.

    In order to talk about the sequel properly I think you have to begin with the first installment of Zombie's remake.

    The primary point about exploring Michael's origin I'm a little iffy on. Exploring it a little could have been quite good. In my opinion Zombie's Halloween misfired in its execution of Myer's origin, which is where the critical flaw lies in his two films.

    I think most fans will agree that the reason Michael’s origin works so well is that there was no reason given for his crimes. He was a normal kid who murders his sister one Halloween night; whether he was born evil or possessed by a malevolent force was left up to the viewer. Nature vs. nurture except it's hinted that Michael had a decent home life. Whatever your conclusions are it's ultimately made clear that it doesn't matter. Michael is evil, a slightly supernatural force that is death personified. The viewer accepts it and moves on. Zombie's Halloween was ultimately doomed because its execution of the origin either misunderstands or willfully ignores this crucial point. It's been said before, and I agree, that Zombie has a few tropes he likes to use, one of them being the frequent use of white trash and hillbilly stereotypes.

    This is on full display in his Halloween. Michael is given a very realistic origin. He comes from a poor and trashy family. He lives in a single parent home, his mother had an abusive boyfriend who took it out on Michael and flirted with his sister. Judith was foul mouthed, promiscuous, unlikable, and sexually inappropriate in front of her younger sibling. Michael's mother was a stripper, something that Michael was bullied about in school. As a final measure, Michael is depicted with one of the traditional traits displayed by many real life serial killers, cruelty to animals.

    It is mundane and the characters are written in typical Zombie fashion-foul mouthed and sexually vulgar. Michael is turned from an anomaly into a textbook case. That's not good. When he snaps and kills the bully at school, his mother's scumbag boyfriend, Judith and her boyfriend, it's not shocking at all. It's even understandable from Michael's point of view. That's contrary to the entire premise of the opening five minutes of Carpenter's Halloween and the spirit of the character.

    In short, it's not that the monster was explained, it's that it was explained badly.

    Here's the second crucial flaw that throws the whole thing off balance: Doctor Loomis.

    I love the character of Dr. Loomis and Zombie destroyed that for his films. The essence of the Loomis/Myers relationship in my opinion is Van Helsing/Dracula. Carpenter's Loomis understands that Michael is evil in its purest form. He knows this and wants to keep Michael from ever harming another person again. Zombie gave interviews for his films stated that he envisioned Loomis as a different character altogether and that's where his films run into major problems. I see what he did wrong, but for the life of me I can't understand why. I don't know if it was studio interference or plain old bad writing.

    His vision of Dr. Loomis was that of a callous, exploitative, greedy ***hole. I understand this is a remake and you want to reinterpret some characters and relationships in order to add some new perspectives so you aren't just repeating the original, otherwise what was the point? However, Loomis is such an iconic character and the Myers/Loomis dynamic is so integral to the series you can't change it without ruining it. While I don't understand why Zombie felt this was the right way to go, that alone isn't why it fails in my mind.

    As stated above Zombie envisions Loomis as an exploitative, greedy ***hole. He's Frederick Chilton from Silence of the Lambs. Whereas Carpenter's Loomis understood Michael for what he was-a monster. He was also driven, obsessive, a little crazy, but he also cared about the greater good. Zombie starts out his film with his version of Loomis and then the last half of his movie is a straight remake of the original film with Carpenter's version of Loomis. The two interpretations of the character are incompatible. Both of them take turns rotating out of the movie and it creates a lot of internal inconsistencies in the Loomis character that couldn't possibly coexist.

    Here are few examples of what I'm talking about; Dr. Loomis' introduction in the Zombie version establishes his take on the character. He's got long greasy hair and is clearly a 60s hippy liberal college type. His first meeting with Michael's mom makes it clear that this Loomis smells opportunity and is an egomaniac. There is no concern present for the child or his mother. Follow that with Dr. Loomis' early interviews with Michael as a child. In the discussion about colors, the portrayal of Loomis' character is that of an out of touch psychiatrist who isn't doing a good job of relating to Michael or gaining his trust. Dr. Loomis is full of ****. It's very well acted by Malcolm McDowell. There's a curious scene between the two as Loomis says goodbye to Michael. In this scene Loomis says something to the effect of "he can't do this anymore, and that in weird way Michael is the closest thing to a friend he has", something like that. This becomes important for me later. If this version of Loomis understood that Michael was evil incarnate and needed to be locked up forever, he wouldn't be having a heart to heart talk with Michael now would he? This is followed by the college lecture about Loomis' book on Michael which is a cash grab, nothing more. So far the character has been consistent.

    Unfortunately from here we move into more of a straight remake of the Carpenter film, and the consistency of the Loomis character goes out the window and irreparably damages the film. Michael escapes and goes to Haddonfield to get his sister. The Loomis character now takes most of his direction from the Donald Pleasance version which makes no sense given the previous characterization. At this juncture in the Zombie version McDowell's Loomis shows an uncanny understanding of Michael's motives and actions that he shouldn't possess. Until now he's been portrayed as a greedy, uncaring, vain ******* whose clinical skills are questionable, with no understanding of what he's dealing with. Aside from the motivation of wanting to stay near Michael so he can sell the story later, I don't believe he would be actually be out on the streets with Sheriff Bracken looking for Michael. He's too much of a selfish coward. He'd be in the police station operating strictly in an advisory capacity. This version of Loomis wouldn't stick his neck out for another human being.

    Bits of dialogue are taken from or inspired by the Carpenter version which makes no sense coming out of McDowell's mouth. Here's a direct quote: "You need to stop thinking that we're dealing with a normal man here. We're dealing with a soulless killing machine driven by pure animal instinct". Now that's an accurate description of Michael Myers, but one could argue that McDowell's Loomis despite being right, was just trying to impress the sheriff with hyperbole so he could sell a future book and got lucky in his description of the shape.

    This Loomis also buys a gun, and later comes face to face with Michael attempting while attempting to save Lori. This self aggrandizing coward would never do that. I see inconsistencies in the character that I couldn't overcome as a fan. This could have been avoided if Zombie veered farther away from the Carpenter film but he didn't for whatever reason and it hurt his film.
    Obviously he was going somewhere completely different with the character so I guess I need to separate it from my image of the original Donald Pleasance version.

    Zombie combined the two verisons of Loomis (His and Carpenter's) in the first film and failed spectacularly. Now in the second one Zombie was freed from having to do a remake. He could take the story and characters anywhere he wanted. In the second one we get the Zombie's version of Loomis without any of the contradictions he included in the first film...up until the end. I don't believe for an instant that after callously ruining Lori's life by revealing her lineage, he would want redemption. It just doesn't fit the character Zombie tried to create. I don't understand that bit. It doesn't work in any conceivable way for the character. It could only work if McDowell's Loomis was again trying to save Lori and stop Michael for his own selfish ends, but it's made clear in hotel room he has a moment of soul searching and wants to make amends.

    Rob Zombie and Malcolm McDowell's Loomis is an incoherent mess of conflicting characterizations. I have to ask myself, how do you screw up the Van Helsing to your Dracula when you had the template in front of you?

    As a side note, while I understood McDowell's reasons for not watching the original Halloween (he didn't want to be influenced by Pleasance), as a fan it offends me that he didn't take the time to watch the original after he finished the remake. It shouldn't, but it does.

    I wasn't crazy about Laurie in the first movie. I didn't hate her, but she was 17 years old, she came from a good home, a loving family, and I felt some of her sexual comments in front of her mother was more the actress' personality and not the character's coming through. I didn't care for that.

    In the second one, she was tad unlikable at times, but I attributed it to PTSD. I felt it was a very realistic portrayal. She was not unpleasant with her new loving pseudo father, Sheriff Bracken. I thought it was surprisingly well done.
    My problem is that you have to make your protagonist likable and I found that very hard in this one.

    The single strongest aspect of the sequel, and something you don't get in almost any horror film, was a clear depiction of the repercussions of the violence. I thought the opening scene in the ER was powerful and masterfully done. The scene where Lori and Annie are being stitched up was very graphic. I didn't think it was done in an exploitative or gratuitous way either. Showing their exposed muscles, subcutaneous tissue, and bone was shocking. It helped to hammer home that these were characters who could feel pain, bleed, and die. It showed that the wounds and violence from the attacks of the first film weren't going to go away in time for the sequel. The rest of the film both Annie and Lori have facial scars-a permanent reminder of the evil they suffered. It also visually reminds the audience that these characters have been through an ordeal.

    I thought the moment when, I believe Lori tells Annie (or the other way around), that she doesn't want to be around her because her facial scars are a constant reminder of the ordeal they went through was a realistic approach to the characters; a sister/best friend relationship that was poisoned by the events of that night. I thought it was well done.

    When Annie finally dies, the scene of Sheriff Bracken crying over his daughter’s body, inter-cut with home movies of his child growing up was also a very effective moment. I really felt sorry for both of them. It reminds the viewer that both of those characters cared about one another, even if we found Annie to be *****y at times. She still didn't deserve to die.

    Lori had to go outside of the Bracken's to find some friends who didn't remind her of the events of the previous Halloween. I liked her blond friend and I genuinely didn't want her to die even though we knew she was going to.

    Feeling any sort of emotion other than joy when a character in a slasher film dies is a rarity for me. So I found it to be very odd when I felt sympathy for them. That happens so rarely, I found myself impressed by Mr. Zombie's story telling abilities in those instances.

    The dialogue killed the movie, same with the first. Not only was it poorly written, sometimes it was just disgusting (like the guys driving the car when Michael escapes talking about necrophilia)1. It seemed that every single character was a puppet with Zombie’s voice being heard through everyone with no contrast. Everybody just screams and curses at each other, dropping F-bombs. I have no problem with profanity, but it just got so repetitive that it was annoying and seemed lazy on Zombie’s part.

    The vulgarity is a constant with Zombie, and it was completely unwarranted here. The Halloween series has always had an air of class about it for the most part. It has never relied on gore, vulgarity, or nudity and sex to entertain. Zombie ramped up all of those aspects and they don't fit in Halloween. After watching the movie I wondered to myself how much better the film could have been without all of those things.

    Now I will say that the violence in this movie was very graphic, intense, and painful to watch, as it should be. When the scumbag owner of the strip club gets killed and the woman gets beaten to death by shoving her into the wall (from what I remember) it was brutal. The violence, while over the top at times, was appropriately horrifying.

    The ultimate blasphemy though was having Michael utter a word. That was unforgivable.

    Rob Zombie always casts his films with fine actors. The performances are something I have no complaints with. I can separate the performances from the writing and directing in Zombie's films. Malcolm McDowell's performance as Zombie's Loomis was quite good. It's the writing and portrayal I had the problem with.

    Sherri Moon Zombie routinely gets a lot of criticism for her acting in the movie and subsequent return on the sequel which I never felt. Zombie stated in the commentaries that the test audiences all reacted very positively to her character. I believe that. I think she did a remarkable job. I found her portrayal of a poor, single mother, working hard to make ends meet, and to keep her family together the best she could to be very spot on. Her character was failing at it, but it wasn't from lack of trying, and the audience saw this. I loved her performance as that character, very true to reality.

    I know in the Zombie's first film you instantly dislike the bully that was picking on Michael and that gets flipped pretty quickly. The following scene where Michael beats him to death was quite effective. Seeing the child cry and beg for his life reminds one that despite being a bully, he was still only a child. Maybe it wasn't suspenseful, but it was horrifying to watch. For the sequel I found there to be more tension and suspense because I didn't want some of the characters to die.
    I don't like Rob Zombie's Halloween films, but there is some value in them, particularly the second one.

  10. #110
    Heroic Warrior Rikki Roxx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2021
    Location
    nWo Country
    Posts
    1,359
    Quote Originally Posted by zodak74 View Post
    Rob Zombie's Halloween II is a work of art
    It certainly ASPIRES to be! I don't quite think they got there, but points for aiming high.

    As I've mentioned, I'm about as much of a "Halloween" neophyte as it gets without just plain never seeing any of them. And I maintain that "just" as horror movies or slasher movies go, I think the Zombie Halloween movies are perfectly fine. I don't doubt that they're infuriating to people who are "hardcores", but as a "hardcore" myself on various other things, I can understand how difficult it can be to judge things in a vacuum.

    Absent any sort of mental checklist about whether they were faithful to the originals or not, and having no emotional attachment whatsoever to the originals, I liked both of Zombie's Halloween movies quite a bit. They were probably made more for people like me who aren't romantically in love with the originals; in truth, most reboots are. They're definitely not perfect and they're not "great" movies - neither are most horror films, objectively - but I'm pretty sure that they're "good movies" to anyone who ISN'T watching them while also being a super-fan of the originals, doing the compare/contrast thing. And given just how devout the fanbase for the Halloween series seems to be - I've legit met Christians who don't love Jesus as much as Halloween fans love those movies - I just don't see how it was even possible for most people to have given those movies a fair and honest shake. The filmmakers had a steep uphill climb right from the jump on that whole project, and I've never envied their position.

    It also doesn't help that the original(s) and the remakes had pretty opposite approaches to horror. One goes for suspense and atmosphere and the other goes for balls-out splatter and gore. If they share a title, but have such conflicting sensibilities by nature, then obviously people are going to have a strong negative reaction to that, whether fairly or unfairly. One can say that the remakes "fail" to capture the spirit of what the originals did... but seeing as how no attempt was ever made to replicate that in the first place, is that really a fair thing to judge on? It's like being mad at a dog for not being a cat. It's not trying to be! And whether it should be or not is an altogether different conversation.

    I'unno. Like most people I'm not a fan of remakes as a rule, but now and then I see one that seems - to me, at least - to be pretty good on its own merits. I think those two qualify. But I do cede that probably has a lot to do with my near-complete absence of exposure to the originals beforehand.
    ----------------

    To Thrawn's analysis of the remakes - which I won't Quote for the sake of brevity, but I'll say that I agree with some of it and other bits not at all, BUT it's all well thought-out and well-spoken regardless - but I think something needs to be said about the original Halloween and Zombie's remakes being made in different decades, for different audiences, with different sensibilities.

    The two are a study in contrast. "Unexplained Evil" vs. "Relatable Evil". Mysteries vs. Explanations. What We Assume vs. What We Are Shown. And so on and so forth.

    Put simply, Zombie's movies were made at a time when audiences don't have as much patience for things that don't have explanations. The "Why" has become increasingly important in recent years, and any villain character being written from the perspective of "He's just Evil, m'kay?" is/was seen as lazy.

    To my way of thinking, had the remake gone with trying to recapture the exact same priorities the original movie had, right down to the exploration of Michael's origins (or lack thereof)... you kind of don't even need to do a remake at all. "Let's pretty much do the opposite in every way" was a pretty bold move, and obviously it didn't hit with everyone, but I do think it was an admirable way to approach the material.

    For better or worse, if you pretend the entire previous Halloween franchise had never existed, and it was just something someone made up in 2007... Zombie's remake is the movie you'd get. You'd probably get something pretty close even if he wasn't the one who made it. It might be a little less "white trash chic" on the whole if someone else had done it, but most of the other stuff people complain about, like trying to make Michael sympathetic and over-explaining his origins, are things which were all the rage at that precise moment in time.

    Again, it's kind of unfair, to my thinking, to scold someone for doing Exactly What They Attempted To Do. "The original does This, but the remake does almost the complete opposite. How Dare They!" Well... that was kind of the entire point of the exercise. The rest is just Personal Preference, nah'mean?

    I'unno, these are good conversations. There's a ton of stuff in that one post I could write my own novel in reply to, both things I strongly agree with and others I kind of don't. Maybe another day.
    Last edited by Rikki Roxx; Yesterday at 12:28am.
    My matches, toy reviews, promos and more are on YouTube here: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCxr...awnHgDz1ceDcfA

  11. #111
    Heroic Warrior Thrawn29's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,894
    Quote Originally Posted by Rikki Roxx View Post
    I think something needs to be said about the original Halloween and Zombie's remakes being made in different decades, for different audiences, with different sensibilities.
    We'll simply disagree on that. Halloween has a style, tone, and sensibility that is different from F13th, which is different from Texas Chainsaw, NOES, and Hellraiser.

    There's overlap between the fandoms of all 5 for instance (I'm a huge fan of them all).

    Rob Zombie was a perfect fit for Texas Chainsaw Massacre. House of a 1000 Corpses was mostly a Texas Chainsaw Massacre inspired rip off in my opinion.

    Put simply, Zombie's movies were made at a time when audiences don't have as much patience for things that don't have explanations. The "Why" has become increasingly important in recent years, and any villain character being written from the perspective of "He's just Evil, m'kay?" is/was seen as lazy.
    My response was this:

    In short, it's not that the monster was explained, it's that it was explained badly. Giving Michael Myers your standard real life serial killer origin was...banal.

    Michael Myers is one of the most beloved characters in film history.

    The 12th Halloween Film just made 50 million this weekend, dethroned James Bonds, and did it while being available on streaming at the same time. For Michael's origin you couldn't anything more inspired than white trash poor home life cliche?

    Again, it's kind of unfair, to my thinking, to scold someone for doing Exactly What They Attempted To Do. "The original does This, but the remake does almost the complete opposite. How Dare They!" Well... that was kind of the entire point of the exercise. The rest is just Personal Preference, nah'mean?
    One would assume if you're remaking a true classic film (Halloween is universally regarded as such) you'd want to keep most of what worked. Simply doing the opposite makes your remake pointless. You might as well have made your own IP.

    I'unno, these are good conversations. There's a ton of stuff in that one post I could write my own novel in reply to, both things I strongly agree with and others I kind of don't. Maybe another day.
    Yeah. It's been enjoyable.

    On the topic of Rob Zombie's Halloween films, I have to approach them as a hardcore Halloween Fan. I actually have a life size cutout of Michael Myers in my room I got from Blockbuster video when they had the Halloween VHS reissue in the late 90s.

    And as I previously posted, they're terrible Halloween films, but I do find them interesting, particularly the second one. There was a really good movie in there, it just failed to materialize.
    Last edited by Thrawn29; Yesterday at 01:13am.

  12. #112
    Heroic Dad, Teacher, Nerd Uki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    The Woodlands,Tx
    Posts
    13,164
    Quote Originally Posted by Ornclown View Post
    Finalized package for the new Neca Ultimate set:

    https://www.figures.com/wordpress/wp...06171080_n.jpg
    I'm not interested in the franchise, but I could see grabbing this to customize a Lubic figure...!
    MOTU Origins Most Wanted: Skeleteen, Prince Keldor, Anti-Eternia Characters, and for the love of the Sorceress and Julie Winston, ODIPHUS!!!

    Instagram: Just_Thommy
    Hermione's Toy Box on Youtube:
    https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8C...xlwUttPSJAUZMA

  13. #113
    Evil Customizer smanomega's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    beneath the ruins of the three towers
    Posts
    2,503
    Michael Myers is by far the scariest protagonist of the slasher films genre. I'm a grown man who still gets the heebie-jeebies after watching one of his films. Obviously the original two first films were the best of the series. There's nothing to say about part 3 well cuz you know but part 4 really was creepy as hell chasing down a little girl of all things. Part 5 is where the wheels really started to fall off on that series though. Part 6 was pretty trashy. H2O was actually pretty good and saw Jamie Lee Curtis return so you know extra bonus there then there was that ending. Resurrection Ugh.

    Rob zombie's Halloween say what you will about these movies the level of violence in them is great. You really get the feel of how angry Michael is. The tragic mistake of those two was taking up all that time to explain something that really didn't need explaining Michael is for all sakes and intents just a killing machine. It would have been nice for zombie to flush out the more psychological part of Michael but he kind of failed on that intent with glimpses of scenes that just kind of left us feeling like WTF.
    The 2018 or 19 film I can't remember what it was but the one they just currently made with Jamie Lee Curtis I mean that whole scene where he drops the teeth over a bathroom stall that's just awesome. Still haven't seen the new one but it'll have to happen sometime soon I mean it is Halloween season. Besides I need another reason to be staring into the shadows making sure someone's not stalking me lol.

  14. #114
    Council Elder zodak74's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Point Dread
    Posts
    15,699
    Quote Originally Posted by smanomega View Post
    The 2018 or 19 film I can't remember what it was but the one they just currently made with Jamie Lee Curtis I mean that whole scene where he drops the teeth over a bathroom stall that's just awesome. Still haven't seen the new one but it'll have to happen sometime soon I mean it is Halloween season. Besides I need another reason to be staring into the shadows making sure someone's not stalking me lol.
    Get ready for nightmares!
    Clearing out Classics, Super7 and vintage MOTU & PoP figures... check out my threads in the Marketplace for Fisto, Sorceress, BA variants, SDCC exclusives and more!

  15. #115
    Heroic Warrior Rikki Roxx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2021
    Location
    nWo Country
    Posts
    1,359
    Thrawn: Hey, I get it man. And on some things, I am furiously purist. Other things, less so. Things like this can be, and often are, judged on multiple levels, between "Does this thing live up to the spirit of what it purports to adapt?" and "Removed entirely from that, does it succeed as an entertaining experience on its own merits?"

    It's like for me, I grew up with the Keaton Batman movies, but I'm much more a fan of the comics over any adaptation. And I've often said that those two movies are terrific "Tim Burton Movies", but altogether not great "Batman Movies", especially if you're a comics purist. Great movies to watch? Absolutely! But again, as a comics purist, they're full of eye-rolling stuff. Especially the second one; I know people love Batman Returns for all its wacky "Tim Burton-ness", but that movie has as much to do with Batman canon as my butt does with a rocketship, and also, the plot is complete and total nonsense. I can watch it and enjoy it, but I have to shut off my "Batman Fan" radar for it or else I'd go nuts.

    Likewise, I can totally see how for a Halloween purist, the Zombie remakes are probably a torturous experience. On some level, I'm actually glad I'll never know what that feels like. To me, they were just some decent slasher movies that I passed an evening with and didn't feel any dumber for having watched. That's about all I ever ask for, from that genre.
    My matches, toy reviews, promos and more are on YouTube here: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCxr...awnHgDz1ceDcfA

  16. #116
    Heroic Warrior Thrawn29's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,894
    Quote Originally Posted by Rikki Roxx View Post
    Thrawn: Hey, I get it man. And on some things, I am furiously purist. Other things, less so. Things like this can be, and often are, judged on multiple levels, between "Does this thing live up to the spirit of what it purports to adapt?" and "Removed entirely from that, does it succeed as an entertaining experience on its own merits?"

    Likewise, I can totally see how for a Halloween purist, the Zombie remakes are probably a torturous experience. On some level, I'm actually glad I'll never know what that feels like. To me, they were just some decent slasher movies that I passed an evening with and didn't feel any dumber for having watched. That's about all I ever ask for, from that genre.
    All good. I'm a huge Halloween fan and I don't hate the Zombie movies, but I am able to recognize they're awful Halloween films made by a director who did not understand Halloween.

    Aside from that, Halloween has 4 different continuities for fans. There's room for a failed reboot and fans of such.

    We're a decade past the Zombie Halloween movies and time has not been kind. However, as evidenced by my long post, there's a lot to talk about there and not all of it is bad. I stand by my statement, there's a very good movie in Rob Zombies Halloween 2. It's a shame it didn't turn out differently.

  17. #117
    Heroic Warrior Rikki Roxx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2021
    Location
    nWo Country
    Posts
    1,359
    Quote Originally Posted by Thrawn29 View Post
    made by a director who did not understand Halloween.
    Going by the second one, he didn't understand David Lynch, either.

    "Stick a white horse in there. It's profound. It's deep. It's symbolic."

    "...Of what?"

    "White. HORSE. Do it."

    ...was probably the conversation.
    My matches, toy reviews, promos and more are on YouTube here: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCxr...awnHgDz1ceDcfA

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •