Universal to relaunch Halloween with Jamie Lee Curtis

[Andrew NDB]

Saw the new "Halloween" (201. I'm probably the last person that should be giving an opinion on it, as I largely disliked all of the originals (H1, H2, especially H4, H5, and H6... eugh!). I found 1 and 2 boring, with 4, 5, and 6 being largely nonsensical, moreso with each new one. I actually *really liked* H20, and found "Resurrection" hysterically awesome (Busta Rhymes drop kicking Myers to the tune of "trick or treat, mutha****a!" still resonates). Apparently no one else did. I think I know the problem, though.

I never watched any of the old movies as a kid. I DO remember watching 3: Season of the Witch on HBO or something as a kid, and it creeping me out. I had no idea it had nothing to do with the other movies. I also remember being dragged to the movies to see part 5 in the theater as a kid (not by my parents, but by the cool older kids who were minding me that particular day -- not that I was ever forbidden to watch R-rated movies by my parents), but even as an 8, 9 year-old kid, finding it laughably terrible. Point is, I think had I seen Carpenter's original Halloween if not when it came out, then at least around that time, I would have probably appreciated it more. Watching it for the first time ever as a late 20-something year-old, it seems lame. After a lifetime of Freddy and Jason movies and all that, it's like watching "Diet Jason" only with far less going on and far less deaths and a less interesting antagonist. So hopefully you can forgive that.

So I got prepared for the new movie. I re-watched the original Halloween (197 -- which is the only one that matters now, as the new one ignores all other Halloween movies, even part 2. I liked it more this time around. I appreciated the nuance. The tons of bits of Michael hiding in plain sight. The careful deliberations, quiet. Then the big payoff at the end. And then...

I saw the movie (the new one). Wow! Completely awesome! Super, super slickly written. I loved H20 but this is like H20 x10 to me. The editing is perfect, the characters -- even the little ones we spend very little time with -- are super likable and funny. The little black kid in particular that the nanny is watching is about the funniest character I've seen in years, and the whole theater was howling at his lines. So many examples of setup and payoff, over and over again in this. I would watch it again, no doubt. Jamie Lee Curtis is a beast in this. This is what Terminator 2 was to Terminator 1, if it took them 40 years to get around to it. It's so good.

Though... wow. What a mess this series is, right? It's like... of historic proportions, and I don't think I'm exaggerating. We had movies 1 and 2, yeah? Then a part 3 that ignored them, and went into the Twilight Zone. Then a parts 4, 5, and 6 that sort of built off of 1 and 2 yet went into batshit crazy territory and kind of buried things. H20 comes out and parts 4, 5, and 6 (and 3, by default) get thrown out the window to get this new Laurie Strode 20 years later thing. And 8, which is like an unnecessary (but I'm so glad it came out... sue me, but I think it's probably the best Halloween movie ever in terms of sheer entertainment value) coda to H20. Then of course comes the Rob Zombie Halloween movies. I finally saw the first one this year (have not seen the second yet), which at the time I generally liked better than the original, even if it felt like every other Rob Zombie movie ever. But anyway, Zombie's Halloween hits, which reboots the whole series, for the first time from scratch this time. Then it gets a sequel. Now we get a movie that... acknowledges only the first 1978 movie and nothing else, even part 2 which everyone apparently loved. It's just odd. Odd and ballsy. And just interesting to me as a choice. This is basically H40, yeah? It's like Jamie Lee Curtis went to both her 20th and 40th high school reunions, yet in exactly the same fashion and pretending the last one never happened.

If I had to grind any axe with this movie, it'd just be that in watching the original 1978 movie right before this one (which we did), Michael's surviving 6 or 7 gunshots and disappearing from the ground below the house he was flung from isn't really addressed. Or maybe it was in dialogue and it didn't soak in. I remember some offhand comment from the cop who claimed to be there that day that, "I stopped Loomis from killing him!" or something. They probably should have had a quick intro or something in the movie to show Michael getting swiftly apprehended after that or something to better ease us into the new movie.

But yeah! Great movie. Super fun with super well written characters. I'd say I hope there's no sequel but it's already doing gangbusters so there will, which means the ending I just watched will be "explained out of" soon enough. Whatever. When they do another one, though, I hope they actually go off the beaten path and do something new with the idea of "The Shape." They make no bones that this is basically a 70 year-old Michael Meyers in this one, and they also tease at least one new direction near the end. I hope they are ballsy enough to commit to the new vs. the old.

Oh, also. Saw "First Man" last week. Fantastic. Humbling. I knew something of this, but I guess I didn't realize the space program was quite the killing field that it obviously was at the time. Very harrowing, and I dug the getting into Armstrong's head.

[Leo656]

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

If I had to grind any axe with this movie, it'd just be that in watching the original 1978 movie right before this one (which we did), Michael's surviving 6 or 7 gunshots and disappearing from the ground below the house he was flung from isn't really addressed. Or maybe it was in dialogue and it didn't soak in. I remember some offhand comment from the cop who claimed to be there that day that, "I stopped Loomis from killing him!" or something. They probably should have had a quick intro or something in the movie to show Michael getting swiftly apprehended after that or something to better ease us into the new movie.

I haven't seen it, but I've been reading about it. They originally had a plan to reconcile the ending of Part 1 better with this new one. They were originally going to re-stage the ending of Part 1 with stand-ins (supposedly digitally superimposing the original actors' faces on), showing the events from a different angle and fudging the details to allow for Michael's survival, so that audiences would see "what REALLY happened" and flow right into the new film. That's how this new film was originally going to begin.

Kinda like the old movie serials, where in Chapter 3, we clearly see the stagecoach go over the cliff with the hero inside, but then the opener of Chapter 4 shows us that "really" he jumped out well in advance and we just didn't see it.

In the end, the director decided that was too much trouble and "The audience will just sort of understand what happened". But yeah, they did have a plan to address the continuity issue.

[newfan]

The continuity with the series was kinda all over the place and it took until later on to explain the character more. I had always wondered if he was supposed to be more than human (more so later on)given how hard he was to kill and his strength etc. Over all I am a fan of the franchise though, even though this is more a slasher movie which usually isn't my type of horror. This movie at least cleans up the continuity as it ignores the other movies. Not sure how I feel about the U-Turn on her being his sister though as a big part of his story became him being driven to kill relatives but if we go from the fist movie they don't have to follow that direction. I read that Carpenter regretted writing that in after he did it.

There were a couple of 'you wouldn't do that' moments but I thought that was intentional to keep with the style of older horrors (around it's earlier time)?

[Andrew NDB]

There has to be something going on with Michael supernaturally. No way he is doing the kind of stuff he does in this movie if he is simply a 70 year old man that's been standing around staring at a wall for 40 years.

[Krutch]

Saw it tonight. It was okay.

Spoilers ahead

I really couldnt get into the first act. Most of the beginning I'd axe completely. In fact, I'd probably start it right at the scene where the dad and the kid come across the bus crash. After the Sherif finds the Doctor, hit the title sequence. From there we show the journalists coming to interview Laurie. I'm all for a slow burn but what we got was pretty unengaging and at times pretty silly. Like a professional journalist shouting like a crazy person at a serial killer while sticking his hand out (way over the yellow line, btw.) It was just... too lame to be funny.

It also felt like alot of seeds were planted that never payed off. Mousetraps were given alot of attention, so I assumed someone was going to end up hiding under the sink... nope. Firecrackers were given alot of attention, so I assumed one would be used to start a fire or something... nope. And I don't think I'm on board with any master plan that involves locking a supernaturally strong serial killer in a bunker with a full arsenal, especially given that we've seen Laurie take pot shots through the ceiling no problem.

The twist with the doctor was appreciated, if not convincing. I'm glad they did something different to separate him from being just a Loomis stand-in, but the way the reveal was handled was kind of goofy. I'm 99 percent certain there was a line of dialogue that was scrapped explaining that he was the one who caused the bus crash and set Michael free. It would have made alot more sense if he did. Instead he's just like... "Oh, he's free? Now's my chance to see it in person and study! Score! And while i'm at it, see you in Hell, Sheriff!"

Editing felt so bizarre at times, too. There's a moment where Laurie cries leaving the restaurant and her granddaughter comes and hugs her. Then we cut to an insert of traffic, and then we're back to the same shot only Laurie is gone and Judy Greer is talking to her granddaughter as if it's mid conversation. Just... jarring. Like there was a scene that was nixed but these two had to be played next to each other or something.

End of spoilers

That's just my take on it. I didn't dislike it by any means, I just thought it was okay. But hey - if this brings back a surge of slasher flicks back into the theatres then by all means I hope it does gangbusters.

[Andrew NDB]

It's true, this might light a fire under R-rated slashers in general. Another Englund Freddy. Another Hodder F13, if they get their rights squared away again.

[newfan]

I prefer a sequel after a long gap to a remake, generally speaking, it worked here.

If they do follow up this movie I am interested to see where they go with Myers character, unless they want to leave some mystery to him. Agreed Andrew, given his age and as you said, years locked up.

[Hamato Yoshi]

JLC , the queen of horror (and poo youghurts)