Halloween Remake Thread... - Part 1

So then what was the point?

I'm all for franchises mixing it up and trying new things, all I ask is that those things make sense! :hehe:
 
That's true. At the very least, I did expect Carpenter's theme though.
 
I really like the idea of laurie being one of his victums that simply got away and he becomes obssesed with getting her. It would also be an interesting side story to where michael escapes once around the age of 15 and kills 2-3 people before being put back into smiths grove, then the state decides once he turns 18 they can put him to sleep legally. the night before hes to be transported to be executed he escapes smiths grove and returns to haddonfield.

I was actually thinking something more along the lines of patients in the juvenile ward at Smith's Grove suffer a series of mysterious "accidents", and always after some interaction with young Michael. Like in the comic, the day Michael arrives to Smith's Grove an older boy with psychotic tendancies tries to bully Michael. Next thing anyone knows he has a red crayon driven into his eye. Then Dr. Loomis decides to see how Michael responds to acts of kindness, so they throw him a birthday party. A fat kid grabs the birthday cake and starts stuffing his face with it. The next day the kid is found in the showers, badly burned. Seems someone had turned the water heater all the way to max, and turned the cold water off completely. The kid later dies of his injuries.

And as for your idea of him being put down at age 18 or whatever, first of all I don't think you can execute someone who is deemed psychologically incompetent (which is why the criminally insane are locked away and not executed). Secondly, I don't know if Illinois even has the death penalty (some states do, some don't). Third, if he were to have escaped and killed again when he was 15, the board of directors at Smith's Grove certainly wouldn't continue to keep him in a minimum security facility. They would shoot him up with the strongest tranquilizers money can buy and ship him off to a maximum security facility. Also, by keeping the deaths at Smith's Grove "mysterious accidents", you maintain the storyline from the original. That the staff at Smith's Grove had become lax in their security around Michael because they got used to his catatonic act. They thought he was a vegetable, so they didn't bother with retraints or sedatives. Only Dr. Loomis suspects the truth.

In the comic, Dr. Loomis isn't convinced of Michael's involvement in all the mysterious deaths and accidents until Halloween 1970. The staff throw a costume party for the kids in the juvenile ward. They give Michael a clown costume and one of those plain white masks to wear. The whole party Michael stands in the corner watching. The kids play musical chairs. The music stops and all the kids sit in a chair except for Michael. He wasn't even trying to win. One of the girls, who's dressed like a witch, laughs at Michael and says he has "cooties". There's a storm outside, which knocks the power out while the witch-girl is bobbing for apples. By the time the emergency generator kicks in, the girl is lying face down in the tub of apples, drowned. Michael is then shown sitting outside the administrator's office. Dr. Loomis is arguing with him, trying to convince him that Michael was to blame for the girl's death. While Loomis is in the administrator's office, the head nurse (who is also Dr. Loomis' fiance) is stalked by The Shape. When Loomis leaves the office, Michael is back sitting outside the office. Then someone finds the head nurse's body. Her head had been twisted almost all the way around. Both deaths are labeled "tragic accidents". But it's at this point that Dr. Loomis becomes convinced that there is no rehabilitation for Michael Myers. That the boy is just pure evil, and must be kept locked away, forever.

It was a very well written comic, and I think that it should be added to the movie script.
 
Sorry, I got spoiled by Friday The 13th.

Ah, but you contradict yourself here my friend. You wrote that suspense and mystique are over rated, yet there was plenty of both in the original Friday The 13th movies. Especially in numbers 1 through 3, which are the best in the series IMHO.

In the first movie, half the kills are done off screen and are shown mostly by the killer's POV. And we are lead to belive that the killer was a man throughout the entire movie, until the very end when we're introduced to Pamela. If you had never seen the movie before, or been told the plot, then you would be completely surprised by that little twist in the end.

In the second movie, again, half of the kills are done off camera. Well, maybe less than half. But still, Jason spends 3/4 of the movie stalking the camp before closing in for the kill.

Part 3 also has a fair number of off screen kills, plus Jason doesn't do much until the last 1/3 of the movie. For most of the film, he hides in the bard and waits for his prey to come to him. It's not until he kills Shelly and gains his hockey mask that he developes the confidence to actually leave the barn.

So you see? Plenty of suspence and mystique in the movies you just said yourself you've been "spoiled by".
 
Rob Zombie sucks!

(The thread has now been bumped)
 
Rob Zombie sucks!

(The thread has now been bumped)

I'd watch doing that. Thats how I got my first infraction for saying basicvally the same regarding Halloween II.

On topic, there's a lot of talk of them still doing H2 in some capacity. How can that work now?
 
Ah, but you contradict yourself here my friend. You wrote that suspense and mystique are over rated, yet there was plenty of both in the original Friday The 13th movies. Especially in numbers 1 through 3, which are the best in the series IMHO.

In the first movie, half the kills are done off screen and are shown mostly by the killer's POV. And we are lead to belive that the killer was a man throughout the entire movie, until the very end when we're introduced to Pamela. If you had never seen the movie before, or been told the plot, then you would be completely surprised by that little twist in the end.

In the second movie, again, half of the kills are done off camera. Well, maybe less than half. But still, Jason spends 3/4 of the movie stalking the camp before closing in for the kill.

Part 3 also has a fair number of off screen kills, plus Jason doesn't do much until the last 1/3 of the movie. For most of the film, he hides in the bard and waits for his prey to come to him. It's not until he kills Shelly and gains his hockey mask that he developes the confidence to actually leave the barn.

So you see? Plenty of suspence and mystique in the movies you just said yourself you've been "spoiled by".

The difference is at least Jason had a *GASP* origin story!
 
Got around to watching both of these last week in one sitting. It wasn't a rewarding experience.

As bad as the the first one was, it at least felt like a Halloween movie.Sure, one set in a paralell universe where everyone has long hair and looks like they smell , but a Halloween movie nonetheless.

The sequel might very well be one of the worst horror movies I've ever sat through. Seriously, what the **** was that?! It certainly wasn't a Halloween movie...


It's insane but I love it. Sure it's not what you'd expect from a Halloween film but there's so much brutality it almost becomes comical. I'd rather watch Zombie's strange derailment of the franchise than Halloween: Resurrection.


The next film needs to bring it back to the basics though. I don't want Michael to be a pro wrestler.
 
Well the teen population may be all like that today with wanting to be youtube sensations but as good an idea as it was it was horribly executed and not to mention the laugh out loud moment when she beat herself up and it drew nothing but laughter in my theater. They had 10 years to hammer out a script and plot that was suppose to create another trilogy but what we got felt like wes cranked it out in 2 nights with no thought. The other problem I had with 2 and 3 was none of the main 3 died. Dewey especially outstayed his welcome past part 2.

At least they had the balls to kill Randy in Scream 2. None of the deaths in Scream 3 had that kind of impact.

The next film needs to bring it back to the basics though. I don't want Michael to be a pro wrestler.

Agreed. Good old fashioned Shape stalking Laurie Strode.
 
I'd watch doing that. Thats how I got my first infraction for saying basicvally the same regarding Halloween II.

On topic, there's a lot of talk of them still doing H2 in some capacity. How can that work now?

I like his music, but thus far his movies have all sucked. He should stick to what he knows.

You mean there's gonna be a third Halloween II? They haven't even done the second remake yet.
 
The difference is at least Jason had a *GASP* origin story!

No more so than Michael Myers does. In fact most of Jason's origin story had to be retconned in during the sequels. Originally he was just simply Pamela Voorhees' mongoloid, mentally ******ed son who drowned in '57. He was her inspiration, her reason for killing, but his voice was a figment of her imagination. Jason popping up out of the lake was a dream, a nightmare the girl had when she fell asleep in the canoe. When Paramount said they wanted to do a series of movies with Jason as the killer, that's when they decided he didn't drown after all and grew up in the wild, just as demented as his mother. Even then, that's about as far as they got with an origin story.

Other parts of Jason's origins are left up to the imaginations of fans. They never openly say he was bullied as a child. But experience tells us kids are cruel. They'll bully the kid with downs syndrome, or the fat kid, or the kid with a birth mark on his face. So it stands to reason that Jason was bullied. But it was never officially written anywhere that he was.
 
Agreed. Good old fashioned Shape stalking Laurie Strode.

Agreed. While I'm very skeptical about Michael Bay's ability to pull off a decent remake, I at least hope he does a better job the Zombie did.

My biggest problem with Michael Bay's horror remakes isn't so much his style as it is the writing. When it comes to things like cinematography, lighting, creating tension and suspense, things like that, I think he did quite well with Texas Chainsaw Massacre and A Nightmare On Elm Street. What I didn't like was that he omitted the fact that Leatherface and his whole inbred redneck family are cannibals, and that he tried to insinuate that Freddy Krueger might have been innocent of the charges against him.

Hell, Freddy had a whole rewrite. He raped kids, but never killed them. He was never arrested, nor released on a technicality. The parents simply hunted him down and killed him without even calling the cops. Not at all the original backstory.

This is the kind of crap I want to see avoided with Platinum Dunes' Halloween remake. Maybe after seeing how poorly Zombie's rewrite of Michael Myers origins went they'll keep it mysterious, the way it's supposed to be.
 
I liked the Hitcher.

The original or the remake? I liked the original with Rudger Hauer and C. Thomas Howell. I never watched the remake on principle alone. I had read that they totally botched the whole story, so I just skipped it.
 
You can find that next to a unicorn's penis and Bigfoot's custom made videogame console.

LOL, that's funny. I like that.

But seriously, there were elements of Texas Chainsaw Massacre and A Nightmare On Elm Street that I really enjoyed. They both had scenes that legitimately had me jumping out of me seat in fright. That is something I haven't experienced for a long time while watching horror movies. I've found so many of them to be so damned predictable and formulaic they just don't ever frighten me. So seeing a movie for the first time and actually having that kind of reation is very refreshing. My only problems with his remakes is he always seems to go for a complete rewrite of the characters. Leatherface doesn't eat people, Freddy may have been innocent, the Ninja Turtles are from another planet, etc, etc, etc. If he would just stop messing with the origin stories of the characters of his remakes, he might actually come up with something good.
 
The original or the remake? I liked the original with Rudger Hauer and C. Thomas Howell. I never watched the remake on principle alone. I had read that they totally botched the whole story, so I just skipped it.
Both. The original is better but the remake was a decent film. Not a thought provoking classic like the original but a good enough film, the score and especially Sean Bean's acting are the highlights. All in all it's a different film from the original but I think that works in its favor.
 
Last edited:
I like his music, but thus far his movies have all sucked. He should stick to what he knows.

You mean there's gonna be a third Halloween II? They haven't even done the second remake yet.

MY bad, I meant H3, slip of the keys.
 
MY bad, I meant H3, slip of the keys.

Ah yes, good ol' typoes.

I haven't heard anything new about Rob Zombie's H3. It could be permanently shelved due to Platinum Dunes' upcoming Halloween remake.
 
By the way, on the subject of children becoming killers for no apparent reason, try looking up the case of Eric M. Smith. In 1993, when he was only 13 years old, Eric Smith lured a 4 year old neighborhood boy into the woods. He then strangled the kid, bludgeoned him with a rock, sodomized him with a stick, then poured Kool Aid onto the kid's wounds. When the police found out who the killer was and asked him why, he said he just wanted to know what it felt like to kill someone.

Watch the video footage of him in court, or of him reading a prepared apology to his victim's family. He's completely emotionless, both in his facial expression and his voice. Look into his eyes. It's just how Dr. Loomis described Michael Myers in the movie, "He has the blackest eyes, the Devil's eyes."

Now Eric Smith didn't have the greatest life, but it wasn't as bad as many people out there. He was the product of a broken home, but then so are half the children in America. His stepfather was a bit of a deuche, but as far as I know he never abused Eric. He was teased at school for his red hair, freckles, glasses, and oddly shaped ears. But then who isn't teased at school about something or other at some time. It happens to just about everyone at least once in their lives. And despite all of this, he was shown great affection by his mother, sister, and grandparents. Yet he became a stone cold killer at the early age of 13. And if he's ever allowed out, he will kill again.

Eric M. Smith is, in my opinion, pretty damn close to a real life Michael A. Myers. And this is the type of backstory Michael Myers should have. A relatively normal, happy, non-white trash upbringing. Maybe not perfect, but as nice as his parents can make it for him. Yet one Halloween night, for no real reason anyone can tell, he picks up a knife and kills his older sister. Now that's pretty damn scary.
 
Both. The original is better but the remake was a decent film. Not a thought provoking classic like the original but a good enough film, the score and especially Sean Bean's acting are the highlights. All in all it's a different film from the original but I think that works in its favor.

Well, it is available on Netflix. Maybe I'll give it a chance.
 
But seriously, there were elements of Texas Chainsaw Massacre and A Nightmare On Elm Street that I really enjoyed.

I cannot begin to tell you how much I hate the Elm Street remake. They got absolutely nothing right. It's amazing, in way.

I didn't mind the TCM remake, tbh.
 
Ah yes, good ol' typoes.

I haven't heard anything new about Rob Zombie's H3. It could be permanently shelved due to Platinum Dunes' upcoming Halloween remake.

Wait, PH are doing a Halloween remake now? I know RZ was not supposed to be involved in H3, rumor was that it would feature Laurie in a mental ward but nothing beyond that was said, most figured she would be the killer this time but it was never confirmed.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"