Halloween (2007)

walt0r

I hate rob zombie but I'm really hoping he doesn't ruin this film. Will go see it first chance I get. Loved the original.

koneko

I thought the first half of the film was significantly better than the second, the second half was fairly standard horror/slasher and the first half was very typical Rob Zombie (particularly the violence and dialogue, they always have a certain feel to them).

I'm not sure how well the film will be received, the original is fairly "safe" as horror films go, and some of the violence in this will probably be a lot more extreme than the average person is expecting (the average person being someone that isn't used to or doesn't like the level of violence in say Devils Rejects). There is one scene in particular (

the rape scene

) that I am absolutely positive people will complain about and find over the top.

Basq

To quote my review elsewhere:

Not too impressed with Halloween.

I enjoyed the beginning with the young Michael Myers. It was different and had injection of Rob Zombie's writing in there (with dialogue such as "skull fu*k", who else would it be writing?).

And then as soon as it showed

Laurie in present day and his escape

, it turned into practically a shot-for-shot remake of John Carpenter's original, not as shot-for-shot as Gus Van Sant's 'Psycho' remake but it was pretty damn close.

The ending was atrocious too.

I've a feeling the new ending will have a "disappearance of Michael" (probably not too far from the falling out from the second story window to the ground.. only to disappear when Loomis takes a second glance) to allow for sequels if it did well at the box-office.

Hollywood really has no soul nowadays! Sad really!

Anyways... 4 / 10 would be kind as it really felt quite same-ish (especially the second half). Shot-for-shot remakes should be avoided and outlawed at all costs. Shame as Rob was going in the right direction at the start telling a new untold chapter of the story.

PS - didn't Malcolm McDowell actually look really young with that wig on when he was with the young Michael Myers? Amazing why a convincing wig can do!

Oh and koneko.. regarding the

the rape scene

, it looks like it has been taken out as new advertisements in the States show

Michael breaking through his chains to escape

.

livEwirE

some of the violence in this will probably be a lot more extreme than the average person is expecting

Gotta agree with koneko on this, I can't see the ladies liking this at the movies:eek:

Rob Zombies movies are NOT for the faint hearted;)

Basq

livEwirE wrote:

Gotta agree with koneko on this, I can't see the ladies liking this at the movies:eek:

Rob Zombies movies are NOT for the faint hearted;)

Well, it is Rob Zombie lads!

Did you see his previous films?

livEwirE

Hell yeah I seen 'em, don't think I'd forget them in a hurry, some sick violence in TDJ and HOTC:D

Zombie seems to feature violents rapes and brutal murders in his films...

koneko

Interesting you felt the same, basquille, I also felt it took a definite turn for the worse when it switched to present day, but I was almost expecting it. The first half just screamed Rob Zombie, it was so exactly his style, then it switches to a completely standard slasher flick. I would have preferred the whole film stayed as a "prequel" or early Myers film, or that they at least did something different with the present day parts.

Re: that 1 scene. I thought they might cut it, especially with a film like this, a lot of people will see it based on the name alone and expect a simple remake of the original and won't be expecting that. I can't see the studio letting that go through. I was expecting a scene like that or similar to it, as you said it is a Rob Zombie flick and it almost wouldn't be complete without it, heh.

livEwirE wrote:

Gotta agree with koneko on this, I can't see the ladies liking this at the movies:eek:

Maybe my avatar didn't tip you off as to what my gender is
But it's a fair point, plenty of couples would go to see a horror film at halloween and plenty of the girlfriends dragged to see it would not be happy. Maybe I'm an oddball then because I loved Devil's Rejects.

qwertplaywert

Whens this out on our shores leads?
And why no us halloween release?

Snake Plisken

Yeah agree first 50 minutes or so great movie, Kudos to Zombie for not making a blow by blow remake thinking to myself now this is how to do a remake, just use the name and main charecter fill in his background and take it in a totally new direction, but for some unknown reason, Zombie decides to do a blow by blow remake for the second half of the film even using some of the same lines. Maybe the studio forced him to do this, and this leak came out so we could say yeah loved the first half but the second half sucked bigtime, thus forcing the studio to allow Zombie finish it the way he wanted.
Who knows? I'd split the points on this one: First 50 mins 4 out of 5. Second half 1 out of 5

Snake

Drag00n79

I agree with all the others who preferred the first half of the movie. The thing is I found myself empathising more with Michael than his victims in the second part! :eek: And did anyone else find some of the acting very substandard - especially McDowell's?

Drag00n79

qwertplaywert wrote:

Whens this out on our shores leads?
And why no us halloween release?

It's out here 18th October I think. I'm not sure why it's not out in the States then too.

Snake Plisken

Well Moriarty on aint it cool here http://www.aintitcool.com/node/33846 has a decent take on whats wrong with this remake and I think his hit the nail on the head. Its full of spoilers so if you haven't seen don't read. He also points out the main differences that were made from the work print, looks like the wiensteins won out on final cut.

Snake

soma

Very interesting & intriguing first half, drivel for the 2nd.

senordingdong

Is this out yet or what?

Karl Hungus

I'd agree with what people have said so far and that it's very much a film of two halves, the latter half being a poor retread of the original, and the first being quite excellent; typical Rob Zombie fare up to a point.

I think the 2 halves just don't gel in a entirely convincing way. It's a case of Michael as the character we know having some mystique to him, and the child portrayed in the first half of the film becoming that character doesn't seem too realistic, despite the fact that it's clearly the intention of the script to begin with.

I really think that the film would've worked solely as a standalone prequel, instead of a prequel/remake that we have, where the transition from being realistic serial killer to superhuman killing machine is bridged by about 30 years, and two very different films, much in the same way the Star Wars prequels don't really impact on the character of Darth Vader from the original trilogy. Because as it is, I think there was a lot of interesting elements in the first section, characters as played by William Forsythe and Danny Trejo could've seriously been fleshed out if the first part was scripted solely as a prequel.

But honestly, no point in ranting about what could have been, because even as a deeply flawed film, I think it's hit the mark as being a decent remake in that it's as different enough from the original, and adds enough new elements to be viewed as a film in it's own right, and not a slick updating (read: Abortion) of a perfectly good film to appeal to MTV fans. Much in the same way that I've probably watched both versions of Dawn Of The Dead numerous times, enjoyed them a lot, and count them as seperate films.

Oh, and I have to say, the horror fanboy in me definetly enjoyed seeing the likes of Brad Dourif, Ken Foree, Udo Kier, Danny Trejo, Clint Howard, and other horror movie icons up in a big hollywood production.

Honestly, I'll be waiting to see what Zombie does next.

koneko

Yeah, the cast was great. Some of them definitely weren't used to their full potential. I wanted to see more of Ken Foree for one

Snake Plisken

Anyone else think when they saw Ronnie that it was Iggy Pop playing him? I was shocked when I read that it was William Forsythe.


Snake

Karl Hungus

koneko wrote:

Yeah, the cast was great. Some of them definitely weren't used to their full potential. I wanted to see more of Ken Foree for one

Ah, most of them were pretty much cameos tbh, so I didn't expect to see all that much of them.

qwertplaywert

Is ìt out here friday?Some sites are listing the uk release as this week....

What rating has the Irish Censor board given it?

Jello

qwertplaywert wrote:

Is ìt out here friday?Some sites are listing the uk release as this week....

What rating has the Irish Censor board given it?

Yeah it's out Friday.

Thankfully it's been rated 18's by the IFCO - http://www.ifco.ie/ifco/ifcoweb.nsf/lookupupcomingreleases/A4E191F4ADF4473C8025734F0042272C?OpenDocument&OpenUp=True&type=graphic - ''Slasher/gorefest''

qwertplaywert

Ah bitches and joss whedons' -was hoping for 16s cert
Only about 6 months to the dvd then!

djkeogh

Saw this the other day and have to say that it's so so. It passed some time but it was never great. The first half is as people have said infinitely better than the 2nd half but it's still not great. As has been said in other reviews, by giving Myers a backstory more fleshed out than the original you have taken away the fear of who he is. Also the killings in this film are in no way fun like I think they should be in this kind of film. They are ugly and stark and will ulitmately turn people off the film.

I think Zombie has talent and I do like his previous films but he does need to keep with original works and not be making what will ultimately be a forgotten film in about 2 weeks time.

ixoy

djkeogh wrote:

Also the killings in this film are in no way fun like I think they should be in this kind of film. They are ugly and stark and will ulitmately turn people off the film.

Should they be "fun" in Halloween? Always thought the original was about a cold, brutal sadistic killer and certainly not meant to have any of the more tongue-in-cheek, camp aspects that may have followed in sequels and other slasher franchises.

NunianVonFuch

ixoy wrote:

Should they be "fun" in Halloween? Always thought the original was about a cold, brutal sadistic killer and certainly not meant to have any of the more tongue-in-cheek, camp aspects that may have followed in sequels and other slasher franchises.

Whilst that is true it took away greatly from my enjoyment of the film when he stabbed a girl a lot and then let her try and crawl away for awhile all the time the camera lingers on her screaming. Especially when it was the 4th/5th female victim for him to do this with, just becomes tedious then because you don't care about the characters anyway as you were only introduced to them 30 seconds ago.
Found this review which is kinda like the hour rant myself & the gf went on once the film ended http://www.chud.com/index.php?type=reviews&id=11637
I have seen both Rob's other movies 1000 Corpses was a bit cack but Devil's Rejects was far better in story, style and execution.

Anyone see Kane's "See No Evil"? Halloween (2007) was in the same vein gore and plotwise but somehow managed to be worse! :eek:

Necronomicon

Am I the only one that really liked it?

I thought it had the right ingredients for a good remake - it deviated enough from the original to really stand out as its own film. A big kudos to Zombie for creating the whole background to the story and giving us insight into a young Michael Myers, the scenes from his childhood were excellent.

I don't think it nose-dived when it switched to present day. I think to call it a shot-for-shot remake of Carpenter's is a little unfair, some scenes that were more slow-burning in the original are much faster paced. Yes, there were some scenes lifted right from the original

Paul being impaled into the wall, then Michael strangling his girlfriend

but there were plenty of Zombie creations, such as

Michael killing Laurie's parents, as well as the final scene in the Myers house where Michael has Laurie trapped in the basement - I thought it was a much more intense finale than Carpenter's to be honest.

IMO, a very worthy remake which really does justice to the monster. Rob Zombie really made it his own.

Ps, just a word on the first couple of posts in the thread,

could someone explain what happens in the rape scene? It obviously didn't make it into the cinema release! It doesn't have to be detailed or anything!

NunianVonFuch

Necromomicon wrote:

Ps, just a word on the first couple of posts in the thread,

could someone explain what happens in the rape scene? It obviously didn't make it into the cinema release! It doesn't have to be detailed or anything!

I haven't seen the workprint but apparently

It's when he's being transferred and a couple of the guards are raping a retarded girl and then ask Michael if he wants in on it so he snaps. Would make sense in that Zombie wants us to emphasize more with the killer but according to others what we saw was better as the rape was just for shock value

Karl Hungus

Necromomicon wrote:

I thought it had the right ingredients for a good remake - it deviated enough from the original to really stand out as its own film.

I'll agree with you wholeheartedly there, and definetly thumbs up to Rob for doing his own take on it and not making a straight out scene for scene job. However, I don't think that deviating from the original automatically makes a remake good. It was mediocre.

senordingdong

NunianVonFuch wrote:

I haven't seen the workprint but apparently

It's when he's being transferred and a couple of the guards are raping a retarded girl and then ask Michael if he wants in on it so he snaps. Would make sense in that Zombie wants us to emphasize more with the killer but according to others what we saw was better as the rape was just for shock value

Better off I think. It would have only added to an element that I'm torn on...in the first have it felt like Zombie was trying to make us feel, sympathetic to Myers...tough upbringing, bulllied at home and school etc...but then in the second half, completely abandoned it.

And another thing I'm confused on, I believe I was giving out to the dickhead behind me who kept hitting my seat and talking, but how did Myers know that Lori was his sister? After fifteen years, a new name and a new family?

P.S. Despite the obvious silly parts and brilliantly executed clichés, I really enjoyed it.
Not a masterpiece, though I never thought Carpenters was, but definatly the kick up the arse that 'nut with a knife' genre needed.

NunianVonFuch

senordingdong wrote:

And another thing I'm confused on, I believe I was giving out to the dickhead behind me who kept hitting my seat and talking, but how did Myers know that Lori was his sister? After fifteen years, a new name and a new family?

I think he's supposed to work out the mystery of her disappearance as in one scene he finds

Laurie’s adoptive parents’ house and holds a picture of Laurie in front of her mother’s face as he kills her.

It’s like Michael Myers as hardboiled gumshoe. If Zombie had merged Halloween with The Maltese Falcon, he could have been on to something here.

unreggd

I thought it was crap

didnt pack many punches


and even though its a remake, it was well to predictable

Also, I dunno how much was cut out, but I know one of the nurses lines was cut out, one that was kind of important [I saw the unedited clip on YouTube]

Laurie was too outgoin and kind of annoying, I actually wanted Michael to get her

So much just didnt make sense

Not my cup of cha at all


Malcolm McDowell is a tool

He's one of them actors who seems to be thrown in for the sake of it

[Like Michael Parks in Kill Bill]

senordingdong

NunianVonFuch wrote:

I think he's supposed to work out the mystery of her disappearance as in one scene he finds

Laurie’s adoptive parents’ house and holds a picture of Laurie in front of her mother’s face as he kills her.

It’s like Michael Myers as hardboiled gumshoe. If Zombie had merged Halloween with The Maltese Falcon, he could have been on to something here.

But how did he figure it out? From the first time he saw her, (she was dropping the letter into Myers old house and he was inside watching her) he just knew? That's BS.

Canis Lupus

Have to say I was mostly bored through the movie.

The first part was played by a kid who didn't give me the willies. He just looked like a stroppy fat american kid. No scariness, no evil behind the facade etc etc. When the kid does say anything it's delivered poorly. I didn't find it particularly scary either.

Then we cut to present day where he grows up.....and looks like a WWF wrestler.... At this point I pretty much watched the movie through then got up and drove home as fast as possible to watch crap on tv.

It wasn't a total waste of time but for the most part I was watching my watch and hoping for the end.

Karl Hungus

Canis Lupus wrote:

Then we cut to present day where he grows up.....and looks like a WWF wrestler....

Actually Tyler Mane, the actor playing adult Michael Myers, was a WCW wrestler.

Canis Lupus

Karl Hungus wrote:

Actually Tyler Mane, the actor playing adult Michael Myers, was a WCW wrestler.

Amazing how it stands out It wrecked the movie in my eyes because if nothing else it took away from Michael being a scary and unhinged individual and just turned him into something that was physically imposing but not really scary cos I just had WWF nonsense running through my head.

Eirebear

More of a Re-interpretation than a remake really huh?

I enjoyed it in a geeky sort of way it was interesting seeing the origins of Michaels killing spree (or at least zombies hackneyed attempt at child phsycology!)
The thing for me is that the first part both confirmed that something was wrong with michael in terms of his childhood but also the fact that he was completely cold blooded and sadistic in his killing

when he kills the mexican guard who had treated him with respect over the 15 years

this for me makes the character that little bit more chilling.

One thing really annoyed me though

He killed Loomis?!?! whats that about, the guy appeared in nearly all the sequals involving Myers, you cant just go changing the history of a character like that can you?

for that reason i was particularly glad it ended as it di to be honest.

Tusky

Surprisingly, I really enjoyed it. Thought the first half was excellent and the second was quite good. You could pick plenty of holes in it but I wont..except one that has already been mentioned.

How did Michael know it was his sister?!?!

lil'princess

Necromomicon wrote:

Am I the only one that really liked it?

it deviated enough from the original to really stand out as its own film. A big kudos to Zombie for creating the whole background to the story and giving us insight into a young Michael Myers, the scenes from his childhood were excellent.

It deviated enough from the original to make it suck. Although it's my belief that even if Zombie did a shot for shot remake it would still suck, proved by the last third of the movie. It's obvious that Rob Zombie had no understanding of the original. Michael Myers was supposed to be pure evil, spawned from satan himself, not the product from a crappy white thrash childhood. The whole concept of the original that made it so terrifing was lost. The only redeeming scene in Zombie's version was when Michael Myers brutally murdered the bully from school.

NunianVonFuch

Tusky wrote:

Surprisingly, I really enjoyed it. Thought the first half was excellent and the second was quite good. You could pick plenty of holes in it but I wont..except one that has already been mentioned.

How did Michael know it was his sister?!?!

Apparently in the workprint

When Laurie drops the envelope off at the Myers' house, Michael sniffs it.

So he's part bloodhound too!

(sigh) Such a stupid movie.

faceman

watched this last nite, and i know im goin to be open to abuse BUT i thought the film was awful. This will sound odd but i found myers totally watered down and nonsensical.

the first half was good in moments however it went on too long and the transition of angst ridden boy to psychopathic murderer just happened. For God sake, no effort was made other than to try make the audience feel sympathetic to the boy. (Which was pointless as it went out the window as soon as he killed his first victim.) i lost interest with him after that.

The friendly prison guard - wtf? It served as a pointless plot device unless it was to prove that myers was a total souless nut job, but we knew that already ffs!

plot holes aside (of which there are many) the laurie thing was inexcusable. until it was revealed i assumed that she reminded michael of his older sister and he wanted to kill her.

myers had no mistique. His backstory was boring and beyond belief, therefore it was difficult to attach to the story. I looked at my watch regularly waiting for the overlong 2 hours running time to expire.

on the plus side, some of the deaths are well done and the soundtrack is very atmospheric.

No patch on the original and it offered nothing new to the story.

sorry guys.

senordingdong

lil'princess wrote:

Necromomicon wrote:

It's obvious that Rob Zombie had no understanding of the original. Michael Myers was supposed to be pure evil, spawned from satan himself, not the product from a crappy white thrash childhood.

Okay, this is something I would disagree with.
As a race I would like to thinnk we are past the supersticious crap and can stop believeing that someone who murders another person is a devil worshipper or infact the son if belzebub.
He took an idea which is now. short of actual demonic possesion, dated, and replaced it with a believable back story that would lead someone to be that full of hatred.

NunianVonFuch

senordingdong wrote:

Okay, this is something I would disagree with.
As a race I would like to thinnk we are past the supersticious crap and can stop believeing that someone who murders another person is a devil worshipper or infact the son if belzebub.

That is fine and I agree with that but I don't think it really applies here as we still have to believe you can only be a serial killer if you have a horribly cliched childhood.

senordingdong wrote:

He took an idea which is now. short of actual demonic possesion, dated, and replaced it with a believable back story that would lead someone to be that full of hatred.

Even though every two seconds all the other characters referred to him as the bogeyman? Rob didn't really know what he was doing and ended up wanting it both ways, some scenes showing how real and earthed the character is and others making him out to be some kind of superhuman. I don't see how its believable that a wussy kid turns into a hulking WCW monster. Its not like we see him buffing up, all he does is make masks. And he's still an unstoppable killer with supernatural powers as he gets shot several times, stabbed with a huge knife in the neck but can still do some deconstruction work at the end :rolleyes:

senordingdong

NunianVonFuch wrote:

That is fine and I agree with that but I don't think it really applies here as we still have to believe you can only be a serial killer if you have a horribly cliched childhood.

Not really, since it has more often then not been shown that an awful lot of killers have become killers because of their dodgy upbringings.

And he's still an unstoppable killer with supernatural powers as he gets shot several times, stabbed with a huge knife in the neck but can still do some deconstruction work at the end :rolleyes:

I'd be pretty sure that this is something he felt he couldn't leave out of the remake. Just like all the other cliches of girls screaming, horny teenagers getting stabbed and the man with a knife being able to withstand a hail of bullets.

faceman

senordingdong wrote:

Not really, since it has more often then not been shown that an awful lot of killers have become killers because of their dodgy upbringings.


I'd be pretty sure that this is something he felt he couldn't leave out of the remake. Just like all the other cliches of girls screaming, horny teenagers getting stabbed and the man with a knife being able to withstand a hail of bullets.

im sure others agree, but there was nothing in myers childhood that i found believable enough that would have turned him into what it did. Thats why i prefer the way the original left all that to the imagination.

NunianVonFuch

faceman wrote:

im sure others agree, but there was nothing in myers childhood that i found believable enough that would have turned him into what it did. Thats why i prefer the way the original left all that to the imagination.

But his mother was a stripper! So he must KILL ALL!!!!

senordingdong

faceman wrote:

im sure others agree, but there was nothing in myers childhood that i found believable enough that would have turned him into what it did. Thats why i prefer the way the original left all that to the imagination.

Maybe nothing extreme but he got bullied in school and treated bad when he got home and lived a horrible upbringing.

Having watched the film twice now I have to admit that I really did enjoy it. The first half was pure Zombie, the dialogue, the realistic violence and it's impact all showed that Zombie is a genuinely talented film maker.

The second half, will nowhere near as decent as the first was still well done. I think that by showing Michael in two differant lights humanised him somewhat. The ending felt very rushed, the abruptness of it had me believing that there would be an after credits scene.

McDowell was fantastic as Loomis and the supporting cast was also spot on. While it was fantastic fun to see so many horror icons on screen, it was also a bit annoying as many of them had what amount to little more than blink and you'll miss them cameos. Udo Kier had two lines and then he was gone.

Jello

I quite enjoyed it. Not a patch on the origional of course but I think Zombie did an allright job.

Canis Lupus

faceman wrote:

im sure others agree, but there was nothing in myers childhood that i found believable enough that would have turned him into what it did. Thats why i prefer the way the original left all that to the imagination.

I'd be with you on this. The way I looked at it wasn't his childhood but rather he killed or hurt and liked it/got off on it so carried on. It wasn't something that was caused by his childhood in my eyes.

TO be quite honest tho I'm thinking of going to that mental hospital cos he went from chubby stroppy american kid to a 7 foot brick wall who can break chains with his arms. There must be something ****ing mega in the meals they serve there.

Savman

Maybe I missed something, were the Halloween movies supposed to be scripted masterpieces of modern cinema?
I quite liked this new movie, for the simple reason it puts Michael Myers back on the screen because there's something about that mask, walk and general menacing demeanour that will never lose its ability to scare.

No Halloween film will ever answer all the questions, even if they got Spielberg to direct the damn thing.

I dunno what people expect? How do you explain why Myers became the way he did? I have no idea. But I'm sure there'll be another movie or ten that'll delve further into it.

More please.:)