jye4ever
Broke and happy
RLM is 100% correct this movie is the worst in the series which is bat **** crazy when you think about it.
JLC sounds like an idiot lol
JLC sounds like an idiot lol
Halloween (October 19th, 2018)
- Thread starter Johnny Utah
- Start date
Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:
greygoose
Super Freak
Felt like a parody in some moments.
I think they had some good ideas for this movie, but tried to pack too much into one film. I think the ideas they pursued would have been stronger spread out over 2 films.
Halloween 2018 gave a proper amount of time to explore Laurie's mindset and the impact she has had on her family and everything that came after that felt natural and flowed.
Kills takes and approach like, hey, you know Laurie was traumatized, these people were there too, just accept that they're going to fly off the rails like she did. It feels rushed, unnatural and forced.
It would have gone a long way if, instead of focusing on the silly talent show and goings on of the bar, they just had a scene of the 4 "survivors" sitting around talking about their experiences and giving some insight into the effect it had on them.
Then, when the news reports show up about the new murders, don't have them immediately rush to forming a mob, but have them go back to their seats and use flashbacks and things to create a build up of "not again" in their minds, especially Tommy. Imagine if they showed highlights from '78 and just as they show when Michael appears at the top of the stairs and Tommy says you can't kill the boogeyman, they cut back to present Tom and he launches from that.
The movie plays like they were focused on what goes on once there is a mob, without too much thought put into setting up the mob.
ironwez20
Super Freak
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2008
- Messages
- 27,018
- Reaction score
- 5,083
Heads up. Halloween kills is being deemed homophobic cause he killed a gay couple
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/amphtml/halloween-bone-chilling-villain-michael-185822468.html
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/amphtml/halloween-bone-chilling-villain-michael-185822468.html
punisher1974
Super Freak
I just figured it showed Michael as killing whoever was really in his path. He killed the boy in 2018 when he escaped the transfer bus. People are too sensitive nowadays.
Isn’t Michael just being inclusive?
Just watched this tonight and wow was it bad. They can do what they want on a plot level, like whatever I’m along for the ride, but man it was just bad on a technical level and looked super cheap, like something made directly for Shudder. Bad lighting, bad cinematography, bad acting, bad editing. Hard to believe it was the same people behind the 2018 movie, which wasn’t anything amazing but it at least seemed like a competently made film. Won’t lie, I forced myself to finish it just to watch the RLM review afterwards which was way more entertaining.
greygoose
Super Freak
jye4ever
Broke and happy
Also H2
medicomsucks
Super Freak
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2012
- Messages
- 3,254
- Reaction score
- 686
i dont know this for sure but I think the mask of shatner is from a 1974 film "devil's rain". You can watch it on youtube and its actually pretty good but I like slightly over the top horror flicks.
The original Michael Myers mask in 1978 was a Don Post Captain Kirk mask that was bought at the store, the sideburns pulled off, the hair painted dark and the face painted white. The same mask was used again for Halloween II in 1981 and by 1988's Halloween 4, it was unusable.
I've heard that the Halloween 4 mask is also a Don Post Kirk but it wasn't modified in the same way so it doesn't look as good.
I've heard that the Halloween 4 mask is also a Don Post Kirk but it wasn't modified in the same way so it doesn't look as good.
medicomsucks
Super Freak
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2012
- Messages
- 3,254
- Reaction score
- 686
Yes, if you watch devils rain you will see what I mean. Allegedly they almost picked a clown mask and a Spock mask. There is just one shot in devils rain that makes me wonder....
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2014
- Messages
- 13,003
- Reaction score
- 4,489
Michael Myers been murdering innocent people for decades, but now he is phobic...well that is where Twitter draws the line. People can't actually be serious with hot takes like this, I wish it was just a grift to get clicks. But sadly I think people are just genuinely this stupid and out of touch with reality.
Same reason people were in uproar about killing firefighters in a movie where a child is slaughtered.
Blood Electricity
Super Freak
So i rewatched this and whatever narrative intention was kinda clicking a bit better. I definitely liked it more the second time. I still get the criticism but this is by no means the worst sequel imo.
also rewatched the original 78 in theatres tonight (fantastic) and I had a thought about Michael’s transcendence idea. Becoming more than a normal man because of a collective fear brought on by his rampage but the director saying thats Lauries interpretation. this might be silly but what if it is literally a ratio of deaths to damage he can take. Like Whatever is going on with him as being something built up overtime.
first of all, I forgot how much heavy breathing and grunting he does in that first 78 movie. Especially after cruising around and stalking laurie, tommy and her friends all day…it comes across as pretty overtly sexual. Obviously his topless sister being his first victim and him having a pained but slightly confused look on his face when his parents find him as well. So bare with me, because im not saying hes getting his Rocks off But rather if you look at sex as being narratively a sort of loss of innocence that is brought on by a biological urge. Lets say Michael is wired differently and his urge is murderous and the result isnt a loss of innocence but a mirror of it. Like a gaining of this otherworldly devil-soulless killing machine quality he is growing more and more into. When hes 6 and kills his sister its the triggering event. When hes 21 and he kills in 78 we see the heavy breathing and grunting Michael. But by the time 2018 rolls around he is full on silent apex predator, having fun, loving his job. He’s improving and becoming more unkillable.
Murdering his sister somehow kicked off this whole boogeyman thing. He kills one, hibernates 15 years and chooses the perfect time to escape. Kills 3 or 4, then the flashback shows us after those
Events in the first film he basically gives himself up. hibernates for 40 years then goes on a rampage of 11 or so and takes a hell of a lot of damage, keeps going. His 2018 halloween night kill count has got to be pretty high…11+ 23= 34 or something?
My theory is whichever inevitably unnamed force that explains the inexplicable Shape is a transcendence built on kills then hibernation and results in inhumane abilities.
also rewatched the original 78 in theatres tonight (fantastic) and I had a thought about Michael’s transcendence idea. Becoming more than a normal man because of a collective fear brought on by his rampage but the director saying thats Lauries interpretation. this might be silly but what if it is literally a ratio of deaths to damage he can take. Like Whatever is going on with him as being something built up overtime.
first of all, I forgot how much heavy breathing and grunting he does in that first 78 movie. Especially after cruising around and stalking laurie, tommy and her friends all day…it comes across as pretty overtly sexual. Obviously his topless sister being his first victim and him having a pained but slightly confused look on his face when his parents find him as well. So bare with me, because im not saying hes getting his Rocks off But rather if you look at sex as being narratively a sort of loss of innocence that is brought on by a biological urge. Lets say Michael is wired differently and his urge is murderous and the result isnt a loss of innocence but a mirror of it. Like a gaining of this otherworldly devil-soulless killing machine quality he is growing more and more into. When hes 6 and kills his sister its the triggering event. When hes 21 and he kills in 78 we see the heavy breathing and grunting Michael. But by the time 2018 rolls around he is full on silent apex predator, having fun, loving his job. He’s improving and becoming more unkillable.
Murdering his sister somehow kicked off this whole boogeyman thing. He kills one, hibernates 15 years and chooses the perfect time to escape. Kills 3 or 4, then the flashback shows us after those
Events in the first film he basically gives himself up. hibernates for 40 years then goes on a rampage of 11 or so and takes a hell of a lot of damage, keeps going. His 2018 halloween night kill count has got to be pretty high…11+ 23= 34 or something?
My theory is whichever inevitably unnamed force that explains the inexplicable Shape is a transcendence built on kills then hibernation and results in inhumane abilities.
Last edited:
I'm very late to the game, but saw this over the weekend. I share JYE's opinion about this film. Did not like it.
I didn't have a firm expectation going in, and don't necessarily have a strong opinion about what a good Halloween movie should be. But it failed on many levels for me.
The core story message about mob violence was convoluted and inconsistent. Also, the idea that Michael is a representation of evil and grows in physical strength and durability as people get angrier, to essentially become Superman doesn't work for me. Maybe that is bias from the earlier films creeping in, but surviving several bullets is one thing. Surviving being beaten over and over, stabbed many times, shot, etc., without even being serious injured or slowed down? I guess he's zombie Jason Voorhees now.
Acting was serviceable. Casting was fine for the most part. But the characters were generally uninteresting and unlikable. Par for the course with many horror movies, but that could have been a silver lining here. I thought the 2018 movie was well done, and it was a whole different story here.
About half-way through the movie I thought it was OK and was curious where it would go. But I ultimately walked away from this one with a bad taste in my mouth. It didn't work. As it stands, the only Halloween movies I really like are the first one, and then a bit behind that the 2018 reboot and Halloween 2 (full disclosure--I never saw the Zombie movies and have no intention to). I don't care much for any of the others, though some had fun moments, even Halloween 3. I'm not sure I can think of anything worth revisiting down the line with Halloween Kills, though. I saw the bargain basement budgeted Tammy and the T-Rex recently, and was surprised to step back and realize how much better that film was than this one. . .
On a brighter note, here is the director of Halloween, Michael Myers himself, and the creator of the original Halloween mask with a tune to soothe the savage beast.
I didn't have a firm expectation going in, and don't necessarily have a strong opinion about what a good Halloween movie should be. But it failed on many levels for me.
The core story message about mob violence was convoluted and inconsistent. Also, the idea that Michael is a representation of evil and grows in physical strength and durability as people get angrier, to essentially become Superman doesn't work for me. Maybe that is bias from the earlier films creeping in, but surviving several bullets is one thing. Surviving being beaten over and over, stabbed many times, shot, etc., without even being serious injured or slowed down? I guess he's zombie Jason Voorhees now.
Acting was serviceable. Casting was fine for the most part. But the characters were generally uninteresting and unlikable. Par for the course with many horror movies, but that could have been a silver lining here. I thought the 2018 movie was well done, and it was a whole different story here.
About half-way through the movie I thought it was OK and was curious where it would go. But I ultimately walked away from this one with a bad taste in my mouth. It didn't work. As it stands, the only Halloween movies I really like are the first one, and then a bit behind that the 2018 reboot and Halloween 2 (full disclosure--I never saw the Zombie movies and have no intention to). I don't care much for any of the others, though some had fun moments, even Halloween 3. I'm not sure I can think of anything worth revisiting down the line with Halloween Kills, though. I saw the bargain basement budgeted Tammy and the T-Rex recently, and was surprised to step back and realize how much better that film was than this one. . .
On a brighter note, here is the director of Halloween, Michael Myers himself, and the creator of the original Halloween mask with a tune to soothe the savage beast.
Watched Halloween Kills on HBO Max last night.
I didn't like that they made the leap from Michael being a normal super hardy human being to full on unkillable supernatural entity.
I know that Jason started out as a normal guy before being some sort of zombie dude but IIRC they did a proper transition by having a bolt of lightning resurrect his corpse as a way of fairly indicating to the audience that the rules have changed. With Freddy they clearly established that he was also normal, then died, then came back as a killer ghost in people's dreams. But with Halloween they're just saying he's been an indestructible force of nature all along? That still bleeds? And feels pain? Come on.
It really felt like a cheat to me. Like the writers just gave him a new power or ability at a moment's notice any time a scene called for a "whoa" moment. It's like a movie with a "twist" ending that had no foreshadowing of any kind for said twist for the sole purpose of robbing the audience of having any chance at figuring it out in advance. That's just cheating to me.
Now I admit to not being an expert on Halloween "lore." But I have watched the first three films multiple times and whichever one had Josh Hartnett in it. And even though it's been years since I saw any of the sequels wasn't Michael killed canonically in both H2 and the Hartnett one? And each time they do a new sequel they just retcon everything after 1978 in order to keep him alive right? So in H2 he dies (because he's a normal human), in H20(?) he gets his head chopped off (because he's a normal human) but in HK they just change all the previous rules and say he's Part V Jason Voorhees with no segue whatsoever into such a persona? That's lame IMO.
Scrolling back in this thread I see that some of you always interpreted Michael as being supernatural. I don't agree with that, people in real life have survived much worse than being shot six times and falling out a window. There are people who have survived 20 and even 30 gunshot wounds! So of course a guy in a movie surviving six isn't out of bounds.
Also I don't like when characters go through hell in a horror movie and then are unceremoniously offed in a sequel. That just comes across as mean spirited to me and there were definitely characters in HK that got slaughtered that I felt had "earned" being a survivor. Even in the darkest films I want there to be an element of catharsis at the end and HK just felt like gory nihilism to me. I guess if this is going to be a true trilogy then a more satisfying finale can still come though.
I did actually like a lot of the characters despite them being complete idiots more often than not. I also thought the actor portraying Michael himself did a really good job and he was filmed really well. I think my favorite moment was when "Little John" saw Michael staring out the window and had that brief moment of trying to connect with him. That scene at least worked on all levels for me. It was staged really cool, I was sympathetic toward Little John, and even found myself hoping to learn more about what was going on in Michael's head in that moment and whether or not he could actually be reached.
But the other stuff just ruined it. Every other horror/thriller with relentless "unkillable" bad guys still has rules that they follow, whether it's Freddy, Jason, 78 Myers, Terminator, Predator, Bruce the Shark, etc., but for this one the writers just typed in the cheat code to put Michael in "God mode" without any rhyme or reason and that to me was really lame.
I didn't like that they made the leap from Michael being a normal super hardy human being to full on unkillable supernatural entity.
I know that Jason started out as a normal guy before being some sort of zombie dude but IIRC they did a proper transition by having a bolt of lightning resurrect his corpse as a way of fairly indicating to the audience that the rules have changed. With Freddy they clearly established that he was also normal, then died, then came back as a killer ghost in people's dreams. But with Halloween they're just saying he's been an indestructible force of nature all along? That still bleeds? And feels pain? Come on.
It really felt like a cheat to me. Like the writers just gave him a new power or ability at a moment's notice any time a scene called for a "whoa" moment. It's like a movie with a "twist" ending that had no foreshadowing of any kind for said twist for the sole purpose of robbing the audience of having any chance at figuring it out in advance. That's just cheating to me.
Now I admit to not being an expert on Halloween "lore." But I have watched the first three films multiple times and whichever one had Josh Hartnett in it. And even though it's been years since I saw any of the sequels wasn't Michael killed canonically in both H2 and the Hartnett one? And each time they do a new sequel they just retcon everything after 1978 in order to keep him alive right? So in H2 he dies (because he's a normal human), in H20(?) he gets his head chopped off (because he's a normal human) but in HK they just change all the previous rules and say he's Part V Jason Voorhees with no segue whatsoever into such a persona? That's lame IMO.
Scrolling back in this thread I see that some of you always interpreted Michael as being supernatural. I don't agree with that, people in real life have survived much worse than being shot six times and falling out a window. There are people who have survived 20 and even 30 gunshot wounds! So of course a guy in a movie surviving six isn't out of bounds.
Also I don't like when characters go through hell in a horror movie and then are unceremoniously offed in a sequel. That just comes across as mean spirited to me and there were definitely characters in HK that got slaughtered that I felt had "earned" being a survivor. Even in the darkest films I want there to be an element of catharsis at the end and HK just felt like gory nihilism to me. I guess if this is going to be a true trilogy then a more satisfying finale can still come though.
I did actually like a lot of the characters despite them being complete idiots more often than not. I also thought the actor portraying Michael himself did a really good job and he was filmed really well. I think my favorite moment was when "Little John" saw Michael staring out the window and had that brief moment of trying to connect with him. That scene at least worked on all levels for me. It was staged really cool, I was sympathetic toward Little John, and even found myself hoping to learn more about what was going on in Michael's head in that moment and whether or not he could actually be reached.
But the other stuff just ruined it. Every other horror/thriller with relentless "unkillable" bad guys still has rules that they follow, whether it's Freddy, Jason, 78 Myers, Terminator, Predator, Bruce the Shark, etc., but for this one the writers just typed in the cheat code to put Michael in "God mode" without any rhyme or reason and that to me was really lame.
BeefEaster
Super Freak
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2013
- Messages
- 1,072
- Reaction score
- 365
Similar threads
