The Horror Thread II: The Return

1116117119121122130

Comments

  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 21,980
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    I think I've only seen the first two, will have to inevitably torture myself with the more recent two at some point then. I think I liked the second more than the first but it's been so long since I saw either one.

    The only reason why you would suffer the pains of this new film is so we can rant about it together. It feels like a film made by The Asylum, of Sci Fi Channel or some such thing.
  • Posts: 11,482
    Halloween Ends is sounding as trash as I expected / was spoiled it would be. To my credit though I immediately had bad feelings about this one before anything even got out. I will see it tomorrow regardless and report back then…
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,321
    I'm not super invested in the Halloween franchise, seen a couple of them... I sort of thought all these slashers were meant to be B movie popcorn fare... this is a genuine question and not an attempt to be snarky, but what do you figure makes a good Halloween film good? Or maybe, what makes the more recent ones bad Halloween films?
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 38,224
    FoxRox wrote: »
    Halloween Ends is sounding as trash as I expected / was spoiled it would be. To my credit though I immediately had bad feelings about this one before anything even got out. I will see it tomorrow regardless and report back then…

    Feel free to spoil it for me once you do. We plan on watching it on Peacock Friday, not expecting much of anything. I've not cared for this new trilogy at all really. The first film was alright but Kills was so horrible.
  • Posts: 11,482
    I'm not super invested in the Halloween franchise, seen a couple of them... I sort of thought all these slashers were meant to be B movie popcorn fare... this is a genuine question and not an attempt to be snarky, but what do you figure makes a good Halloween film good? Or maybe, what makes the more recent ones bad Halloween films?

    Personally I enjoyed both of the last two Halloween films, so I can’t speak on that end. I seem to be one of the only people who considers “Kills” among the best in the franchise so I’m probably not a good source. I think in general though the worst entries take liberties with what are perceived core concepts / stories, like eliminating Michael’s mystique in Rob Zombie’s remake or the horrendous plot twist at the start of Resurrection. Without trying to spoil, sounds to me like Michael is going to get seriously shortchanged in Ends…
  • Creasy47 wrote: »
    FoxRox wrote: »
    Halloween Ends is sounding as trash as I expected / was spoiled it would be. To my credit though I immediately had bad feelings about this one before anything even got out. I will see it tomorrow regardless and report back then…

    Feel free to spoil it for me once you do. We plan on watching it on Peacock Friday, not expecting much of anything. I've not cared for this new trilogy at all really. The first film was alright but Kills was so horrible.

    Same, though I was never really on board with the 2018 Halloween either.

    What makes a great Halloween film? Atmosphere and the KISS principle ("Keep it simple, stupid"). Sure, the more elaborate family connections started with Halloween 2 and Halloween 4, but the point wasn't belabored in those films. They were still steeped in that irreplaceable 80s atmosphere and simply about Michael Myers stalking the people of Haddonfield. You don't need anything more complicated than that. Just stick to that core premise and dial the horror and the atmosphere up high. And keep the comedy to a minimum. It's never done well in these films.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 7,566
    I loved 2018 and didn't mind Kills too much (it was dumb, but it was fun).

    My biggest nitpick with the new trilogy is the inconsistent portrayal of Michael. Not in terms of his acts of violence or his demeanor, but whether he's a real, tangible person who is simply evil or whether he's a supernatural force.

    2018 struck the perfect balance between the two approaches, similar to how Carpenter originally pulled it off. Michael was a murderous sociopath driven by the thrill of the stalk, with an air of mystery around him that gave him added weight and left questions about what was really happening in his head. It felt like he could be defeated and that gave the film added drama.

    Kills went too far in making him indestructible; he survived so many things that even on their own would be fatal, and did so without any impact on his killing ability. He gets shot twice, stabbed with a pitchfork, beaten by a mob, and then knifed through the spine, all while having almost no left hand. So that means he must be supernatural, right?

    Now, with Ends, they're going back towards the previous approach and it almost seems totally ridiculous that Laurie could ever take him on. It seems like they're angling towards her defeating him (I haven't seen it so can't confirm), which means there'll likely have to be a massive contrivance in place.
  • edited October 2022 Posts: 11,482
    I must vehemently disagree with the idea of Michael being “too indestructible.” I should have thought the ending of the original would have been enough to suggest he is more than just a man.

    EDIT: @Creasy47 I can do an in-depth spoiler tagged thing, should be fun!
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    edited October 2022 Posts: 7,566
    FoxRox wrote: »
    I must vehemently disagree with the idea of Michael being “too indestructible.” I should have thought the ending of the original would have been enough to suggest he is more than just a man.

    Key word there being "suggest". Kills doesn't suggest, it pretty much outright states it both through action and dialogue in ways just as egregious as the latter installments in the original timeline.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    edited October 2022 Posts: 7,321
    Assuming for the sake of argument Michael is a supernatural being who can survive otherwise fatal wounds... would it be cooler or lamer if he could be killed, but when he was, someone else from the town was involuntarily compelled to take up the mantle?
  • Posts: 11,482
    FoxRox wrote: »
    I must vehemently disagree with the idea of Michael being “too indestructible.” I should have thought the ending of the original would have been enough to suggest he is more than just a man.

    Key word there being "suggest". Kills doesn't suggest, it pretty much outright states it both through action and dialogue in ways just as egregious as the latter installments in the original timeline.

    Just because it’s presented more subtly in the original doesn’t make it any more / less ridiculous the guy survived 6+ gunshots and whatever else hits him.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    edited October 2022 Posts: 7,566
    FoxRox wrote: »
    FoxRox wrote: »
    I must vehemently disagree with the idea of Michael being “too indestructible.” I should have thought the ending of the original would have been enough to suggest he is more than just a man.

    Key word there being "suggest". Kills doesn't suggest, it pretty much outright states it both through action and dialogue in ways just as egregious as the latter installments in the original timeline.

    Just because it’s presented more subtly in the original doesn’t make it any more / less ridiculous the guy survived 6+ gunshots and whatever else hits him.

    It kind of does though. Quite a difference between that ending finished with "I think that was the boogeyman" and scenes with the above list, accompanied by a narration that says "this guy isn't a man." Good writing and also good direction come into it.

    Gordon Green did very well with the 2018 film in that regard, but less so with the follow-up even if it was still enjoyable in a vicious kind of way. That he had Michael moving around in the flashbacks without any sign of injury is another sign that he couldn't quite decide what he wanted to do over three films (well, that and the complete change of pace for the third film, which was initially supposed to be set on the same night as the previous two). It would have been much better had Michael's police capture been left to the imagination.

    Fundamentally, my main point is that it renders the Laurie-Michael showdown Mark II a bit silly when it wasn't in the previous films.
  • Posts: 11,482
    Well clearly I’m the stupid one since I’m alone in enjoying it so nothing I could say here matters.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 7,566
    FoxRox wrote: »
    Well clearly I’m the stupid one since I’m alone in enjoying it so nothing I could say here matters.

    Nobody said you were stupid. I also said I had fun with it. It's right there in my original post.

    Sheeesh.
  • FoxRox wrote: »
    Well clearly I’m the stupid one since I’m alone in enjoying it so nothing I could say here matters.

    Sorry if you misinterpreted my KISS acronym. That's just a common expression that was coined by a Lockheed engineer and picked up and popularized by the US Navy and Air Force. The "stupid" wasn't aimed at anyone in this thread. I had actually only read Creasy's post when I replied anyway.
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited October 2022 Posts: 5,374
    I personality found both 2018 and Kills just a bit meh. Not awful, not great. Just meh. I do think both have interesting elements, and I'm sure Ends will too, but I just wonder if all of those interesting elements weren't separated between three films, and were made into one cohesive story?
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 38,224
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    FoxRox wrote: »
    Halloween Ends is sounding as trash as I expected / was spoiled it would be. To my credit though I immediately had bad feelings about this one before anything even got out. I will see it tomorrow regardless and report back then…

    Feel free to spoil it for me once you do. We plan on watching it on Peacock Friday, not expecting much of anything. I've not cared for this new trilogy at all really. The first film was alright but Kills was so horrible.

    Same, though I was never really on board with the 2018 Halloween either.

    What makes a great Halloween film? Atmosphere and the KISS principle ("Keep it simple, stupid"). Sure, the more elaborate family connections started with Halloween 2 and Halloween 4, but the point wasn't belabored in those films. They were still steeped in that irreplaceable 80s atmosphere and simply about Michael Myers stalking the people of Haddonfield. You don't need anything more complicated than that. Just stick to that core premise and dial the horror and the atmosphere up high. And keep the comedy to a minimum. It's never done well in these films.

    That's what's crazy to me: keep with the KISS principle for virtually any of these franchises still trying to capitalize with some success and you're gold. They're too ambitious or trying to shake up the formula in such needless ways. Look at how convoluted the Terminator series has gotten or how outlandish and inconsistent Halloween has become.
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe Moderator
    Posts: 13,100
    I thought 2018 was ok, though I don't like this trilogy's take on Laurie. Kills got moronic at times, but has the best version of Michael Myers. Right from the off Michael was angry, and the whole town was going to feel his wrath.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 38,224
    I thought 2018 was ok, though I don't like this trilogy's take on Laurie. Kills got moronic at times, but has the best version of Michael Myers. Right from the off Michael was angry, and the whole town was going to feel his wrath.

    I never wanted to see Laurie as wasted as she was in Resurrection but they came pretty close in the last one.

    And with the film officially releasing today in theaters, it sounds like those leaks are 100% confirmed now and I'm expecting a dumpster fire of a trilogy ender as a result.
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe Moderator
    Posts: 13,100
    If those leaks are true, calling it a dumpster fire is very kind. #-o
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 38,224
    If those leaks are true, calling it a dumpster fire is very kind. #-o

    Yes, about as kind as one can be. I'm honestly kind of in disbelief that that's the route they'd take. It's clear that this trilogy was poorly thought out in advance.
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe Moderator
    Posts: 13,100
    Spoiler review (for what it's worth, it's a random review, so I know nothing on this fella views in general)...



    It sounds far, far worse than I thought.
  • Creasy47 wrote: »
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    FoxRox wrote: »
    Halloween Ends is sounding as trash as I expected / was spoiled it would be. To my credit though I immediately had bad feelings about this one before anything even got out. I will see it tomorrow regardless and report back then…

    Feel free to spoil it for me once you do. We plan on watching it on Peacock Friday, not expecting much of anything. I've not cared for this new trilogy at all really. The first film was alright but Kills was so horrible.

    Same, though I was never really on board with the 2018 Halloween either.

    What makes a great Halloween film? Atmosphere and the KISS principle ("Keep it simple, stupid"). Sure, the more elaborate family connections started with Halloween 2 and Halloween 4, but the point wasn't belabored in those films. They were still steeped in that irreplaceable 80s atmosphere and simply about Michael Myers stalking the people of Haddonfield. You don't need anything more complicated than that. Just stick to that core premise and dial the horror and the atmosphere up high. And keep the comedy to a minimum. It's never done well in these films.

    That's what's crazy to me: keep with the KISS principle for virtually any of these franchises still trying to capitalize with some success and you're gold. They're too ambitious or trying to shake up the formula in such needless ways. Look at how convoluted the Terminator series has gotten or how outlandish and inconsistent Halloween has become.

    Yup, the further along a franchise goes, the farther it usually gets from what made it great in the first place.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 38,224
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    FoxRox wrote: »
    Halloween Ends is sounding as trash as I expected / was spoiled it would be. To my credit though I immediately had bad feelings about this one before anything even got out. I will see it tomorrow regardless and report back then…

    Feel free to spoil it for me once you do. We plan on watching it on Peacock Friday, not expecting much of anything. I've not cared for this new trilogy at all really. The first film was alright but Kills was so horrible.

    Same, though I was never really on board with the 2018 Halloween either.

    What makes a great Halloween film? Atmosphere and the KISS principle ("Keep it simple, stupid"). Sure, the more elaborate family connections started with Halloween 2 and Halloween 4, but the point wasn't belabored in those films. They were still steeped in that irreplaceable 80s atmosphere and simply about Michael Myers stalking the people of Haddonfield. You don't need anything more complicated than that. Just stick to that core premise and dial the horror and the atmosphere up high. And keep the comedy to a minimum. It's never done well in these films.

    That's what's crazy to me: keep with the KISS principle for virtually any of these franchises still trying to capitalize with some success and you're gold. They're too ambitious or trying to shake up the formula in such needless ways. Look at how convoluted the Terminator series has gotten or how outlandish and inconsistent Halloween has become.

    Yup, the further along a franchise goes, the farther it usually gets from what made it great in the first place.

    All while they praise "getting back to the roots" or upholding the original as the blueprint for their new one, which ends up the complete opposite of what it accomplished usually.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,321
    Gamespot gave Ends 3/10.
  • RemingtonRemington I'll do anything for a woman with a knife.
    Posts: 1,521
    Halloween is my favorite franchise after Bond so I was at least intrigued about this one despite not really caring for 2018 and hating Kills.

    It was okay. I won't be in a rush to buy it or and I don't necessarily agree with the direction they decided to go in but I didn't hate it.

    2.5/5
  • edited October 2022 Posts: 11,482
    Alright, back from the theater. For anyone who cares, I'm going to post a spoiler-filled review, then my updated ranking of all 13 films in the franchise. What a ride...

    It's hard to know where to even begin with this one. I guess the first point I'll make is that for my personal tastes, this movie proved to me I take more of an issue with Michael Myers being sidelined than Laurie Strode, which is what happens in a reversal of "Kills." One of the biggest complaints of "Kills" was Laurie's sidelining, and while I do love Jamie Lee Curtis and Laurie's character, this just doesn't bother me the way it does when it happens to Michael. I can envision Halloween movies with Michael without Laurie, but not the other way around. Before anyone jumps on me to say "but you have Season of the Witch ranked so high, and that doesn't have Michael!," it's different when he's still an actual part of the plot and being shortchanged like he is in "Ends."

    Not only is Michael's screen time in "Ends" tragically limited, but the moments / portrayal he gets are among the worst stuff in the franchise. After the badass display of fury and endurance we saw in "Kills," he's reduced to a shell of his former self, not even able to fend off the unintimidating Corey character (PLENTY more on him later) from taking his most prized possession, his mask. This Michael isn't my Michael. This Michael SPARES Corey when he ends up in the sewer. Are you joking? If Michael Myers is evil incarnate, he wouldn't spare ANYONE in his clutches like he had Corey in. The dramatic eye-to-eye thing between them was so silly. I refuse to buy Michael was cool with sparing Corey, taking him in as an apprentice figure, and worst of all, after Corey steals his mask and Michael finally catches up to him at the end, he delivers a simple, lame, neck-snap death to him. Really. What should have been the most epic death up to that point. Michael Myers never felt more un-scary, unthreatening, and disappointing than in this movie.

    I might as well knock off the stuff on Corey now. I won't lie, the opening of this movie was pretty interesting and solid, and Corey's character was pretty interesting for the setup content. But to turn him into the bad guy / killer was just dumb. There's never a point where I bought it, and it's overused that characters like him have to become evil. Speaking of "evil," he isn't even close to being believable as the apprentice of Michael, either. He's still just a guy, who screams when he gets hurt and carries none of the mystique or strength of Michael. We want to see MICHAEL MYERS doing the bad guy stuff in a Michael Myers Halloween movie, not some Joker-ripoff dude.

    Rohan Campbell does all he can with Corey, I really don't blame the actor at all on this one. The writing is atrocious though; I cannot even believe they had him out loud say "if I can't have her, no one will" and treat it seriously. This is regarding Allyson, who starts off a likeable character in the movie but becomes overly mean towards Laurie. The focus on romance and drama feels so un-Halloween, it hurts. Tonally, the mark is completely missed. Just way, way too much attention given to the things that don't matter. Not that Corey's character lacked any potential at all, but having him be the biggest focus and take away from Michael and Laurie is an utterly baffling idea for the "final film of the franchise," or at least realistically just this timeline. As a spinoff or whatever, I'd be a lot less hostile about the whole thing, but the only real "finale" feel we get is in the final ten minutes.

    To move on to the few positives, I'll say Jamie Lee Curtis as Laurie Strode is the definite best part. The traps she sets for Corey and Michael are terrific, and she remains as likeable and badass as ever. I found it really unfair and dumb though how characters around Haddonfield were bullying her. Anyway, she clearly gives it her all in this final turn, and that's still wonderful to see. John Carpenter still delivers the goods in the music department. The film looks good, the opening credits were cool as always, and when the kills come, they're usually pretty good, the biggest highlight being the DJ's death.

    I've said most of the main things I wanted to about this one. Knowing the worst stuff to come in advance still didn't do a lot to soften the blow of how disappointing and rough this movie was. I can't call it the very worst of the franchise, as I did still find Resurrection and Zombie's sophomore offering to be even more miserable collectively, but it definitely belongs near the bottom of the pile for me. I'm glad to see some people are enjoying it more than me, and I have nothing against anyone who is happy with what they got. For me, it just feels so... wrong, and misguided as the big, final Halloween episode, at least for this latest timeline. Subversive just for the sake of being subversive. I've seen comparisons to the new Star Wars trilogy, and I definitely get it. There was no clear sense of direction, and each of the trilogy entries really feel more like three separate pictures. It's just such a shame as I really, really enjoyed the first two in this new timeline, but it really got screwed up for me in this ending.

    TLDR: It's very bad.

    Some basic thoughts before final rankings regarding all the movies: the original is unbeatable, plain and simple, one of my all-time favorite movies even beyond just horror. Season of the Witch is the only other one that can stand completely on its own, and I simply love it for what it is. Kills and '18 are both very solid for my money, did a lot of great stuff and were handily my favorite Michael sequels. I see H20 get a lot of hate, but I dig it, especially the ending which I thought was still the coolest "resolution" between Laurie and Michael. II is good, but marred by the infamous brother-sister plot twist. 4 is plenty flawed, but I still find lots of enjoyment in it, and it's the last one on the list I do genuinely like. Big drop-off there, as 5 and 6 are both mediocre and interchangeable in my mind. '07 ruins the mystery and subtlety completely, but did a few interesting things here and there. Ends is disappointing for several reasons with minimal highlights. Resurrection's opening is the most insulting stuff I've ever seen, and the rest isn't a lot better. Zombie's second is the most start to finish unpleasant experience.

    Ranking:

    1. Halloween (1978)
    2. Halloween III: Season of the Witch (1982)
    3. Halloween Kills (2021)
    4. Halloween (2018)
    5. Halloween H20: 20 Years Later (1998)
    6. Halloween II (1981)
    7. Halloween 4: The Return of Michael Myers (1988)
    8. Halloween 5: The Revenge of Michael Myers (1989)
    9. Halloween: The Curse of Michael Myers (1995)
    10. Halloween (2007)
    11. Halloween Ends (2022)
    12. Halloween: Resurrection (2002)
    13. Halloween II (2009)
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 7,566
    Nice review!
  • Posts: 11,482
    Nice review!

    Thank you! I’m a little surprised, and jealous, to see as many people that loved this one as there are, but more power to them. All entitled to their tastes!
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 7,566
    FoxRox wrote: »
    Nice review!

    Thank you! I’m a little surprised, and jealous, to see as many people that loved this one as there are, but more power to them. All entitled to their tastes!

    I'll be seeing it at the weekend. I don't have much hope for it but who knows, I've been surprised before.
Sign In or Register to comment.