The Halloween Franchise

[Joe Hellandback]

Boils down to;

Halloween 1-6-the Jamie storyline

Halloween 1-7-8 the H20 storyline

Rob Zombies remakes

Halloween 1-2018

Personally I like 1-6, it makes the most sense and 6 gives a explanation and definitive ending to the series. 

[Bastet]

I love the original, find two a dull follow-up, never saw three (since it's not part of the Michael Myers arc), like four, will sometimes watch five and six as part of a marathon on TV, like H20, have never seen Resurrection, and really like 2018/Ib/whatever we're calling it.

H20 and the 2018 film I saw in theatres opening weekend, because it was just that exciting to have Laurie back, and I'll do the same with Halloween Kills and Halloween Ends when they come out; I would have loved for the ending of 2018 to be the end of the franchise - Michael finally taken out by three generations of Strode women - but I like that they did 2018 with a plan for the following two already in place.  It's not like they intended it to be the end and then just decided to keep going because it made money.  So I have faith I'll be happy with this modern arc as a whole.

I've never seen the Rob Zombie remakes.

[Tenshinhan]

I would have liked to have seen where the series was heading had Donald Pleasance not died.  The setup in H6 (or at least the Producer's Cut) was an interesting direction for the series to take.

[Simon Boccanegra]

I don't have anything very interesting or fresh to say about the 1978 original. It's as good as it's cracked up to be. It was terrifying in its time, and as much as it's been imitated, as many times as others tried to "outdo" it (usually while missing what had made it special), it still holds up well. It's artful and precise. Even its '70s period-piece touches are charming.

Nothing else in ten attempts has come close. Halloween II is a pretty good slasher film set mostly in an oddly underpopulated hospital. It at least benefits from the two leads picking up where they left off in playing their characters, JLC's heinous wig notwithstanding. This is the only sequel to reunite Pleasence and Curtis. 

Halloween III: Season of the Witch is an okay standalone B-movie. It's as though it were made to run on television at 3 a.m. for insomniacs to find. That maddening jingle is the most memorable thing about it.    

Halloween IV wasn't the same without Curtis, but it's technically well made and has some effective set pieces, like the rooftop scramble. Halloween V is less of the same, with so many grating supporting performances that it's almost as if the actors are in competition. Was the idea to give us people we'd be happy to see die?

The producer's cut of Halloween VI is the only version I've seen all the way through, and one thing it does extremely well is a scary Michael in the movements and the look of the mask. I really like the staging of the scene with the female victim hanging the laundry. But it needlessly overcomplicates the Myers lore and was just a wrong turn.   

H20 is frustrating, because what's good is so good, but the surrounding movie is abrupt and perfunctory. Steve Miner directs with little flair or atmosphere, but he can't wreck some of the good setups the script hands him: the mother and child in the restroom; Michael reaching through that gate, slashing wildly at two people just inches away, and then trying key after key while Hartnett and Williams pound on the door. JLC gives one of her best performances in any kind of movie, but the actor playing MIchael manages to be miscast. He isn't imposing enough. The changing masks are all awful. I don't mind the movie's very '90s quality, though. All of these films are products of their changing times; it's part of the fun.   

I've never seen Resurrection past the first 15 minutes, and nothing I've ever heard or read has made me regret that.

Zombie's 2007 remake is a classic case of a filmmaker perceiving that "more" is "better." He gets off on the wrong foot with the long, tedious and banal section "explaining" Michael by dramatizing his abusive childhood. Then, in the second half, he absurdly ups the body count. This is the movie for anyone whose main complaint about the Carpenter Halloween was that there were only a few deaths and the violence was relatively discreet. I didn't see Zombie's sequel.  

The 2018 film is frustrating in different ways from H20's. Rather than being abrupt and perfunctory, it's leisurely to the point of sagging in places. It also gets caught in a having-it-both-ways trap -- it wants to trade on the history of a long saga while retconning most of it away. (Would Laurie really be this obsessed with a Michael who was not targeting her for any specific reason, and whose carnage during one night of her life was followed by his being locked away for 40 years?) But there is, again, JLC, and her sixtyish survivor is as compelling as her fortyish survivor had been. I found H20's supporting cast better; only Judy Greer really stands out as memorable from the 2018 group. But this would have been a satisfying end to the series.  

Edited November 1, 2019 by Simon Boccanegra

[Dr.OO7]

The first is the best. Michael lurking around everywhere is just thoroughly creepy and scary.

I actually like the second one. It makes perfect sense that Michael has escaped and would continue stalking Jamie right away.

I have a soft spot for the fourth and fifth films, as bad as they are, but the sixth just sucks, and not even in a "So Bad, It's Good" way. It just felt like it went on and on and ON. That said, I do like the Shout Outs to the original.

The seventh isn't bad, although I don't like how it ignores the previous continuity, but it just doesn't do anything for me. The eighth is absolutely godawful.

I didn't bother with the 2007/2009 remakes and I didn't bother with last year's, once again because of the different continuity. 

[Bastet]

13 hours ago, Simon Boccanegra said:

(Would Laurie really be this obsessed with a Michael who was not targeting her for any specific reason, and whose carnage during one night of her life was followed by his being locked away for 40 years?)

That's the fundamental flaw of the 2018 film, because by ignoring all the sequels - which I don't otherwise mind, just like I was fine with how H20 ignored major aspects of canon - Laurie has absolutely no reason to center her life around the certainty that one day he will escape and come after her.  And since the way she has lived her life and its affect on everyone is what the whole film is about, that's a big problem.  Yet I really like it, so kudos to Jamie Lee Curtis.

13 hours ago, Simon Boccanegra said:

JLC's heinous wig

Oh my.  The color of the fake blood in II is bad, but that thing is on another level.

[KnotsLanding]

I agree that Laurie's obsession is kinda confusing. Looking at the sequel with Tommy and Lindsay returning, it makes sense they would continue living in Haddonfield since Michael was a one off. He didn't kill that many people in the original and murders happen in every town. But it is weird that Laurie of all people was so hung up on it. I feel they should've kept Halloween 2 in the mix and kept him as her sister. They made a big deal about how that needed to be retconned, but without it it doesn't explain why she felt he'd come back for her. And yes she technically did seek him out, but still, what are the chances he'd return in the realistic world they attempted to create?

Also, for all the work they did to make sure the sequel was grounded in reality, you end the film with his fingers shot off and him burning up in a house. For him to survive that and lord knows what else to feature in TWO sequels, you're going back to the over the top world of before. I guess my point is that they made too much of an issue of grounding it when this is a slasher film which requires you to suspend belief.

[Tenshinhan]

Axing the sister part works for me, but why bother to have him be found and locked up? Wouldn't it make better sense if they had never found him?

[Dr.OO7]

8 hours ago, Tenshinhan said:

Axing the sister part works for me, but why bother to have him be found and locked up? Wouldn't it make better sense if they had never found him?

Exactly. The most chilling thing about the original is that Michael has vanished. Laurie's fear of him coming after her again would have made much more sense if he'd never been recaptured. In fact, having him imprisoned again is a major continuity error.

[Bastet]

12 hours ago, KnotsLanding said:

Also, for all the work they did to make sure the sequel was grounded in reality, you end the film with his fingers shot off and him burning up in a house. For him to survive that and lord knows what else to feature in TWO sequels, you're going back to the over the top world of before.

As much as I look forward to the final two installments, the thing that really bugs me about not ending it in 2018 is not only the usual oh, come the hell on; how did he survive that? suspension of disbelief horror franchises require, but that it means Laurie's plan didn't work.  She was obsessed, and meticulous, and ingenious, and she got him - through a lovely combination of brain and brawn and with an assist not by any man, but her daughter.

[Simon Boccanegra]

By the way, my mind is blown at the belated realization that the Joe Chappelle who directed Halloween: The Curse of Michael Myers (or "6," colloquially), is the same guy who was an executive producer and director of my favorite TV series, The Wire. 

Hey, everyone has to break into the business somehow! 

But it actually makes sense to me that it's someone who went on to do quality work. I noted above that the laundry scene (the killing of Debra Strode) is nicely staged, and a lot of the rest of it is too. It's more atmospheric than some of the other sequels. It's the scenario he had to work with (the Curse of Thorn, the cult, the runes, the uncle/niece incest) that's terrible. 

[Tenshinhan]

11 hours ago, Simon Boccanegra said:

 It's the scenario he had to work with (the Curse of Thorn, the cult, the runes, the uncle/niece incest) that's terrible. 

I don't mind the Thorn cult aspects in the plot, because it ties in the Samhain mythology and the original film.  At that point the series had to evolve somehow, so that was one direction they could take.  Unfortunately the execution was flawed.

[Joe Hellandback]

On 11/3/2019 at 2:40 PM, Simon Boccanegra said:

By the way, my mind is blown at the belated realization that the Joe Chappelle who directed Halloween: The Curse of Michael Myers (or "6," colloquially), is the same guy who was an executive producer and director of my favorite TV series, The Wire. 

Hey, everyone has to break into the business somehow! 

But it actually makes sense to me that it's someone who went on to do quality work. I noted above that the laundry scene (the killing of Debra Strode) is nicely staged, and a lot of the rest of it is too. It's more atmospheric than some of the other sequels. It's the scenario he had to work with (the Curse of Thorn, the cult, the runes, the uncle/niece incest) that's terrible. 

I liked the Curse of Thorn, it made sense of the story. 

[Ubiquitous]

On ‎10‎/‎31‎/‎2019 at 1:59 PM, Bastet said:

I've never seen the Rob Zombie remakes.

Consider yourself lucky. It is awful.

[Joe Hellandback]

On 11/15/2019 at 8:41 PM, Ubiquitous said:

Consider yourself lucky. It is awful.

Seconded. 

[MagnusHex]

Halloween H20 was so underrated. It was actually my first introduction to the Halloween franchise and I love its character-driven PTSD element that also made me love Scream 2.

Edited October 21, 2020 by MagnusHex

[Dr.OO7]

On 10/31/2019 at 6:58 AM, Joe Hellandback said:

Personally I like 1-6, it makes the most sense and 6 gives a explanation and definitive ending to the series. 

Me too. Halloween 7 may have technically been better quality-wise, but it did nothing for me. And Resurrection was just purely horrible.

Edited October 21, 2020 by Dr.OO7

[Spartan Girl]

So I caught H20 on TV and up til now I missed the part of the end where it turns out Rodney the security guard survived being shot because he stops Laurie from finishing off Michael after his fall. Suck it, The Black Guy Dies trope!

[Jan Spears]

I spent my Halloween weekend watching the Scream Factory DVD release of Halloween II -- both the theatrical and television cuts.

Halloween II has a bit of a convoluted history in terms of the final cut(s). While John Carpenter and Debra Hill wrote the screenplay and produced the film, Rick Rosenthal directed it. Rosenthal tried to follow the look and style of Carpenter's original so that the two movies could be watched seamlessly. Carpenter, however, thought that this approach with its slow build didn't work post-Friday the 13th, which had set a new standard for gore and pacing in a horror movie. Since he was filming additional footage for a made-for-television cut of Halloween at the time, Carpenter took the opportunity to film additional scenes for Halloween II, most notably the murder of the teenage neighbor to the Elrods at the beginning of the film. (Carpenter also prepared the television cut of Halloween II.)

Watching the theatrical and television cuts of Halloween II is an interesting experience as they diverge quite notably in places. There are the expected cuts in terms of gore and language. What's more interesting are the inserts of various scenes that weren't in Rosenthal's theatrical cut and alternate takes of the scenes that did appear in his cut. The television version has many more scenes of the various hospital staff members interacting, which helps to flesh out the hospital setting and characters a bit more.

The downside of the television cut is that Carpenter rearranged the running order of various scenes. Frequently. this isn't for the better as the pacing becomes choppy and nonsensical. The various cuts and inserts also add to the choppiness. One positive to the television cut is that it contains a scene which explains why the hospital becomes so dark in the latter half of the movie.

Rick Rosenthal's theatrical cut is still the best version of Halloween II. If it still existed, Rosenthal's original cut might make for interesting viewing as it would contain the excised footage that was cut in favor of more gore and reassigned to the television version.

 

 

[shantown]

9 hours ago, Spartan Girl said:

So I caught H20 on TV and up til now I missed the part of the end where it turns out Rodney the security guard survived being shot because he stops Laurie from finishing off Michael after his fall. Suck it, The Black Guy Dies trope!

H20 has always been my favorite because it was Josh Hartnett at the height of his ruffled teen heartthrob days, LOL

[JAYJAY1979]

Halloween 1,2 and 4 were a good story thread..with Jamie being made fun of for being the niece of Myers..and the trauma of the night would cause anyone to have a mental breakdown.  4 ended with a good hook for part 5..but it was abandoned in part 5.  She could have still had the telepathic link to Michael and still followed up with the ending of part 4.

H20...tol dawson creek esque for me.

2018 movie could have had Laurie be unable to move on from her experiences in 1978 with Myers out there lurking 

[BetterButter]

 

[krankydoodle]

Ooh! I thought Halloween 2018 was fine, but didn't plan on seeing the sequel. They got me with that trailer, though. Interesting that this starts up right after the events of the first film just like Halloween 2, and that this seems to involve a supernatural element when 2018 was more grounded in reality (well, as much as this type of movie can be anyway). I'm surprised by how many deaths are shown in the trailer, but I love seeing Jamie Lee Curtis in this mode and am really curious to see how things play out in this one.

Candyman is still my most anticipated horror movie of 2021, but I think this has become #2.

[Spartan Girl]

Was not expecting that level of carnage just from the trailer. 

Sheesh what WILL it take to kill him?

[txhorns79]

I did notice some of the people who died in the trailer were wearing the Silver Shamrock masks from Halloween III! 

[bunnyblue]

I thought that looked like Anthony Michael Hall in the trailer, so I checked IMDb to see if I was right

Spoiler

and to my complete surprise I see that he's playing Tommy Doyle. I was not expecting that character to make a reappearance, much less Lindsey Wallace - played by the original actress from the 1978 film! 

Laurie Strode reunited with her charges from 40 years ago? And taking on Michael once again? Hell yeah, sign me up!

Now I really can't wait for Halloween Kills to come out.

[BetterButter]

 

[Bastet]

That's a much better trailer than the first one. 

There's no way I'm going to sit indoors with strangers for two hours, though, so I guess I'll have to wait for the Blu-Ray.  That's a bummer, since it's tradition for my friend and I to go see certain horror films together.  Or one of us could sign up for a Peacock free trial, maybe, and stream it.  Still not the same.  Stupid pandemic.

[bunnyblue]

I really like the new trailer. I'm not gonna spoiler tag the following because the trailer gives it away:

I knew Kyle Richards was returning as Lindsey Wallace but I didn't know that Nancy Stephens was also reprising her role as Nurse Marion Chambers. I love it!! The more original cast members, the better.

At 1:12 in the trailer, they show a boy and his adult version on the split screen. I'm assuming the scene on the right is from the 1978 Halloween, but I don't recognize the kid nor the scene. Anyone know who he is??

Also, what is going on at 2:00? Is that Dr. Loomis (!) standing on the porch of the Myers house? I don't remember that particular scene in Halloween.

I had no idea the movie was going to stream on Peacock the same time it's out in theaters, but I'm happy because now I won't have to wait months to rent it on Xfinity.

Edited September 23, 2021 by bunnyblue

[pinkandsparkly13]

On 9/22/2021 at 10:27 PM, bunnyblue said:

At 1:12 in the trailer, they show a boy and his adult version on the split screen. I'm assuming the scene on the right is from the 1978 Halloween, but I don't recognize the kid nor the scene. Anyone know who he is??

Also, what is going on at 2:00? Is that Dr. Loomis (!) standing on the porch of the Myers house? I don't remember that particular scene in Halloween.

I think that's supposed to be Lonnie from the original movie. He's one of the kids that Dr. Loomis scared away from the Myers house. Although that shot of him on the ground is new. 

And that's a new scene with Dr. Loomis. They're going to show how he was caught after he escaped from Tommy's house. 

[Spartan Girl]

On 9/20/2021 at 7:30 PM, Bastet said:

That's a much better trailer than the first one. 

There's no way I'm going to sit indoors with strangers for two hours, though, so I guess I'll have to wait for the Blu-Ray.  That's a bummer, since it's tradition for my friend and I to go see certain horror films together.  Or one of us could sign up for a Peacock free trial, maybe, and stream it.  Still not the same.  Stupid pandemic.

It’s going to be released on Peacock on the same day if you have it. 

[Spartan Girl]

Halloween Kills:

The trailer was basically the whole movie.

Spoiler

Dammit, not Karen! I loved how badass she got to be in the last one, only to wind up like this?!? Booo!

The end reminded me of that sequence in H20 when Laurie, 100 percent done with this shit, marches off to finally confront Michael. 

Seriously though, Michael:

Edited October 15, 2021 by Spartan Girl

[Anela]

Do you only have to upgrade to paid Peacock, or do they ask charge a rental fee?

[Spartan Girl]

4 hours ago, Anela said:

Do you only have to upgrade to paid Peacock, or do they ask charge a rental fee?

We have xfinity and wound up getting Peacock for free. As far as I know there’s no additional rental fee. 

[tinaw]

I watched Halloween Kills on Peacock. No additional charge

[txhorns79]

5 minutes ago, tinaw said:

I watched Halloween Kills on Peacock.

I watched it on Peacock too.  It honestly wore me out.  I have lots of feelings, but mostly am tired of the world's most unstoppable killing machine.

[Anela]

1 hour ago, Spartan Girl said:

We have xfinity and wound up getting Peacock for free. As far as I know there’s no additional rental fee. 

 

24 minutes ago, tinaw said:

I watched Halloween Kills on Peacock. No additional charge

 

18 minutes ago, txhorns79 said:

I watched it on Peacock too.  It honestly wore me out.  I have lots of feelings, but mostly am tired of the world's most unstoppable killing machine.

Thanks. I have the free stuff on the app, but hardly ever watch it, so I didn't upgrade to see whatever is on the paid version. 

[Sarahsmile416]

10 hours ago, txhorns79 said:

I watched it on Peacock too.  It honestly wore me out.  I have lots of feelings, but mostly am tired of the world's most unstoppable killing machine.

Agreed.  I don’t know why I expected any different…it is Michael Myers after all…but it was a little too much in this one.  Other problem is the way it was described “Laurie Strode leads a vigilante mob…” - she did nothing of the sort.  

[Dr.OO7]

On 10/31/2019 at 6:58 AM, Joe Hellandback said:

Personally I like 1-6, it makes the most sense and 6 gives a explanation and definitive ending to the series

That's my favorite continuity too, as bad as Part 6 is. Part 7 should never have dismissed it, and they didn't have to. In fact, it was originally going to be part of it.

Part 8 should never have existed.

[txhorns79]

4 hours ago, Sarahsmile416 said:

Agreed.  I don’t know why I expected any different…it is Michael Myers after all…but it was a little too much in this one.  Other problem is the way it was described “Laurie Strode leads a vigilante mob…” - she did nothing of the sort.  

I think at some point, for all the talk of how evil he is, they haven't established that he exists outside the laws of nature.  He's murdered what, dozens of people over the course of a day?  He's also taken savage beatings, being shot and burned in return.  Yet, he gets up like nothing is happening.   

I also felt like the movie had too many characters making typical bad horror movie choices.  If I see my back door is open, and a bloody handprint is by the door, I leave and go somewhere safer to call the police.  I don't stick around to challenge the intruder. 

[Bastet]

I thought this one kind of sucked.  My friend signed up for the Premium Plus Peacock plan and will cancel it within seven days, so we'll have watched it for free, so that's fine, and I probably wouldn't even be mad if it had been safe to pay cinema prices and yell at the screen along with the rest of the audience, but it was not good.  I hope it's just a lull in the middle of the trilogy* and the next one kicks ass (especially with Laurie extra motivated by what happened at the end), because otherwise I will be hella pissed the kick-ass 2018 ending wasn't the actual ending.

*For any X-Files fans, I likened it to the "Blessing Way" entry of the Anasazi/Blessing Way/Paper Clip trilogy, and my friend said that perfectly described it - it's fine, it sets some stuff up, but you always skip over it during a re-watch.

There were a couple of good scares, I liked bringing back original Lindsey and the nurse and that they nicely wove Dr. Loomis into the retcon of the original, and I appreciated the commentary on vigilantism, but it was a tremendous letdown - we go from three generations of Strode women using teammwork and more brain than brawn to this penis posse of random dudes and their random weapons.

The next one will presumably get Laurie out of the damn hospital and doing something.  She was barely in this one, and she was incapacitated the whole time.  The hell?  That is not why I watch.  Again, I'm going to go with optimism for the third film, since the three-film arc was planned from the beginning for this revival.  But this one on its own?  A big ball of meh.

Kudos to Jamie Lee Curtis doing the whole film looking like someone who'd just been through all this shit would look.  We need more of that, so that it's not cause for kudos, it just is.

[txhorns79]

53 minutes ago, Bastet said:

There were a couple of good scares, I liked bringing back original Lindsey and the nurse and that they nicely wove Dr. Loomis into the retcon of the original, and I appreciated the commentary on vigilantism, but it was a tremendous letdown - we go from three generations of Strode women using teammwork and more brain than brawn to this penis posse of random dudes and their random weapons.

I felt like the commentary on vigilantism was underdeveloped.  Tommy essentially lead the mob, felt chastened for a moment when it became clear the wrong person was targeted, then was back leading another mob later in the movie.

I think the biggest mistake this set of movies has made was retconning that Laurie was Michael's sister.   Yes, he attacked her after stalking her in 1978, but this movie made clear that Michael could care less about Laurie.  They noted the only reason he went after her in the 2018 movie was that his doctor brought him to her.  That he wasn't seeking her out, and was only really interested in returning to his home.  So while I do find the underlying idea of how devastating trauma can harm someone long term interesting, there also seems to be the idea that Laurie just could have had her life because Michael's killings were not about her.        

      

[Bastet]

Yes, that is the one massive problem with retconning the original and pretending all the sequels never happened, that Michael was captured in 1978 and remained locked away until he escaped 40 years later -- Laurie is, as Karen suffered through and tried to make her daughter understand, a nutjob, convinced for absolutely no reason that Michael is someday going to break out and come after her, when really she was just one of several random babysitters that night.

Edited October 16, 2021 by Bastet

[bunnyblue]

3 hours ago, txhorns79 said:

He's also taken savage beatings, being shot and burned in return.  Yet, he gets up like nothing is happening.   

I was sort of glad when the filmmakers said that this trilogy was going to disregard everything that happened after the 1978 movie (even though I am still annoyed they retconned Michael & Laurie being siblings) because I thought Michael had become (in the later movies) a completely supernatural being incapable of being killed. In Halloween 2018 I think the worst thing that happened to him was getting hit by a car and Laurie shooting off some his fingers. He was even unconscious for a while after getting run over. So I'm really disappointed that the filmmakers did a complete 180 in Halloween Kills and turned Michael into another supernatural unstoppable force. He took 4-5 bullets to the chest, bricks to the head, a pitch fork to the back, knife to the neck, multiple savage beatings, etc. And like you said, he got up  like nothing happened. He's now no different than all the other versions we've seen of him in the movies we're supposed to disregard. And for all this movie's many flaws, turning Michael into Jason Voorhees is the one that annoys me the most. 

3 hours ago, txhorns79 said:

I also felt like the movie had too many characters making typical bad horror movie choices.  If I see my back door is open, and a bloody handprint is by the door, I leave and go somewhere safer to call the police.  I don't stick around to challenge the intruder. 

Haddonfield is apparently inhabited by complete morons. The Johns not getting TF out of the house upon seeing the bloody handprint is one of the worst instances. There were also a few times when people just stood there screaming while Michel advanced on them - all the while they were standing next to an open door and didn't run out of it! Also when Lindsey got out of the car at the park, why didn't anyone else in the car get into the driver's seat in case they had to book it out of there ASAP?! Predictably, Michael begins his assault and the idiots in the car couldn't even unlock the doors much less drive away. 

I had high hopes for Halloween Kills, but it's just another slasher movie with people making stupid decisions upon stupid decisions while an unstoppable killer carves his way through town. The best part was the flashbacks to 1978.

Edited October 16, 2021 by bunnyblue

[Bastet]

2 minutes ago, bunnyblue said:

Haddonfield is apparently inhabited by complete morons.

Gods, yes; I said more than once to my friend, "These people all deserve to die."

3 minutes ago, bunnyblue said:

So I'm really disappointed that the filmmakers did a complete 180 in Halloween Kills and turned Michael into another supernatural unstoppable force. He took 4-5 bullets to the chest, bricks to the head, a pitch fork to the back, knife to the neck, multiple savage beatings, etc. And like you said, he got up  like nothing happened. He's now no different than all the other versions we've seen of him in the movies we're supposed to disregard. And for all this movie's many flaws, turning Michael into Jason Voorhees is the that annoys me the most. 

Yes, in addition to Laurie being sidelined and the residents of Haddonfield being stupid, that's what had us most yelling at the TV.  Before it started, my friend wondered how the hell he's going to make it out of that house*, and I said, "Dude, we saw his chopped-off head roll down a hill in H20; obviously, nothing kills him," waving it away like all the other impossible survivals one must endure with slasher franchises, before remembering, no, 2018 wiped all that out.  He can be caught, and he can be killed.

*I thought he was going to steal the firefighter's clothes and walk out unnoticed, and was so pissed off when instead he just waltzed out of there as himself and took out an entire unit in 30 seconds.

I also didn't buy the kids who knew nothing about Michael Myers.  Based "just" on killing his sister, the Meyers house was someplace the kids in the original dared each other to walk up to.  Even after 40 years, the Halloween spree killing of 1978 would be similarly used to scare each other each year; it's Haddonfield, not much else happens there worth talking about. 

[Racj82]

I get the disappointment with the lack of Laurie.

Realistically, I never expected otherwise. And just by watching the trailers, they never even really showed her anywhere outside of the truck or the hospital.

We also knew this was a trilogy while kills was a direct continuation. It makes zero sense for her to be active based on the 2018 movie.

These are just expectations the movie was never going to keep.

This middle film is meant to explore the town. It's not just a dudebro Lynch mob. The whole town wanted to take back their town. Its a logical step after the carnage from the last movie.

Yes, there is a lot of gore. While the movie doesn't need to be this gory expecting the sensibilities of a slasher from 1978 now is just not going to work. Even Carpenter implanted more violence in the original Halloween 2 while the new director wanted little to none. By 1980, that way of doing slashers were already gone. I know what the new creative said but I don't think they were ever talking about the violence. The mystique was gone. The menace was gone. He just became another villain with a cool mask after a while. You could argue we are back to square one now. But, I think the 2018 movie got us back to more of what he used to be. Sadly, now, if you are going to do a trilogy Michael has to become almost superhuman to keep it going. In a way, it makes sense. He was and is the shape. The boogeyman. Pure evil. He doesn't stop. It's kind of why this should has always been a one and done. Evil is always out there. But, if he is always there, what's the point of trying to stop him and over and over again y'know?

Plenty of dumb decisions abound. But, I think the point trying to made throughout was that Haddonfield was filled with fighters. They rather fight than run or live in fear. It's not just Laurie.

I have mixed feelings about erasing continuity. I'm glad the brother/sister stuff is out of here. But, it makes no sense that Laurie is this shook over this one night. In this continuity, he stalked her one night and he was captured almost immediately. He stayed locked up for 40 years. I can understand having a fear of the world through it but specifically worried about him seems a stretch. If she had lived through two nights of terror after he had been shot that many times, anyone would be scared for life.

They probably just shouldn't have done this in the same night at all. The original Halloween 2 did this and it was the wrong impulse then too. In both cases, you have to leave Laurie incompasetated. But, she is OUR character. Tommy, her daughter, her grandchild or anybody else can't fill that void.

[txhorns79]

13 hours ago, Racj82 said:

But, it makes no sense that Laurie is this shook over this one night. In this continuity, he stalked her one night and he was captured almost immediately. He stayed locked up for 40 years. I can understand having a fear of the world through it but specifically worried about him seems a stretch. If she had lived through two nights of terror after he had been shot that many times, anyone would be scared for life.

In the first movie, she is stalked during the day, and later discovers the bodies of her friends, with her friend, Annie, specifically posed with Michael's sister's gravestone.  She was then violently attacked and nearly killed herself.  It's pretty horrific, and even though he was caught, the guy was still out there.  I can see someone being traumatized for life over those events, particularly given it seemed Laurie either rejected help or did not benefit from help. 

 

13 hours ago, Racj82 said:

But, I think the point trying to made throughout was that Haddonfield was filled with fighters.

Really dumb fighters.  It was like when the group thought Michael was back in his old home.  Does Lonnie call the police?  No.  He just goes in by himself to see what was going on.  That kind of behavior is maddening. 

[Steph619]

I watched Halloween Kills today and I thought it wasn’t as good as Halloween 2018. I enjoyed the flashbacks to the 1978 Halloween, which to this day, is still my favorite scary movie ever. 

I didn’t like that Laurie wasn’t in this movie as much and I hated that Karen was killed especially with how awesome she was in the previous movie. I thought for a moment they were setting her up to kill too like they did with Laurie’s daughter in Halloween 4.

The decisions made by some of the minor characters just made them look absolutely dumb. For example, why didn’t the Johns leave and why were they living in THAT house to begin with? I wouldn’t live there even if it was gifted to me lol.

Overall, the sequel is ok, but it doesn’t live up to the original. Halloween 2018 should’ve been a one and done. It’s annoying that Michael Myers won’t die. It’s been established that the guy is supernatural, but I would like to see Laurie triumph once and for all. 

[Racj82]

2 hours ago, txhorns79 said:

In the first movie, she is stalked during the day, and later discovers the bodies of her friends, with her friend, Annie, specifically posed with Michael's sister's gravestone.  She was then violently attacked and nearly killed herself.  It's pretty horrific, and even though he was caught, the guy was still out there.  I can see someone being traumatized for life over those events, particularly given it seemed Laurie either rejected help or did not benefit from help. 

 

Really dumb fighters.  It was like when the group thought Michael was back in his old home.  Does Lonnie call the police?  No.  He just goes in by himself to see what was going on.  That kind of behavior is maddening. 

I'm sorry it's still a stretch to still be worried about this one specific person after 40 years with one movies worth of events in mind. Worried in general? No. About Michael who hasn't made a move in 40 years? It's a stretch.

I didn't say they were smart fighters. Brave. I would say yes. Anyone who stands up to Michael is. But, Laurie planned for this for decades. People in the town were scarred by the events of the original but they were operating of just pure rage and confusion. A far worse recipe for good decisions.

And Laurie will get her day. I'm not worried about that at all. I hope she survives it though.

[krankydoodle]

I thought Halloween 2018 was decent, but even though it gave too much away, I thought the first trailer for this one was fantastic and it really got my hopes up for the sequel. I just finished watching the movie, though, and am so disappointed. Even for a horror movie, there were so many characters acting so stupidly that it was hard to watch. The mob scene at the hospital was especially tedious. I also thought the flashbacks to 1978 were too long, the returning characters from 1978 were largely wasted and their introduction clumsy, and I didn't like what they did with Hawkins. And I wish Karen hadn't been killed off, or at least not in the way they did it.