Halloween (2007) The Verdict.

Discussion in 'Site Polls' started by Ash28M, Sep 1, 2007.

?

Rob Zombie's HALLOWEEN was...

Poll closed Oct 2, 2007.
  1. Great

    12 vote(s)
    9.0%
  2. Good

    40 vote(s)
    30.1%
  3. Average

    29 vote(s)
    21.8%
  4. Below average

    17 vote(s)
    12.8%
  5. Awful

    35 vote(s)
    26.3%
  1. _pi_

    _pi_ Peace, bitch

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2001
    Messages:
    2,631
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    New York
    This whole discussion really reminds me of conversations I often have with my friends about music.

    Like, how they can't possibly take me seriously because I love Avril Lavigne or Girls Aloud. It doesn't matter what else I listen to, even if it is "respectable" by their standards, because Avril and the Girls simply aren't cool and suck and so must my taste in music.

    I did kind of agree with what I thought was Winona's point is his first post: that some people seem to be a little bit protective of films that even they themselves must admit are not really good.

    But it IS elitist to think that everyone shares the same opinion of what's good and what's bad - or rather that your own idea of what's good and bad is the prevailing one.

    So go Congo, go Girls Aloud and go Halloween 2007! Screw The Beatles and Led Zeppelin and Halloween '78 and Dawn of the Dead.

    Oh, and Scream is the best horror film of the 90s, no contest. Followed closely by Scream 2.
     
  2. Luna

    Luna Guest

    That was where the problem arose for me... I actually liked this movie on a serious horror film level. Everyone knows I love cheesy movies too, and I appreciate levels of cheese and pure badness most other people have very little tolerance for... but I did not see this film in that light at all. It was brutal and kept me fully entertained and engaged for its entirety, which is more than I can say for a lot of horror movies these days. I damn well know the difference between bad-good and good-good and to me, Halloween was of the latter. That's really all I have to add to this discussion because other than this, it's really a question of differing tastes and those arguments are fairly useless to me.

    And you go, girlfriend, with your Girls Aloud and stuff. :D
     
  3. spawningblue

    spawningblue Deadite

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2004
    Messages:
    5,069
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
    hmm... so what do you consider good horror films? You still haven't answered what you didn't like about this film and how it is so terrible, so how does your opinion matter anymore then anyone else's? AS well, who are you to decide what is good or bad, or know whether we just liked it because we are fan boys or like bad films? I, like most on here thought it was a well made tense horrific film. Oh, and for that matter, lets see some horror movies that you made that show that you can do a better job.
     
  4. You might have to better define "well made". If you define it as "better than average", you have an uphill battle--right now, 48 participants label it better than average and 49 participants label it worse than average. If "well made" is defined as "mostly competent", you may have a case.

    TW, what you fail to recognize is that most of us--maybe all of us--don't have any reason to believe that your opinion is the one that defines quality vs. lack-of. You say that we cannot honestly say this film is well-crafted, but fail to tell us why other than you found it poorly crafted. You say that an individual who declares that the film is well-done and offers reasons for this opinion clearly knows nothing about movies, without telling us why we should value your judgment over any other. You seem to say, though you fall short of explicitly declaring, that if someone fails to recognize a film as bad when you have done so, in your opinion, their thoughts on movies is no longer valid. Yet you fail to enlighten us as to why your opinion is so authoritative in the first place. You modestly choose not to declare your opinion as the definitive truth on every given matter, yet you declare your opinion as the definitive truth on this particular matter without telling us why we should care more about what you think (and vociferously claim as fact) than what others think.

    Simply put, you present fallacious arguments and kindly, gently insult those who may disagree. Why would we want to engage in a thoughtful discussion under those circumstances?
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 12, 2007
  5. spawningblue

    spawningblue Deadite

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2004
    Messages:
    5,069
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
    haha yes Livingdead, you pretty much summed up what i wrote but in a more intelligent manner haha.
     
  6. ThievingWinona

    ThievingWinona New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    169
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    That's a fair enough point, and really, there's no way I am going to be able to articulate that to anyone on this board. And even if I could, I don't think anybody would care or believe me. I suppose my only defense to this question would be to offer qualifications, but then I'd probably be seen as elitist. It's a no-win situation from my point of view.

    I never said people needed to believe my opinions or judgments on a given film. I simply said that from my point of view, these people know nothing about movies. Therefore, if I see someone praise Zombie's Halloween film, by default I'm going to look suspiciously upon any of their comments on subsequent films. Nowhere did I declare that I am the be all end all authority on movies and nowhere did I say people must listen to me. I simply stated things from my point of view. I think it's telling about those that overreacted to my statement.

    And I completely get where you're coming from. This kind of goes back to my response earlier in this post. I mean, I've studied film and the horror genre for many years. I've done scene-by-scene breakdowns of horror films for classes to understand how good films work and operate; what the mechanisms are that make them succeed. I've read countless books on the genre as well as hundreds of critical scholarly looks by people like Robin Wood, Tanya Kryzywinksa, and Joan Hawkins. I've actually directed a horror film that has gotten decent reviews. I've seen thousands of horror films and, all things considered, think I have a pretty good handle on this topic. Of course, now the obligatory "You're an elitist" comments will come out. Whatever, but the fact of the matter is that my interest in the horror genre, aesthetics, and film in general for that matter, goes much further than simply "this movie sucked/this movie was good".

    I have absolutely no expectation that anything I've written will change anyone's mind on whether my view's are "authoritative", though it should be pointed out that I never said they were, only that from my personal point of view, some people just have wrong outlooks on things. If you think that's some sort of nice insult to people, well then so be it. I don't think that's an insult, I think that's a fact and usually the people who get defensive and pissed off about it are the ones who can't handle getting told that.

    But unlike those people, it doesn't bother me if someone says they think my point of view is bunk. That's fine with me, I don't lose any sleep over it. Their insults and defensive posturing aren't going to make me change how I view their opinions (note that this is completely separate from them as people. Too often on internet message boards, people take criticism as a personal attack on themselves as people rather than the opinion at hand), nor will anything I say have much effect on how you guys feel. No biggie. My only issue is that there is no real need to get pissy about such trivial things.

    So, if you want to get into a point by point debate on the merits of Zombie's Halloween film, I'll be more than happy to do so. But I suppose I should start by asking a simple question:

    Do you guys believe there is a such thing as a "bad" movie and if so, what criteria do you ascribe to it?
     
  7. Mortis

    Mortis GARBAGE DAY!

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2001
    Messages:
    7,401
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Like most?

     
  8. Ash28M

    Ash28M Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    6,064
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Mississauga, ON, Canada
    So you wish you were able to articulate how much better of a Judge you are then us on what makes a good horror film?

    Actually your right don't bother nobody would believe you.


    OK so no matter how many horror classics we have loved and analysed and studied at nauseam in the past. Just because you think the Halloween remake is the "worst film of all time" (sorry those kinds of IMDB blanket statements still makes you loose major credibility) any one who disagrees with you knows nothing about horror?

    Yes you do sound very conceded. Lets take for example, I'm pretty sure I've read (I apologize if I'm talking about the wrong guy from Dead Lantern) you put down films like BWP, Open Water, Carrie. films that the vast majority of "respected film critics" have rated highly. Yet you are the Messiah of film so I guess that these critics don't know what constitutes a good movie either?

    If there was a right way and a wrong way to make a horror film Hollywood would have bottled that formula long ago. Yet they rarely make a good one why is that?

    Of course we do, I already listed a few posts back that personally I thought Black Christmas, and The Fog where bad examples of horror films. I'll throw in House of the Dead, Alone in the Dark, Resident Evil Apocalypse, Pulse.

    Why? because for the most part "IMO" they played it safe, The acting was wooden there was nothing in them that inspired any emotion out of me, the characters and plot were also by the numbers.

    You know what though, what makes horror films differ then any other genre is that they can have a number of flaws but as long as they get the right tone, mood or atmosphere or feel. it can make up for all that.

    A horror film can be technically well done but if it doesn't evoke emotion out of you, does it fully succeed a horror film? Everyone has life experiences that are going to come into play. This is why there can't be a formula.

    And I too have seen 1000's of horror movies and read every horror related book and magazine I could get my hands on.
     
    Last edited: Sep 12, 2007
  9. Mok

    Mok Family is Forever

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2003
    Messages:
    5,011
    Likes Received:
    225
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Look all he meant to say was that if you like this film, he'll take your opinion with a grain of salt when it come to other movies. It's like when people have this conversation: "Ebert hated _______." Which is countered with, "Yeah but he liked _______."

    I understand that way of thinking. At the same time, he deserves to be flammed for telling everyone about it. :D
     
  10. Ash28M

    Ash28M Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    6,064
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Mississauga, ON, Canada
    And you don't realize how ridiculous that sounds? That's like me completely dismissing Ebert's knowledge of film as obsolete because he gave FearDotCom a good review or Rhett because he liked The Wicker Man remake.

    It's funny how everyone thinks the best reviewers are the ones who agree with us.
     
    Last edited: Sep 12, 2007
  11. ThievingWinona

    ThievingWinona New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    169
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    OK, so we've established that you DO believe that bad movies exist.

    Just so I double check, are you saying these movies are "bad movies" or are you saying you just don't like them? I mean, if Rhett or Roger Ebert said Black Christmas and The Fog were good films, would you suddenly then believe they weren't bad movies?

    Just trying to figure out your position

    As for some of your reasons to what makes a good horror film: what do you mean by "play it safe"? The fact that you said "for the most part" and "in my opinion" sorta leads me to believe that there were indeed good things in these films for you. What were they? What types of films do you consider to be good and how do they differentiate from, say, House of the Dead?

    I mean, it could be argued and pointed out that Halloween had "wooden characters" (with nary any sort of development whatsoever, I might add). What types of emotion did Halloween bring out of you? Terror, I believe you said. Name the scenes and instances where you felt "terror". The plot of Halloween is also "by the numbers" (Myers kills as a kid, escapes sanitarium, murders the girls, etc.).
     
  12. Jamm

    Jamm J'aime les cadavres

    Joined:
    May 19, 2000
    Messages:
    3,828
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Location:
    Albany, New York
    Well, you should have told us that earlier!! Then no one would have questioned your supreme authority on the matter!
     
  13. spawningblue

    spawningblue Deadite

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2004
    Messages:
    5,069
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
    No offense ThievingWinona but you seem kind of conceited. Your movie looks interesting, but when you've done one movie you don't really have the right to be full of yourself, and say that all these movies are bad because you've shot one and know how to make a good horror movie. That will turn off a lot of people who might have checked out your movie otherwise.

    An opinion is an opinion, there is no right or wrong, and we appreciate you saying you didn't like Halloween, although it would have been nice if you wrote a review and stated what was so bad about it to you. I can find faults with it as well, although I still enjoyed a lot about it, and thought the directing was done quite well. It's the fact that you blatantly came out and said that whoever liked it is wrong, and you consider them fools in the movie world for liking it. If you wanted to just ignore any opinions from those who liked it, then that would have been fine, but you didn't have to post that, and make yourself come off as a jackass. Also, I am sure there are many on here who have read the same books and magazines you have, and there are a few on here as well who have done their own movies. It doesn't make them or you an expert on what makes the perfect horror film.
     
  14. Mok

    Mok Family is Forever

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2003
    Messages:
    5,011
    Likes Received:
    225
    Trophy Points:
    63
    It's not really ridiculous. Calling that ridiculous undermines Ebert's profession. People read his reviews because there is a level of trust established based on the validity of his opinion. If he were to break that trust by liking a shitty movie, then can you blame someone for thinking twice about what he has to say?
     
  15. Ash28M

    Ash28M Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    6,064
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Mississauga, ON, Canada
    Yeah I'm a friggin sheep that why I like The Halloween remake when every critic hates it.

    I haven't seen those films in a while so I'm not going to go into detail about why I think they are "Bad" films. Whatever that means everyone has their own tastes. There are many films I don't care for but I can still recognize them as well constructed.

    I'm sure everyone in your film class agree's on every film right?

    By playing it safe I mean they stayed in the PG13 framework and it felt like they were just catering to the market that would lend to the most profit.

    As for the most part. I meant I named a few films, they are all different. I'm not talking about each film individually.


    I never said "Terror" I believe that was someone else. I said I liked it's gritty feel and the surreal feel feel of the workprint.

    You haven't answers any of my questions so I'm not waste any more time with this.

    Have you noticed not many people agree with you?
     
  16. Ash28M

    Ash28M Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    6,064
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Mississauga, ON, Canada
    So if I was a racist simply because one person from a different race did me harm. That would be logical?
     
  17. Mok

    Mok Family is Forever

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2003
    Messages:
    5,011
    Likes Received:
    225
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Thread officially
    GODWINNED
     
    Last edited: Sep 12, 2007
  18. ThievingWinona

    ThievingWinona New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    169
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Um, I never said that A) my film was any good (which I don't think it is) and B) that I was some supreme authoritative being because I made one.

    I was responding to the gentlemen who made some comment to the effect of "well let's see the movie you have made?!". I was using it as an example that I have worked within the horror genre. There's nothing conceited about that. Believe me, my film is not some amazing piece of work by any means :)
    Well now you're just doing what you're bitching that I'm not. That is, saying a movie sucks without mentioning the reasons why. That's called hypocrisy, right?

    This is one of the biggest problems I have with horror fans today. Instantly, if something is PG-13, it must equal shit. There are plenty of horror films rated G and PG that are far more unsettling and horrific than any R rated film that's been released recently. I mean, what's the problem with PG-13 horror films? Not enough gore for you? Gore doesn't necessarily equate to good horror.

    So grittiness and surrealness constitute a "good movie" in your opinion?

    The only reason I ask is because you still don't seem to understand my point of view on this.

    My position is that there is a difference between emotionally enjoying a movie and a movie's quality. You mention a "formula" for creating a good movie. To a degree, there is one. Included in that formula is structure, narrative, editing, pacing, acting, scriptwork, cinematography, etc. etc. Those movies that get the formula correct, and the director's that can solve that formula, create movies that supersede one's on personal feelings of like and dislike.

    Where you lose me is that on one hand you say there is a such thing as a bad movie, but then on the other hand you say it's all in someone's point of view. Therefore, by your own estimation, there can't be a such thing as a bad movie because there is always going to be someone who likes what you consider a bad movie. Somebody out there really digs Black Christmas, therefore it can't be a bad film in your mind because it's quality is defined by the person who watches it, not by an objective reading of a film.

    And that's fine if you believe that, most people do, and most people operate that way. Personally, I don't, and I feel you can make a distinction between quality and personal taste.
     
  19. Ash28M

    Ash28M Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    6,064
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Mississauga, ON, Canada
    You can never separate the two completely and I've yet to find a reviewer that can. Personal enjoyment always comes into play on reviewer rating.

    Sure there are horror films where the subject matter didn't appeal to me that I can still recognize were well made. Many times I've gone back to those films and enjoy them more the second time. I'd be hard pressed though to think of a film I Hated yet thought was well very well constructed.

    The only way that would be possible is if I found the film offensive and I don't get offended by art.

    Please though give me your long list of horror films that you Hate yet you feel are brilliantly constructed.
     
    Last edited: Sep 12, 2007
  20. Bobbywoodhogan

    Bobbywoodhogan Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2004
    Messages:
    1,586
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Leeds, England
    I just watched a Screener version, I think it may have been the workprint. I wasn't impressed TBH. The reason Michael Myers is so scary is because there is no reason why he flips, he just does. In this you just get the feeling he is a psyhotic person not something that is pure evil. I am not suprised that he becomes a killer, his life is s**t. I am so glad Zombie isnt getting anywhere near a sequel.
     

Share This Page