Watching the Halloween series for the first time; any I should skip?

Discussion in 'Slashers' started by crikan, Jul 28, 2009.

  1. Cujo108

    Cujo108 Guest

    It's not that the sister subplot is stupid, as it's not in and of itself. It is a believable turn of events. However, I think it was a dumbass move to go that route, as the first film was much more effective when Meyers was just randomly going after Strode for no apparent reason. The whole sister idea ruins the creep factor of this potentially happening to anyone. I've never thought the original to be as good as most people say it is, but it did have that strong unknown factor going for it. The sequel took that away.
     
  2. Matt89

    Matt89 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2004
    Messages:
    5,698
    Likes Received:
    963
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Toronto
    Alright, yeah I'll give you that. Point taken. :)

    ~Matt
     
  3. maybrick

    maybrick Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2001
    Messages:
    10,786
    Likes Received:
    664
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Keene, NH
    The answer is simple. It's because John Carpenter and Debra Hill wrote a LOT of intentional humor into the script for HALLOWEEN. Sure, there's a plenty of creepy sequences, but there's just too much goofiness going on to simply chalk up to it being "dated". The only source of comedic relief in Texas Chainsaw Massacre is the obnoxious brother in the wheelchair. They're both horror films intended to scare, but they have completely different vibes. The intention of HALLOWEEN was never to be as nihilistic as TCM. I contend that it was always supposed to have a sense of fun at his core. If it didn't, then that scene with Michael dressed as a ghost with glasses would be completely out of place.
     
  4. Matt89

    Matt89 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2004
    Messages:
    5,698
    Likes Received:
    963
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Toronto
    Sure there's INTENTIONAL humor. Definitely. But what I'm saying is that people were laughing at parts of Halloween that clearly were not meant to be funny. If the entire film was meant to be funny, Halloween would be a comedy, a parody even. I understand that there was a lot of intentional humor, however people still laughed at parts that weren't really meant to be funny. It's all I'm saying. People tend to find Halloween rather humorous than scary.

    ~Matt
     
  5. maybrick

    maybrick Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2001
    Messages:
    10,786
    Likes Received:
    664
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Keene, NH
    I get what you're saying, but this conversation has become circular. The kind of people that laughed at Halloween during the serious bits will laugh at no matter what they're shown. They're not laughing at HALLOWEEN per se, they're laughing simply at the fact that it's "old". I see a distinction. I also see the same kind of idiots at new movies, too, so the fact that you've seen them at a presentation of HALLOWEEN isn't enough evidence in my mind that the film has truly "dated" other than in the shallowest of regards.
     
  6. Matt89

    Matt89 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2004
    Messages:
    5,698
    Likes Received:
    963
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Toronto
    Tru yeah I get what you're saying too.

    This didn't get too violent a discussion though. :)

    ~Matt
     
  7. maybrick

    maybrick Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2001
    Messages:
    10,786
    Likes Received:
    664
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Keene, NH
    Hey, as long as no one talks shit about DEADLY FRIEND or ARACHNOPHOBIA everything is hunky dory. ;)
     
  8. Matt89

    Matt89 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2004
    Messages:
    5,698
    Likes Received:
    963
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Toronto
    :lol: That made my day (even though it's 11:45 PM here).

    Haha "hunky dory". Haven't heard someone say that in years.

    ~Matt
     
  9. maybrick

    maybrick Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2001
    Messages:
    10,786
    Likes Received:
    664
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Keene, NH
    You can attribute that to the David Bowie Fan in me. :)
     
  10. Angelman

    Angelman OCD Blu Ray Collector

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2004
    Messages:
    3,606
    Likes Received:
    1,141
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I've been to a Halloween screening in LA that people paid well for and Carpenter was there to introduce the film. People still laughed. But it was less dismissive than one of fondness and familiarity - it's like seeing Psycho - there is a fondness for the film and the genre in general but people laugh, not out of disrespect, but out of familiarity and fun (even if they haven't seen the film, they are aware of the conventions of the genre).

    I think Halloween holds up well insofar as it is very much a movie of the 70s. Kids talk different now and how kids are portrayed differently now (on film) - to that extent it is dated.
     
  11. rhett

    rhett Administrator

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2000
    Messages:
    9,395
    Likes Received:
    45
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Canada
    Hey, I'm cool with the sister subplot - it adds a continuity and story arc that could be mined for several films. Without it, it would just be Michael killing without cause from sequel to sequel, and well, Jason already claimed that territory by the time the sequels kicked in. The second film has never been a favorite, but the best parts of the remaining sequels are the family subplots, either with Laurie and Michael or Jamie and Michael. Making the series about family means that we actually get a female protagonist to root for, rather than your typical Final Girl who knows nothing for the first two acts and then gets thrown into the role as the force to defeat evil. The best (only good?) part of Resurrection was the opening face-off between Laurie and Michael - had they done away with family it would have just been the second half of the movie, and, well, Trick or treat, muthafucka!!!!!

    As far as watching the series goes, I echo MorallySound and Fistfuck, you've got to watch them all. Part of the pleasure of being a horror fan is experiencing those long-running series and toughing through the bad ones to find the goods. This year for me it was the Silent Night, Deadly Night and Slumber Party Massacre films. It's always great to finish a full canon and to reflect on the individual parts. The Halloween series is one of the most entertaining in that respect since each one is so different than the last.

    Six is a massive piece of shit that will turn you into a man if you manage to complete it in full. Four and Five work great together, and personally I think I prefer the general craziness in H5 to all the other sequels in the Michael canon. Other than a laggy interlude inside the house at the start of act three, H4 is filled with good old fashion horror, too. The other pair, H20 and H:R, works well together, even if they can't compare to 4 & 5. H6 may be dull and numbingly boring, but Zombie's remake is bad in a whole slew of different ways. It definitely isn't boring, just insulting to intelligence, memory, taste and virtually anything that fires synapses in your brain. I really wish H3 would just go by the Season of the Witch title (but then Romero already took that, so maybe we should just call it Silver Shamrock, or something), since it obviously doesn't fit within the series at all. H3 is a blast though, you get Dean Cundey rocking the cinematography, Carpenter behind the script and score and Tom Atkins totally owning every scene he's in. I can't ever let a Halloween pass by these days without playing Tom Atkins' epic finale in H3.

    It's definitely a rite of passage watching the Halloweens, Fridays or Elm Streets for the first time. I'll always remember those days fondly, and you will too, crikan. Enjoy it!
     
  12. Buddusky

    Buddusky New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2005
    Messages:
    192
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Outpost 31
    For me the original is obviously the best then parts 2 and 3. I agree Tom Atkins is great in the 3rd. After that they went downhill. I wonder what the following films would have been like if they had stuck to their original plan after the 2nd and gave every film a different story.:hum:
     
  13. spawningblue

    spawningblue Deadite

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2004
    Messages:
    5,069
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
    Yeah that's what I was trying to say, you just said it in a way that makes sense haha.
     
  14. CasEjonz

    CasEjonz Guest

    The original is my all time favorite movie, and I think the rest are a big step below, but when I revisit them I gotta say that they are not to bad in retrospect. Though part 2 is a needless gorefest, its still decent (except Michael is sooooo small) Part 3 is a good stand alone film, it just got tagged with the "Halloween" label so it got blasted but is still a fun film in its own right. I really like Part 4 and to a lesser degree part 5. I like the Jamie Lloyd character. Part 6 sucks, and the producer's cut is the better way to go for that film. H2O is nothing to right home about and Ressurection REALLY bites (Busta Rhymes beating up Michael Myers with his kung fu moves...yeah right)
    The Zombie film was pretty weak, and the workprint of that does little to really pull the thing together.
     
  15. bigdaddyhorse

    bigdaddyhorse Detroit Hi-on

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    12,508
    Likes Received:
    56
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Under a rock
    I think I'm literally the only person on the board who liked Ressurection, what a shame. It seems like no one can see around Busta's big ass head and lets his pressence ruin anything else they may get from the film. I don't like him, I don't like his role, I definitly don't like him kicking Michael's ass, but besides that the film has some good stuff. If only Tyra really died filming it...:evil:

    I don't see how anyone can with a straight face say 6 is a better movie than 8, even the producer's cut sucks!

    My ranks:
    1,2,4,3,8,5,7, and way behind fan films, comics and any other Halloween story I can dream up is 6. Quite possibly the worst horror movie ever, except maybe Viscious.;)
     
  16. maybrick

    maybrick Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2001
    Messages:
    10,786
    Likes Received:
    664
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Keene, NH
    You're not the only one. I like it as well, truth be told it does have it's moments, but I guess not enough of them for me to make a habit out of defending it. I'd gladly take another sequel with Busta than another one with Rob Zombie.

    The Producer's Cut of Part 6 is a different story. I think that it's WAY better than the theatrical cut and I'd rank it fourth tied with Part 2 and beating 5, H20 and Resurrection (not to mention the remake).
     
  17. BrokeNads

    BrokeNads New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2008
    Messages:
    249
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I think is true some is good some is bad but is best to see all the movies.
    Halloween 3 is no Micheal Myers. Is Halloween 3 the night he didnt come home. Is some masks and hypnosis when you put the mask on your face but you dont need this masks because to listen to the song make the cockaroachs run from your brain and eyes! Crazy annoying song!
     
  18. crikan

    crikan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2008
    Messages:
    2,026
    Likes Received:
    105
    Trophy Points:
    63
    I watched Halloween 4 last night and loved it. The first 40 minutes were fantastic before hitting a wall when they went to the sheriff's house. That kicked off a 30 minute stretch that couldn't have been more boring. Thankfully, Dr. Loomis returned and made the film entertaining again. The ending was amazing. Probably the best ending to any slasher. It wasn't really a surprise but very well executed.

    Just like the first Halloween most of what I enjoyed was Dr Loomis. Donald Pleasance is a real treat in that role. Much like the first, there is some truly funny dialogue during the excellent setup that takes up the first half of the movie. This is what I missed in Halloween 2.

    After watching 3 films I still don't find the Michael Myers character/creature design interesting or scary. I think the look of Michael actually took a step back in Halloween 4. I am certainly interested in his motivations, but I don't like his look or the way he moves.

    It's on to Halloween 5: The Revenge of Michael Myers. I hope the 2006 Special Edition from Anchor Bay is good. I picked it up at Vintage Stock new for $10.
     
  19. maskull

    maskull I finally got an avatar!!! Yay!!

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2004
    Messages:
    5,599
    Likes Received:
    598
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Etobicoke, Canada
    Nope. I also enjoyed Resurrection. Sure it's got some silly lines, and Busta hams it up massively, but I always find myself getting drawn in when the final girl is alone in the house with Michael and the internet audience is sending her text messages to keep her alive. I find myself cheering for her along with the people sitting at the computer.

    Maybe if they'd made the movie about a completely different killer and had it as a stand alone flick, it wouldn't be quite as reviled. Maybe. If they can get past Busta.

    The first time I saw the original and part 2 were when I was a kid. I didn't really like them. I didn't see them again for many years until I was close to being in my 30's. The original I totally loved the second time around and found it to be disturbing and creepy. Part 2 I was pretty bored with. Now the original is one of my favourite horror movies and after a few more viewings, I really like part 2 as well. All the others I didn't see till fairly recently and I really enjoyed 3, 4, 5 and yes, there are parts of 6 that really work for me. Part 4 is easily the second best movie in the series. H20 is probably my least favourite of the franchise as it seemed too rushed.

    Anyway I think the series still holds up well. I hadn't seen most of the movies until recently and they still worked for me.
     
  20. shockwave

    shockwave New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2008
    Messages:
    203
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Joplin, MO
    I think its a great series. And as for Part 2, I love it, I remember when I was younger I actually liked that better than the first, but now I appreciate the original for what it was which was slowly building suspense. ANd in my opinion 3 is great, in some ways its like F13 5 in that it gets shit for trying to go in a diffrent direction and not having Michael or Jason in it, but still a good movie nonetheless. 4 and 5 were good, 6, eh was stupid however the Producers Cut redeemed it into a watchable film. H20 felt like Dawson Creek/Scream/Urban Legend take your pick type of film. It had some good moments such as JLC return, but overall it fails for ignoring the previous films. Resurrection was absolute shit, nevermind Rhymes ridiculous role in it, the whole plot itself stank. And I've still yet to see any of Zombie's Halloween's as the man can't make an original or entertaining movie to save his life, I dont need to see Michael Meyers as a white trash teen blah blah every movie he does.


    Vintage stock huh, you're a midwesterner huh? We have them around here too.
     

Share This Page