Rob Zombie's Halloween II Discuss/Grade Thread

[DarKush]

I think the first Halloween remake was released in August to avoid competing against Saw, but because it did so well I think they decided to try an August release again. I really liked the first remake. I liked the MM backstory part the best. It gave him more motivation. I was never a big fan of the original MM, except for the cool mask and the music. All the other great horror icons of the 80's seemed to have a motivation, something driving them, but I never quite got what drove MM in the old films-granted I only saw Halloween, Halloween 2, and H20, so maybe it was explained in one that I missed. In Zombie's remake I got a better understanding of who MM was and why he did the things he did.

Now, on to H2. I was majorly disappointed. I didn't care for the actress playing Laurie in the first film and I sort of tuned out when I realized she would be carrying the majority of the sequel. Others have pointed out some of the stupid plot points, but one thing that I thought about much later after watching the film was why couldn't anyone smell MM coming? I mean, he didn't look like he was the most hygenic person in the world, but yet he was able to sneak up on everyone. Overall I think that H2 was a pointless remake, the 'twist' ending didn't work for me either. I think that Brad Dourif did fine and I didn't have a problem with McDowell's new slant on Loomis though he was never as impressive as Donald Pleasance in either film.

[JacksonArcher]

See, that's my problem with Zombie's Michael Myers... he tries to humanize Myers too much. Carpenter's take on Myers was that he was evil incarnate, the embodiment of evil, and that there was no explaining why he does what he does. Sort of the ultimate boogeyman. I think that's a much scarier take. And even in Zombie's version we really don't get exactly what makes Myers tick. I mean in Zombie's remake he seems to kill his family because he's bored. In the sequel he's given much more definition and the idea of being haunted by your dead mother is interesting, but still kind of out there.

I saw the rest of Halloween II yesterday and it's clear that after the first 20 minutes the film just gets sloppy and dull. The best part of the sequel were the bits inspired by Rick Rosenthal's 1981 Halloween II. Whenever Zombie deviates it has interesting but unexplored potential. The idea that Laurie is seriously mentally unstable or becoming unstable is a neat idea but played very simply. Besides the single scene with the therapist played by Margot Kidder, we don't really get a sense at how fragile her state of mind is, or how the loss of her family really affected her. I mean the idea is very interesting but I didn't believe the transition.

However I do think this is the most interesting thing to happen to Laurie Strode since H20. I'm actually interested to see where this goes from here, if Lussier continues from where Zombie has left off.

[The Borgified Corpse]

Rob Zombie seems to have interesting casting against type choices. Personally, if I were being chased by an evil serial killer, I would not want to be helped by Alex deLarge/Dr. Soran and Chucky/Grima Wormtongue/Lon Suder. I also would not want my therapist to be Margot Kidder.

[Aragorn]

^ Zombie's next film will be a balls-to-the-wall 80s throwback hardcore action film with Hugh Grant, Kate Hudson, Michael Cera, Zac Efron and Jon Cryer as the badass cops and Colin Firth as the ruthless crime lord.

[Spaceman Spiff]

Aragorn wrote:

---

^ Zombie's next film will be a balls-to-the-wall 80s throwback hardcore action film with Hugh Grant, Kate Hudson, Michael Cera, Zac Efron and Jon Cryer as the badass cops and Colin Firth as the ruthless crime lord.

I really and truly hate it when you do that.

As for the ending of this movie, do any of you guys buy into the interpretation that...

Laurie was committing the murders throughout the whole film?

I've heard that a few times on horror sites, but I don't think that works at all.

[JacksonArcher]

Umm... that's really off the wall. Nothing I've seen in the film or read through articles or interviews would seem to support that. Maybe in the next film, though. That I could buy.

[Spaceman Spiff]

I don't think so, either. The ending was already pretty dumb, but that would take the cake.

[JacksonArcher]

Yeah, I think people somehow put that together because...

... Laurie walked out of the shack with the Shatner mask on, which I thought was an obvious visual clueing in the audience that Laurie had finally become "consumed" by Michael, or had learn to accept the reality that he was her brother.

[nx1701g]

I don't think we need the spoiler code.

I'll admit that I had the thought that Laurie was Michael while I was watching the film a few times, but I was familiar with the original plans for Halloween Resurrection before Jamie Lee Curtis asked for a decreased part so I think that's clouded my opinions. If you didn't know the original plans for Halloween Resurrection (the one where Laurie was killed) ended with the lead character unmasking Michael to find that it was Laurie all along and that she'd become him after she'd killed him in H20.

[JacksonArcher]

Yeah okay but maybe if the physical stature of Myers resembled a woman had that idea been executed that might have been conceivable on some idiotic, contrived level but does anyone buy Laurie Strode as a hairy hippie behemoth? I mean, seriously. Unless Laurie imagined herself as Myers but it still makes absolutely no sense given the context and reality of Zombie's story.

[DarKush]

If Zombie had done something like "High Tension" and made Laurie the killer all along in the sequel I think I would've liked it better. And her shadow shelf takes on the guise of Michael. I think that would've been a worthy sequel.

Back to the first film, I liked the attempts to humanize Michael. I think they showed he came from an abusive home-at least verbally abusive, and he anger issues, and took out his frustration or rage on animals, which could be some indicators of possible antisocial personality disorder. I think there was more behind his killing his family than boredom. They seemed to be holding him back, restraining him, insulting him, abusing him, and he just got tired of that. He let go, and he did it in a very violent way. I think his violence was about taking control, trying to assert power over his own life, and other the lives of others. I think he wanted people to fear him.

For me, I just never got the indestructible, evil incarnate Michael from the old films. At least with the other icons of that era, Freddie, Chucky, Pinhead, and Jason, there was some supernatural explanation to explain why they kept coming back again and again. But with Michael? He's just too evil to die? That didn't work for me. Though I did enjoy Donald Pleasance's pontificating about it. He really knew how to build up to an epic confrontation, something McDowell's Loomis unfortunately didn't do.

[Spaceman Spiff]

JacksonArcher wrote:

---

Yeah okay but maybe if the physical stature of Myers resembled a woman had that idea been executed that might have been conceivable on some idiotic, contrived level but does anyone buy Laurie Strode as a hairy hippie behemoth? I mean, seriously. Unless Laurie imagined herself as Myers but it still makes absolutely no sense given the context and reality of Zombie's story.

No sense at all. She'd have to imagine she was Michael imagining his mother, whom she's never met. She doesn't even find out she's his sister until the last third of the movie.

But speaking of the end, in that last shot of Laurie grinning at the camera, do you think Zombie was paying homage to Psycho, or just plain ripping it off? I'd like to think it was the former, but it's a weird choice to pay homage to another movie with your final shot.

[JacksonArcher]

I instantly thought of Pyscho. I thought it was a not-too-subtle homage, especially since Laurie outright smiled, whereas Norman Bates smiled in a more subtle way (in my opinion). Why was the room so long? I gathered it was in Laurie's head, as was the apparition of Myers' mom and the horse, but that's my main problem with Halloween II: Zombie paints the first film and this one, dream sequences aside, as a very realistic, gritty horror film. The inclusion of the dream sequences -- which somehow Laurie can see by the end of the film -- ruin that. I was confused a lot during the film as to what was suppose to be real or dreamt up, and not in a good way.

[Spaceman Spiff]

Well, it looks like Patrick Lussier's been confirmed as the director of Halloween 3D. It says they're planning to begin filming in November for a summer release.

Doesn't that seem a bit too soon? As reviled as this movie was, and with its disappointing box office take, you'd think they'd want to let it lie for a couple of years before trying again.

It's also reported that Todd Farmer will be writing the movie. I enjoyed My Bloody Valentine 3D on a pure "it knows what it is" level, though the ending was dopey. But his other credits include the lackluster The Messengers, The Messengers 2: The Scarecrow and, uh, Jason X.

Well, here's hoping.

[JacksonArcher]

Hmm. I guess I need to see My Bloody Valentine now.

It does seem a bit soon. Why summer? Wasn't My Bloody Valentine released in the spring? The Final Destination was released in August. I miss when horror films came out around, y'know, Halloween. That's excluding those Saw films, of course.

At least I have Trick 'R Treat to look forward to.