Halloween (2018)
 

With all that's being said so far between me and cheeba, who hasn't even seen it yet, I figured I would make a thread for the people who have. I have a few things I wanted to ask people who have seen it to see what they think. I will write it's in white so people who haven't seen it won't have it spoiled for them...

First of all I want to say I don't think Michael is dead. Yes he was more or less locked inside of a furnace but that really means nothing. In a horror movie anything can happen and I realize we might as well not even count the times that everyone thought he was dead before since apparently those times no longer exist I just think it would have been too weird and sudden of an ending to be the actual ending. I would also like to think by them showing her daughter holding the knife, whether it be because she's too scared to put it down or because she is about to freak out, I still think there is more to be told on that as well as what exactly the link is between Michael Myers and Laurie Strode they really aren't brother and sister. I mean when the crazy ass doctor said Judith, it made Michael wake up. What if Lori looks like Judith and he saw her and thought she was still alive and he needed to finish the job. That actually kind of makes sense but I would like to think there is something deeper than that especially if they are insinuating the daughter holding the knife is the evil tendency in the family like what happened with Jamie at the end of Halloween 4.

I would love to hear some theories and inside from others who have seen it.

SPOILERS

First of all, I thought the film was just OK as a horror thriller. I certainly wasn't impressed by any aspect of the film. Thought it was much too light on what I would consider the key themes of the original Halloween: the Boogeyman/The Shape, Laurie Strode, psychiatrist's obsession, suspense and horror. Neither did it add anything to the essential story, nor answer any questions.

On a positive note, I thought it managed to balance being a fan-film while still progressing the timeline, avoiding unintentionally corney parody, telling a different story and being sufficiently unpredictable.

Is Michael still alive? You just have to look at the budget ($15mil) versus box office ($250mil). ::big grin:: The answer is no mere mortals can resist Yes.

You're right, Michael could get out of the house somehow. Or, as the ending shot focuses on the bloody kitchen knife in the daughter's hand, she could be the new Boogeywoman.

It's interesting the film doesn't explore why Michael was going after Laurie. Certainly doesn't say Laurie was his sister. In the original, it could be enough that Laurie and friend drops off a key at Michael's old house, where he sees her, and stalks her. Why he'd have any interest in her after he's captured... (how he was captured is unaddressed in 2018 film) that is puzzling. Halloween 2, written by the same pair, introduced she was his sister, because they understood the plot needed it, something the writers of the 2018 missed. The podcast reporters asked Laurie why, she doesn't answer, and the film never addresses it again, which I think added disappointment.

I think them not explaining the Strode connection works fine with the first movie.
It presented Michael as just a force of nature - an animal, a pure predator devoid of any human reasoning.
He set his sights on Laurie just because she happened to be in his path.
He saw her - that was it.
Her extermination became his only objective.
Whatever was, or wasn't "wrong with him" aside - I think it was simply that for whatever reason he chose what was there as his victim/prey and she was his singular "reason", tunnel vision.
I think between the two films, he was just on pause out of circumstance.
He was simply picking up where he left off.
She was still there - his aim was to remedy that, for whatever reason (or lack thereof) he had in the first place.
Whatever it was that drove him, that factor that I don't think was ever really intended to be understood by the audience (eg - can't explain/understand = scary)
was still in play.
Just like he was an animal in enforced hibernation.

Just me, but I think the lack of WHY was one of the things that made the first one so effective and what made Michael really unique...reasons and connections were only really toyed with in the sequels...this follow up was set firmly within the lore contained in the first movie, and I think they were happy to keep it there. I think what we have here is a sequel that stayed true.
He's the shark. She is his blood in the water.
I look forward to seeing him again, perhaps with that mask melted into his face.

Would be pretty interesting if the teen daughter (in 2018 version) becomes the next Boogeywoman... wonder if a shorty spice coming at ya would work? = p

Glad you liked 2018. I thought it was ok, just a little lacking. The podcast interview was a great vehicle to ask some questions, give some answers, even if the answer is 'don't know'.

Curious though... between the two films, how did they capture Michael in the first place? (After Loomis shot him out the window, he looked back and he was gone). Michael was captured, they could have had some 'cannon' fun with how. Laurie could have told them how she tried to get Michael killed in prison. Maybe some flashback. A convo she had with Michael's shrink convincing her he's still out to get her. Shrink trying to get info out of Laurie, and Laurie getting the idea he's obsessed. Just peppered in throughout the film... because I don't think I really got to know who the 2018 Laurie is, or who the psychiatrist was, or anyone really. I think it would have enhanced the film; because the suspense and action was subpar to the original.

I Fucking Loved Halloween (2018)
 

I thought this was a great film. I loved how it brought back elements of the original 2 films like where they follow Michael with the camera. Thats awesome! I loved the soundtrack. It was perfect! I liked the storyline as well. I am excited to see "Halloween Kills" on October 16th, 2020.

Is anyone else excited to see the new film?
::cool::

Some people wonder why Myers cannot die. Our money keeps him alive. He wears a bullet proof vest of dollars.

I liked aspects of the film. The doctor who helped Myers for instance. I also enjoyed the scene where he snuck into people's homes and just slaughtered them. Evil. And Casual.

They (Hollywood) are re-releasing the original Halloween in theaters this fall.

I saw it and i it looked 👍

Started liking it after my third viewing.

I thought it was pretty good. Some of the kills were savage and there were some cool callbacks to the original. Probably up there as one of my favorites in the series and I think it might even be the best out of the sequels.

Laurie Strode and other let downs.
 

The movie had many letdowns. Why would the justice department allow the journalist to possess Michaels mask and use it for an interview with someone already prosecuted and sentenced? Makes no sense. Why would you make Laurie Strode tough as nails and fully prepared only to make her weak as hell and make many stupid mistakes in the final confrontation? Why would they have Laurie Strode have a son in H20 only to switch to a daughter? Stupid. Stop rewriting history. It's like they have the financial backing so they can use their creativity the way they want without them taking into consideration of how the audience will react to their ridiculous changes. Talented actors, but bad creative concepts and writing. The problem with sequels and remakes is that those in the creative process are not getting any genuine feedback and just allowed to run amok at our expense when we pay to watch these movies after hyping it up, only to be let down.

LOL the events you refer to were just as much a retcon/addition in their own right as anything in this film.

Because it's been since 1978, the Michael story is still not completely understood and explained, and therefore worthy of attention, just like unsolved murders etc.
As to why it was "allowed", I would imagine the proper channels were followed and that it was not deemed to be a risk factor that they attempted to interview him.
I personally wonder more HOW they had the mask.

Because she's old? She's human? She thought she had it all locked down and the sudden reappearance of Michael plus the threat to her actual family threw her a bit, I'd say.
I mean hell...she did ok?

Because that's H20. This is Halloween 2018 - the only thing this movie needed to worry about fitting into was the original title, not any of the sequels/reboots.

I dunno...I feel like they'd have got inundated with feedback...and I have to say you do seem to be somewhat A minority with how you feel about this movie. The vast majority of people I've encountered loved it...because it stayed true to the theme, atmosphere and style of the original. Aside from the original Halloween 2, I don't think much of the series has come close to attaining that status.

Just me, I liked it fine.

I don't really like this film. The story didn't attracted me, kinda boring imo.

It didn't bother me that the podcast/reporters had the mask. Probably because we have no idea how they captured MM. It could have fell off during a chase and purchased later off ebay some time after the trial. If the state had the mask, I don't see how the reporters would get it. Did Illinois state sell John Wayne Gacy's underwear stuffers, or let anyone grab one if they wanted? I don't think so.

Anywho, I think a great question is how did the police capture MM? He's in one piece. They must of shot and cuffed him while he was 'out'. MM demonstrated super strength, how did they cuff and keep him from getting away, like when he was in the hospital under guard? He could have "shutdown" again, I mean, like he was in the institution from the first film, but the film just doesn't say. He wouldve been unfit to stand trial.

I'm just saying, when the reporters interview Laurie, the film could have laid down a viable plot exposition there explaining some of these things. I could have composed an easy entertaining explanation that would have added to the fun and setup a few punches for the rest of the film.

Like I said before, in the Laurie interview they could have revealed MM's psychiatrist was asking Laurie a lot of obsessive questions; how they captured MM; Laurie could say she tried to get him killed in prison, but it didn't succeed, instead getting her friend, a guard, killed... and setting up another character who's helping her.

Lastly, I was disappointed I didn't really get to know who Laurie 2020 was. Not enough there. The interview should have been a more useful catalyst to really make her alive, believable, likeable, setup of the psychiatrist, etc.

Meh
 

I've watched it twice now and although I enjoyed it more the second time around I still don't think it was great. I can't remember now if they explicitly said Laurie was Michael's sister or if it was just implied but neither make sense going back to the original there was never any mention of another sister nor that Laurie was adopted. That's not a deal breaker for me but as a couple of people have commented, it's much better to have Michael just going after her because he needs to, nothing else. An unstoppable evil force. That's all the reason that we really need. This is definitely a situation where less is more in the story line.

I liked the idea and structure for Laurie's character, I just didn't like the "Home Alone" vibe of her house with all of the traps. I would have liked to see a more direct confrontation where she ambushed him or something rather than trapping him in a rigged basement.

As for the other inconsistencies in the Halloween story line, this is just Halloween 2. The only real question (as others have mentioned) is how they captured Michael although that's a forgivable plot sin I think as the details of that aren't terribly important to the current plot. Michael needs to escape so he can kill Laurie. End of plot.

Overall, meh. It was better than most of the previous sequels but that's not a high bar.