Re: H2 (Halloween II ) ------> 1/12/10
 

Makes sense to me. Since she but at the same time he could have conveyed that better.

Re: H2 (Halloween II ) ------> 1/12/10
 

Movie was garbage... RZ is a hack. That's my opinion and I'm sticking to it! :thmbsdwn:

Re: H2 (Halloween II ) ------> 1/12/10
 

I doubt there's others who would try to dissuade you from that opinion... ;)

Re: H2 (Halloween II ) ------> 1/12/10
 

Couldn't find it at WM so I ordered it through Deepdiscount for 16.44

Re: H2 (Halloween II ) ------> 1/12/10
 

This movie is a steaming pile of shit. I just watched it to see if it could top the awfulness of Halloween:Resurrection and it actually did. Way to go Zombie! But the best part was the commentary because Zombie is such a prick the whole time. He keeps talking about how he made up stuff on the spot and how, like another poster already mentioned, nothing was his fault. And you know all that white horse garbage? That came to Zombie as he was driving to set one day and saw a wild white horse and thought that it looked "surreal", so he incorporated it into the film.

Zombie also talks about how he didn't feel like explaining how Myers survived the magnum blast to the head from the previous film and just replied with a "whatever". So he clearly doesn't give a shit with some of the big logic problems with the film and then acts like the audience is stupid when they can't figure out the dream sequence stuff he tossed in there. From what I've read, nobody forced him to make this movie and he only wanted to do it in order to finish on his own terms. If that's true, I wonder why he came across like making this movie was such a waste of his time in the commentary? I can understand him being upset that nobody liked his vision, but he seemed like he didn't give a shit from the very start.

Re: H2 (Halloween II ) ------> 1/12/10
 

I think it's bizarre that everyone seems to hold the new Halloweens to a totally different standard than the old ones. So, a director throws in a tiny bit of visual symbolism and then all of a sudden the movie has to be a web of intricate psychological mastery? The horse indicates people going crazy. I didn't take it particularly seriously. It's a slasher movie. I don't see anyone particularly up in arms about how Michael survives the original Halloween II, so why is it Zombie's responsibility to explain how Michael survives the shot to the head in this one? Because this Halloween is ostensibly more realistic?

I just can't buy that people would rather have the same old crap -- plus Busta Rhymes karate chopping Michael -- in the horrendous Halloween: Resurrection than something that is different and interesting. Michael gets his power from druids! Is this really the canon you want Zombie to stick to? Michael's a human being, are human beings not allowed to talk? I think there aren't any answers to these questions that won't validate Zombie's take just as thoroughly as the original take. Remember, it's one thing to say you didn't like something, and you hated all the ideas, and blah blah blah, and it's another thing to call it stupid, to claim it doesn't make sense, etc. One is an opinion, the other is an assessment of fact, and the latter has to be backed up by some sort of logic. Is Halloween II a great movie? No. But I don't think it veers wildly into some sort of territory that seems unprecedented by what came before.

Re: H2 (Halloween II ) ------> 1/12/10
 

Zombie seems very angry that people either don't understand or like his vision of this film. But after watching it and listening to the commentary it's pretty obvious that Zombie really didn't have a clear vision to begin with. In the commentary he talks about how a lot of the stuff was created on the spot as a result of their tight filming schedule. Sometimes ideas born under intense pressure like that lead to complete genius and other times they lead to stuff like Halloween II. There is no weight behind them and it comes off as sloppy and half-baked.

As for your comments about the previous Halloween sequels, nobody is giving them a free pass at all. In fact, I've never met a horror fan who liked Halloween: Resurrection! But all of their failings shouldn't absolve Halloween II of its own problems. In fact I would argue that like Halloween II, Curse of Michael Myers tried to be something more original and interesting than your standard slasher. Obviously it failed as well, but that's beside the point. People aren't being unnecessarily cruel to Halloween II just for kicks. It just so happens that it has a lot of problems.

On the topic of Zombie's take on Myers, he should have know from all the previous films that if you fuck with him too much, it will piss off the fans. So having him walk around without a mask and speak at the end of the film was a very bad risk. Michael was supposed to have a line at the end of H20 as well, but the producers were smart enough to know it would bother the fans. That's the problem when you are dealing with an iconic figure like Myers, people don't want him to change too drastically. So with Zombie's "fuck you" attitude to all the fans with this film, it's easy to understand why it bothers so many people.

Personally, I wasn't that upset by Zombie's take on Myers, but I found the film itself to be a complete mess. I know that's it's tough to like something that so many people hate, (I enjoyed Knowing :o), but there are reasons why this film had such a negative reaction from a lot of people.

With all this said I'm not looking to get into a fight with you over this film. I've said my piece and will leave it at that. :)

Re: H2 (Halloween II ) ------> 1/12/10
 

That's the biggest problem I had with the film. Michael without the mask in several scenes, sporting a ZZ Top beard, and speaking at the end of the Director's Cut. Sorry, but that was nothing like the Michael Myers of the original series, the Michael that almost every Halloween fan liked. The Michael Myers in Zombie's Halloween II (and briefly in Zombie's Halloween) seemed like a regular guy/hobo that went apeshit and became a mass murderer. In the original series, only one time did you get a clear look at Michael's face as an adult. At the end of the 1978 original when Jamie Lee Curtis pulls his mask off. And John Carpenter made a good choice by picking someone who looked the part. There were a few other instances in the original series where adult Myers didn't have the mask, but his face was always obscured by shadows or too far in the background to be clearly seen. My point? Zombie shouldn't have revealed Michael's face.

Re: H2 (Halloween II ) ------> 1/12/10
 

I didn't think he came off as a "prick" on the commentary. I haven't finished it yet, but I've listened to pretty much the whole thing. And I don't seem to remember him blaming other people for his problems. I remember him sounding frustrated by what sounds like a very rushed schedule, which either was or wasn't his fault (probably not HIS fault) and him complaining about the weather and whatnot, but hardly a "prick"

His "whatever" attitude is fine with me. Lets all remember back to the ending of the original Halloween II when Michael Myers for all intents and purposes was blown up along with Loomis and then in part 4 they are both fine (save for a scar on Loomis' cheek). They never explain how ANY slasher killer survives the previous film. They don't really explain how Myers survived the end of the original part 2, so who cares? I completely agree with his attitude toward that. I think trying to explain it would have been a mistake. Nobody cares HOW he survived it, they just want to see him killing people again.

I recently watched this again. I saw it in the theater but then I saw the DC on DVD. I have to admit, though still NOT very good, it's not nearly as bad as I remember it. I think the DC is much better than the TC and the commentary has actually made me appreciate the film more. I think that if Zombie had taken more time and spent more time looking at the other films and what the fans wanted it would have been a much better film. But it's hardly that bad.

Oh yes you have, because I liked it. Not one of the best, but still I enjoyed it for what it was. Was Busta Rhymes horrible? Yes. But still, I enjoyed it.

See. To each his own :)

Re: H2 (Halloween II ) ------> 1/12/10
 

The logic being that, since Halloween II is going to follow Zombie's Halloween 2007, you can't really keep using the "he's not like Michael from the original" argument. If a character's drastically changed in a remake to a movie, and the same writer/director makes a sequel to it, are you really shocked that the character in the sequel is still drastically changed?

Again, it's one thing to say you don't like it, but the expectations you're presenting as having expected Zombie to meet are nonsensical.

Re: H2 (Halloween II ) ------> 1/12/10
 

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. He came across as very bitter and angry and always put the blame on the tight schedule and the crew. He took shots at the fans for dumping on the film yet he never seemed to care about it in the first place. That's why his "whatever" response to a lot of what he put in the film bothered me. If he didn't care, why should we?

Wow, okay then. Even the part where that cook guy quickly makes a mixture of spices and then throws them in Michael's eyes? lol. :)

Re: H2 (Halloween II ) ------> 1/12/10
 

I remember that character, but not that scene! It's been a few years since I've seen the movie all the way through though.

Re: H2 (Halloween II ) ------> 1/12/10
 

If he is going to be pissy about the movie and the process of making it then he should have never signed on to do the fucking thing in the first place. It must be tough to be able to choose your jobs or choose to not work. I would have been happier if he had chosen not to make Halloween II and let someone else do it or just left it to be.

Re: H2 (Halloween II ) ------> 1/12/10
 

I believe it's right before The best part was that Michael is charging him and the kid has a knife in his hand, but he chooses to throw the spices instead. Comedy gold!

Re: H2 (Halloween II ) ------> 1/12/10
 

Oh! I think I do remember that...

I think I enjoy Resurrection because there are so many bad things in it that it makes it good. Busta Rhymes has to be the worst actor ever. I think the worst line I've ever heard in a movie is "Michael Myers is a KILLER SHARK... in baggy ass overalls" :)

Re: H2 (Halloween II ) ------> 1/12/10
 

Funny. Reading this thread makes me want to watch Halloween 6 & 8 just for fun. :D

Re: H2 (Halloween II ) ------> 1/12/10
 

I still am trying to figure out how we as an audience are suppose to be able to tell that the long dolly shot down the hallway of the sanatarium in the last scene is as he claims it does in the audio commentary
and he totally ruined any bit of creepiness of that scene by removing Lauries theme from it and replacing it with that crappy version of love hurts

Re: H2 (Halloween II ) ------> 1/12/10
 

I was ragging on Resurrection before, but the truth is that I think it's merely a mediocre slasher flick with some really bad elements (like the prologue, which I really, really loathe -- just a terrible waste of time and characters, the fact that some people are watching over the internet, and Rhymes, among other things I don't remember, since I've only seen it once). I mean, it's adequately crafted if poorly written. I definitely hate the sixth way more. One of my least favorite films of all time.

Re: H2 (Halloween II ) ------> 1/12/10
 

And i just have to add I dont think i have ever laughed as hard watching a movie as i did when .

I have always been a fan of the halloween movies more than any other horror icon cause even as an adult,that character (even in the worst entry in the original series)still scared the heck out of me. Zombie between both of his films has totally ruined that for me, his Grizzly Adams errr i mean Michael Myers is a joke, he is not scary at all. I think thats why so many people have a hatred of his 2 halloween films, its that he took a character that still scared quite a few movie fans for 30 plus years and through 7 sequals, and basicly made him not scary to anyone anymore unless you are maybe 10 years old and even then thats a big maybe.

Re: H2 (Halloween II ) ------> 1/12/10
 

I actually liked the prologue, I thought it was suspenseful and was a good end to the Laurie Strode storyline.
but the reason why we even have that prolouge is cause The Weinstiens basicly forced Jamie Lee curtis to be in the movie,even though she had no desire to be in a H20 sequal, the reason why Jamie Lee curtis said she wanted to make H20 was because the 20th anniversy of her big break in hollywood, she and really no one else for that matter was really expecting H20 to be a Hit.(hence the august release date) and the ending was written to be a closure to the Halloween Franchise.
But once it became a pretty good size hit in Aug of 1998(the reason why every halloween film since then has been an august release), Bob and Harvey didnt want to see the franchise which had now become popular again fade away, then it turned out that Jamie was contractually obligated to appear in another halloween sequal if one were to come about if H20 were to become a success

I remember in the hollywood trade papers that they reported over her trying to get out of appearing in the sequal to H20. the final compromise being to have her just be in the first 20 mins.




one thing i find funny about the inclussion of Halloween 6 on this disc is that really Halloween H20 and resurection are sequals that just totally ignore the exsistance of Halloweens 4 5 and 6.

Re: H2 (Halloween II ) ------> 1/12/10
 

:lol: If you enjoy Resurrection for those reasons, then I'm right there with you. I thought that you actually thought it was a decent Halloween film. I also liked the sound Michael makes when he gets kicked in the balls near the end of the film. He sounds like a whale dying.

And to keep this thread on track I will say one thing I enjoyed about Zombie's HII. The whole opening sequence in the hospital was very well done as long as you get rid of the stupid dialog between the coroners and the hitting the cow stuff.

Re: H2 (Halloween II ) ------> 1/12/10
 

I agree that the opening was pretty damn good. If the rest of the film had been like that it would have been way better. Even though I don't think it's as bad as the original viewing, I still have major problems with the movie. Michael taking his mask off a bunch then putting it back on, Laurie is ultra annoying in this movie as is Annie. The characters changed way too much since the last film. Loomis is the biggest douchebag. That is my biggest problem with the movie, way to ruin an iconic character played by a fantastic actor! And I truly hated the original ending, I liked the DC ending better.

Re: H2 (Halloween II ) ------> 1/12/10
 

I just wanted to briefly chime in here, a cliffs notes version if you will:

The director's cut is far better than the theatrical cut, but there are still a lot of flaws with the film (such as Loomis' story, white horse).

In the commentary, Rob does come off as kind of a dick.

And yes, you do sort of have to hold this film up a little higher to scrutiny than previous Halloween efforts. This was a new beginning, a new beginning that Rob wanted to be more 'realistic'... and he especially wanted that for the second film. So yeah, we could get a little upset when he simply doesn't care to explain how Michael survived a BULLET in the FACE, lol

Re: H2 (Halloween II ) ------> 1/12/10
 

But again, I just don't understand why people are getting so upset over this. He was blown up in the original part 2 and that was never explained, he was shot like 20 times with shotguns at the end of part 4 and that was never explained. I think the only time his death was explained was the ending of H20 in Resurrection. It's just a part of slasher films, the killer can't die. It's been said numerous times Michael Myers can't die.

Re: H2 (Halloween II ) ------> 1/12/10
 

And even aside from that time-honored tradition, the viewer is perfectly capable of determining the gist of what happened; if Michael's alive, she must have only grazed him in the side of the head or something to that effect. Do you really need HIS explanation when you can arrive at an acceptable one just as easily? I think that's what Zombie means by "whatever" -- "I don't need to explain what the audience can probably accurately guess at". Plus, of course, it just comes with the territory. By going to see the movie, you are basically accepting that Michael lives, because otherwise, what's the movie about? I mean, realistically, people's opinions of the movie probably don't hinge on this one little element. Either Zombie could waste screen time trying to wedge in an explanation that people would either a) criticize anyway or b) not care about, or he could just let the audience jump to whatever conclusion they can come up with and it's basically the same.