New trailer is finally up...

Halloween

I hated this cause it's not myers at all but it's some sort of generic devils rejects group with kids and it's just fuck'n annoying.

During the SDCC G4 specials, that cute chick was trying to get an adjective out of Rob to describe this movie (as opposed to "remake").

He summed it up by saying "If Carpenter's "Halloween" is a short story, mine is a novel".

So from watching the trailer it appears

I'll still probably wind up catching this, but I'll be going into it with very low expectations.

I had high hopes, but after watching the trailer on VH-1 it looks like your tipical modern, noisy, in your face horror movie.

the thing that made halloween scary was the gloomy lighting.... the music and the fact that they didnt have to show any blood...

I believe it's been posted elsewhere that it's a mask made from paper.

Why the hell is everyone bashing this flick already? It looks damn good and a hell of a lot more intense then Carpenters. I know, the original Halloween barely used any blood, was toned down, day scenes were awesome, blah, blah, blah.

Look, yes I love the original Halloween but I somewhat gave up on it because of the cheesy dialouge and well, it's just a low budget borefest - does it suck? Fuck no but it's dated and has lost it's appeal a bit (for me anyway).

Hey, I'm not saying this film is gonna be the best ever but it looks like Zombie has done his homework and there are a lot of classic/homage shots shown in the most recent trailer.

For me, one of the biggest reasons that this just doesn't feel right is that Myers is freakishly superhuman in proportion to any normal human being. To see him rip apart people and survive attacks, as tall and massive as he is, isn't entirely a stretch.

For me, that's part of the reason the original was terrifying. Nick Castle was slightly above average in height (something like 6"1') and was of average weight for that build. However, in the new film, Tyler Mane is in the area of 6"9', and considerably more well built.

For me, it was the fact that there was this average looking man, a man who, sans mask, you could see about anywhere, simply walking around destroying people and their lives. It brought a sense of realism to the theatrical nature of it all.

EDIT: I just realized I used "for me" to open each paragraph in my post. Weird...

Because after already seeing it, it isn't halloween at all and is rather a piece of shit. So is there justification in bashing the flick if you've already seen it?

I'd have to agree to a point. The old Halloween is still great as long as nobody is speaking.............

I'll take Jack's word for it... That trailer looks fucking awful and I'm not at all surprised by that.

This movie is being pretty much made for the teenage generation who finds Halloween ultra boring. You can even see it in some of the reviews. The AICN review from someone who was so bored during the original that he fell asleep.

And this is usually the case. They don't tend to like it as the movie has dated. This is basically Halloween, gone action, for the ADD generation. I can see them liking it. Anyone who thinks the original is some kind of gold standard will probably hate it.

I've always been borderline positive to the original. It's a good movie, but a tad slow, tends to have bad acting, and also contains many plotholes (like how did Michael get that tombstone all the way upstairs in Lindey's house? how come no one in town noticed a large man in a mask hauling this tombstone?).

It's not really my favorite horror movie, so I'm probably shoot or miss when it comes to this film.

Is it worse than H20 and Freddy vs. Jason -- two of the worst "horror" movies I have ever seen?

Is it worse than Halloween 5,6,8 (the worst sequels in cinematic history)? Three things damaged this series far more than this remake's idea:

1. Thorn
2. Michael's baby (after Michael Myers raped an underage Jamie Lloyd due to Thorn's influence. Incest.)
3. Busta Rhymes

Face it... Myers is already a mockery and has been for nearly 20 years. He's constantly been thrown into ridiculous plots with ridiculous characters -- not to mention showing up in Dawson's Creekville in '98 for a PG-13 teeniebopper lovestory. Followed in '02 by a looney Laurie Strode kissing Michael Myers on the lips before falling to her death. Seriously... wtf was that? Way to toss a pivotal character in a shamefully disgusting way.

Halloween itself being made a mockery by Wes Craven's writing in "Scream." A teeniebopper calling the film "shit" to Randy. Talk about no respect to a classic. Far worse...

Or does it resemble movies like Halloween, Friday the 13th 2/4, and early 80's slashers in tone? If that's the tone, I'll probably like it. I did enjoy The Devil's Rejects as well. I also did think that The Devil's Rejects was a far better film than most of the Halloween sequels.

Just saw the trailer and I thought it looked pretty good. I enjoyed the first one Halloween and I liked the Devil's Rejects. So I think I'll give this one a shot.

It resembles NOTHING like the tone of the original Halloween, Friday the 13th and early 80's slashers. It's really as someone described it. Halloween for the ADD crowd.

Well I guess I will have to develop ADD before the DVD release comes.

I can't understand why people would find the original Halloween slow or boring. Sure it's not the fastest horror movie in the history of film but it was still a pretty damn entertaining flick & still holds up well for the most part today. It's a classic no doubt. Of course the current teenagers think that The Girl Next Door, "Is like the best movie ever!".

Boy What the f**k has happened too good movies? "Back In my day...".

Nate its a lost cause. The art of making a good film is lost to this generation. Its all about business and demographics.

If a movie were made where people watched paint dry and it turned a profit, someone in Hollywood would green light it and its obligatory sequals until the franchise has been ruined or run into the ground.

This movie will probably turn a profit, how much of a profit I'm not sure.

But its certainly a marketable success! Remake the original classic "Halloween", using a "cutting-edge" director, and follow the current trend of "new-horror"! and lets make some money! Yaaaay!

-ohbfrank-

:rolleyes:

It's always been about the business and demographics, let's not try to pretend it hasn't. There have been plenty of will-be classics that have come out in the recent years.

From what people are saying from screenings it sounds like Zombie has taken a step back in his directing. I felt that The Devil's Rejects was an incredible film, that had suspense and thrills, and was not a torture-porn, it wasn't even that graphic, but it was still very brutal, and it certainly wasn't for people with ADD. I agree with Stephen King's putting it in his Top Ten that year.

Still I want to see this new Halloween, maybe I'll still like it.

Not always. I believe the original 'Halloween' was born from a desire to thrill people using film. Carpenter used his talent and skill to make it what it is. Got some financial backers for the idea and made a great movie.

I have no idea what this version of the film is supposed to be. Some lucrative deal somewhere was made and here we are...again...in the mire of 'Halloween' revisits.

Fact is that subtlety is lost in filmmaking and on most audiences today. Unless you hit them over the head with over the top CGI or splatter its b o r r r r i n g. :boring:

Yeah, Halloween was never made for the major audience. It was done for the love of filmmaking. Something you rarely see in todays day & age. A $325,000 budget doesn't mean it's going to be a shit movie. Not everything has to cost $200 million dollars for it to be a great movie.

I heard (I think on the DVD) that Donald Pleasence only got like $15-20,000 for the first Halloween & Jamie Lee Curtis only got like $7,000 for Halloween. Most (even then) actors won't do a movie for less than $5 million.

I agree, In this day & age if it doesn't have big CGI effects & no talking then it's boring for the current generation.

Yes, I think I saw eralier in this thread that you already saw it but did you see the completed version yet? I only ask because no too long ago I remember Zombie stating that the film was just recently completed.

But as far as traliers ago, I liked what I saw and once again, I'm not saying I'm even going to like this film just liking what I see so far (I like the Argento look in some scenes a lot and I'm not even that big fan of his).

I think you're arguing with someone who doesn't care about any opposing POV. It sounds like he's conditioned himself to love this movie no matter what, and even though you've already seen it and made up your own mind, that doesn't count. :)

Going by the commercials I've seen, it still looks better than 5, 6, and 8.