Ain't It Cool News: The best in movie, TV, DVD, and comic book news.

Ford Fairlane Returns With A Look At Rob Zombie’s HALLOWEEN!

I'm gonna see it. by eggbeater	Aug 30th, 2007 11:58:29 PM
Should be cool
This one may still not hit by ewokstew	Aug 31st, 2007 12:03:59 AM
This one may still not hit the mark but Zombie is getting better as a filmmaker.
fuck by groundwork	Aug 31st, 2007 12:04:20 AM
thought i had firsties. I'm sure this shit blows, regardless. H8!!
Honestly at this point... by JERRY HORROR	Aug 31st, 2007 12:05:54 AM
The real 4 questions are simple: How big will it open? Will the film have legs? Is the film enough to CPR the franchise itself? Will die-hard fanboy/girls dig it?
Don't waste your money by jmike9243	Aug 31st, 2007 12:06:26 AM
Watch the original. This zombie shit fest cant hold a candle. What made the original Halloween great was creepiness and suspense. This movi has none of that.
Since there's no TAKE A SHIT MASK, I ain't going. by TallBoy66	Aug 31st, 2007 12:06:30 AM
My money went to BALLS OF FURY today, instead. TAKE A SHIT MASK = ASS IN SEATS.
This is the workprint, too by zikade zarathos	Aug 31st, 2007 12:07:17 AM
He reviewed the workprint. Sure, the real version's not much different (the escape and the ending are the most changed), but still.... and for the record, yeah, this movie sucks ass.
Balls by jmike9243	Aug 31st, 2007 12:08:17 AM
My money went to balls of fury too. That shit was funny! James hong is the man!
I just saw the trailer for the "One Missed Call" remake by eggbeater	Aug 31st, 2007 12:08:53 AM
and it sucked. It looks like another PG-13 horror movie we will forget about in a day. I liked the original but this just doesn't look good. I'm glad Rob Zombie remade Halloween with a hard R-rating. But then again, I don't see how he couldn't.
I do not trust this reviewer. by LoneGun	Aug 31st, 2007 12:09:02 AM
He might be right about the film but he sounds so argumentative. I get the impression that he went into the theatre prepared to hate Zombie's version. I'm going to see this HALLOWEEN and make up my own mind.
FIRST! by TORTURE PWN1	Aug 31st, 2007 12:10:23 AM
This is a review of the workprint.
Not so first... by TORTURE PWN1	Aug 31st, 2007 12:11:18 AM
This movie was absolutely terrible.
Love it or hate it this is a by arsonistradio	Aug 31st, 2007 12:14:24 AM
Love it or hate it this is a review of the workprint not the real deal...
Interesting by Purgatori	Aug 31st, 2007 12:14:39 AM
since most of this sounds like the "work print" stuff has been edited into the theatrical if this is in fact the theatrical version that was seen. It was so great when they ruined/spoiled one of the main surprise deaths at Comicon with their fucking clip.
GREAT review! by hegele	Aug 31st, 2007 12:15:17 AM
You basically pointed out every gripe I had building up in me as I read the script and watched the trailers.
Ford by Mr. Lowrie	Aug 31st, 2007 12:16:01 AM
That was some seriously forced, self-conscious writing there, Ford. It's like someone doing an impression of a bad Aintitcool or Pitchfork contributor. And 1000 Corpses was pure manure.
Sad when the review is more entertaining than the movie by Mullah Omar	Aug 31st, 2007 12:23:15 AM
So many clever words wasted by discussing this shit...
This film has it all... by neutrino	Aug 31st, 2007 12:23:28 AM
Bad acting, nonexistent character development, more plot-holes than Haddonfield Cemetary, dialogue written by a lobotomized twelve year-old, and cinematography designed to increase Dramamine sales.
LoneGun by shmu65	Aug 31st, 2007 12:25:21 AM
You whiny bitch. Go be gay somewhere else.
Just an observation by Longfellow X	Aug 31st, 2007 12:29:43 AM
Ford - may I call you Ford - you can be as critical of a movie as you want, but when you adopt a tone of smug superiority and begin dissing the director, you lose me and your credibility.
Differences between workprint and theatrical? by And Nicolas Cage as Fu Manchu	Aug 31st, 2007 12:39:57 AM
What are the differences? (I am sure I will see it this weekend so I will know soon enough, but I figured I would ask.)
a screw up by rocknrolldetective	Aug 31st, 2007 12:40:28 AM
Okay, this is Ford. I've gotten permission to say this. Long story short, the version that we "screened" awhile back which I was told was the final version according to some of you is not. I can't say more than that at this point, but if this version was NOT the final version, then I admit this review should be nixed. It isn't fair for some comments to be made if it wasn't the final version. However, I still stand by the majority of my points made in my review about the film, and what miniature differences there are do not change the characters, and that is my main problem. If the review is smarmy, well, that's kind of the point, and it's supposed to be fun. But I'm fine with the review being removed from the site since this apparently was not the final version, and this is a mistake that I have never made before in reviews, nor will ever be made again.
DAY TIME WALKING!!! IT'S IN CARPENTER'S VERSION by TheDohDoh	Aug 31st, 2007 12:45:22 AM
Umm, all of you complaining about MICHAEL MYERS WALKING AROUND IN BROAD DAYLIGHT = THAT SHIT IS TAKEN FROM THE 1978 VERSION.
Vern, where are you? by Kasch	Aug 31st, 2007 12:46:36 AM
I wanna see Vern tear this one to shreds. By the way, this guy is obviously reviewing the workprint. The theatrical version is MUCH different...and, yes, its even WORSE than this version.
damned if ya do..... by gudge	Aug 31st, 2007 12:47:51 AM
OK, i know iv stuck up for Rob before. Thats pretty much on the basis of TDR (House of 1000 was fucking awful). u didnt seem to like the 'where michael came from' aspect and i can dig that. But i think you looked at it wrong. Sure, it tried to shows us the little things - a stepdad that took the piss (nothing too harsh. i got shit from dad and uncles all growing up), and he was already skinning cats and generally was just fucked up anyway. He was always evil. He was premeditated. This Myers is still a slasher - he just has a human face now. As for the masks - Michael didnt communicate with anyone for 15 years in the film once his mother died. If his only form of communication are his masks (in a supposedly secure environment) then he would be allowed to continue. Also, its pretty fucking obvious that his masks have something to do with his 'little problem', and being that Loomis is have a real fucking job getting anything out of him - it makes sense that they would want to study what seems to be a split personality. as for walking around on Halloween with a mask on and noone saying much.... ITS FUCKING HALLOWEEN. Ever been to a party? As for the claim that its the idea of a Slasher that makes it scary - thats bollocks. Its the suspense that makes it. The original is fucking cool at that - possibly the best ever. For example, the opening scene is slow and drawn out from the killers POV. Then we find out its a 10 year old and its like WHAT THE FUCK! The deaths in the remake are just as suspenseful. As for 'This Laurie is a jerk' - isnt that more likely? Seriously - we are all film nerds together here so i know people will agree - the good looking cool kids at school are cocks, and this film is supposed to be more realistic. You didnt like Loomis because Michael didnt tell him anything. THATS NOT LOOMIS' FAULT! Its Michaels, because Michael is pure evil. He was never goign to get anything out of Michael. Thats the point. Loomis then quit after making no progress, you are right - AFTER 15 FUCKING YEARS OF NOTHING! he even says that to michael. You dont even need to read between the lines there. as for Michaels size.... we never met his father. He could have been huge. (ps. Mankind isnt 6'8". looked more like Abyss). to look at why Loomis was with the police before goig to Laurie.... hmmm, lemme think. MYERS IS A FUCKING PSYCHO. Wouldnt it be nice to have backup? Also, Laurie had been adopted, changed her surname and lived somewhere else. also, MYERS IS A FUCKING PSYCHO - he hasnt spoken about anything in 15 years. Hes a bit of an r-tard to the untrained eye - would you expect him (in real life) to go straight after someone he only ever saw or spoke about 17 years previous. No - i think not. I will agree with your points on Michaels escape. That was fucking shit. but you could argue about the rush of getting caught, or you could argue its what sent him over the edge again - youre the one that tried to say his psychoness is due to his upbringing (involving rape and stripping). Personally, i just think hes a fucking psycho and didnt need a boost. if the characters in this one are so dumb, why did Jamie Lee Curtis run up the stairs? you want an answer to why his old house has a pool? its called redevelopment. its been almost 20 years. How many people WERENT poor 20 years ago? OH MY GOD! Laurie got upset and ran from a bloke thats A) trying to kill her and B) showed her a picture of her real adopted and now dead parents. I know we havent been told shes adopted - but its pretty fucking obvious. the only other option would be the massive coincidence of her parents telling her on the 17th anniversary of her parents death, halloween of all days, and you would have complained it was too set up. Make your fucking mind up. how can u rip the unorignal remakes and be pissed at this for trying to be original with the fucking story. Jesus H! "also, not a single moment in this film feels like Halloween. No shots of a bunch of trick or treaters. No carving Jack O Lanterns. The first film FEELS like Halloween, even if you watch in on Christmas. This one feels like any old night." You werent watching the original halloween though. You were watching the remake. You knew that. If you want the exact same fucking film, WATCH THE FUCKING ORIGINAL. Have u seen the Psycho remake? its near enough scene for scene. and its crap. Utter crap. Stop jumping on the bandwagon from when aintitcool said the script was lacking, since youve pretty much just applied what was said there to the film youve seen. Shame you didnt think your points through. But at least you tried. Thanks.
Just saw it on the big screen... by The Dum Guy	Aug 31st, 2007 12:53:53 AM
The third best Halloween movie, take that as you will.
wow that review was fucking awful. by slappy jones	Aug 31st, 2007 12:55:40 AM
you are not as witty as you think you are.if you want the original as you obviously do go and watch it. because this isn't a carbon copy. so it seems silly to just complain about how it is different to the original. that is all you did over and over and over again. well thats what you did after you gave us a mini review of die hard 4.
UMM, THIS GUYS SAW THE WORKPRINT by TheDohDoh	Aug 31st, 2007 12:56:16 AM
There is no rape scene in the theatrical version.
and regardless of anyones thoughts..... by gudge	Aug 31st, 2007 12:57:29 AM
at least its better than Dead Silence.
oh and this is a review of the workprint by slappy jones	Aug 31st, 2007 12:58:32 AM
the rape scene is gone....and daylight walking is straight out of the original......
so whats instead of the rape? by gudge	Aug 31st, 2007 12:58:35 AM
i only saw the workprint
Walking in daylight is in the original but by reflecto	Aug 31st, 2007 01:01:10 AM
A fucking monolith standing in the middle of the road is not.
PISS POOR REVIEW WITH TONS OF ERRORS / WELL SAID GUDGE by TheDohDoh	Aug 31st, 2007 01:01:57 AM
There is so much wrong with this review. Moriarty, you printed it out of spite. There are so many errors in it, not to mention that it's A REVIEW OF THE WORKPRINT AND NOT THE THEATRICAL VERSION. How does this guy forget that the scene where Laurie's friends taunt Michael on the street in broad daylight IS TAKEN FROM THE ORIGINAL???? Except in that version, Michael is somehow driving a fucking stolen car. HAHAHA. He even stops it when they yell, "Don't you have a sense of humor." Btw: LOTS OF TEENS HAVE SEX WITH THEIR STEP-PARENT ASLEEP. IT'S CALLED THE NEW MILLENIUM ASSWIPE. ALSO, ESPECIALLY KIDS WHO HAVE DRUNKS FOR STEP-PARENTS. Lastly, Laurie and Loomis are less likeable in this version BECAUSE IT'S MORE REALISTIC. This movie is about evil, not GOOD AND EVIL. JUST EVIL. And Michael isn't fucked up in this b/c he gets bullied. HE'S JUST FUCKED UP FROM BIRTH. There is no nature/nurture here. Just evil. THIS IS A PISS POOR NOSTALIGC REVIEW. This is easily the best Halloween since 1978's. AND HEY IDIOT REVIEWER, YOU FORGET THAT CARPENTER WROTE THE SECOND HALLOWEEN WITH ALL OF THAT "SISTER STUFF" YOU LOATHE??? RIGHT? WRONG.
PISS POOR REVIEW MORIARTY PLUS IT'S FOR THE WORKPRINT!! by TheDohDoh	Aug 31st, 2007 01:05:05 AM
SHAME SHAME. LIKE I SAID EARLIER, YOU GUYS REALLY HAVE IT OUT FOR THIS ONE. YOU SIT THERE AND SAY YOU WON'T PRINT ANY OF THE REVIEWS OF THE WORK PRINT, AND THEN YOU PRINT ONE. YOU MUST NOT HAVE EVEN SEEN IT THEN OR DONE YOUR RESEARCH. PATHETIC.
But I thought the workprint is Rob's "director's cut!" by reflecto	Aug 31st, 2007 01:05:07 AM
You're fucked either way you go on that one.
actually... by rocknrolldetective	Aug 31st, 2007 01:05:10 AM
the line from the original that Annie yells at Myers is "speed kills".
i wouldnt even mind but..... by gudge	Aug 31st, 2007 01:05:55 AM
im not even that into Halloween. I grew up on Nightmare on Elm Street (its my earliest films memory. In the first one where Freddy is chasing the girl in the alley and the arms extend. I was about 5 and dad was going through tapes to see what was on them. Thats the only bit i saw.scared the fuck outta me. I was over it by i was 7.)
comparisons to die hard 4 are ridic. by TheDohDoh	Aug 31st, 2007 01:07:49 AM
seriously, there is no comparison. besides, it's only been 30 FUCKING YEARS SINCE THE ORIGINAL HALLOWEEN. you can say that about the halloweens with all of that samhain/druid bullshit, but not this one. zombie put a lot of effort into this for you dorks to shit all over it for petty reasons like "laurie acted too slutty." goddamnit, did scream 1-3 never happen?
IT WAS DIE HARD... COCKHEAD! by LordEnigma	Aug 31st, 2007 01:09:46 AM
Yeah... he reviewed the workprint. It's a total workprint review because the whole RAPE SCENE has been removed. Once again AICN quality control has failed. Tune in next time when some other shenanigans break out.
Mai? MAI? by TheMovieLover	Aug 31st, 2007 01:10:36 AM
"Mai? Oh the you must be looking for the asian chick? likes to kick people? last time I saw her she was at the bottom of an elevator shaft with an SUV shoved up her ass." You can't tell me that wasn't a great one-liner. That shit was classic John McClaine.
Best Review Ever!! by phoenixmagi	Aug 31st, 2007 01:15:43 AM
right up there with Vern's Die Hard rant. Finally someone is reviewing it like it fucking is. two points though, you were wrong myers steals the tombstone in the original and walks around during the day with no one stopping him remember when he stalks tommy at the school? but right on man! I want to buy you a few beers! thanks for this great review stating DON'T FUCK WITH A CLASSIC. AND ROB FUCK YOU, YOU HACK!! HOPE IT BOMBS!
fuck, i forgot about Die Hard 4! by gudge	Aug 31st, 2007 01:16:24 AM
dont talk bollocks kiddo. Die Hard 4 has the following: Kick ass action, "you just killed a car with a helicopter", "did you see that?" "yeah i saw it i did it!", Mary Winstead, a good bad guy, a fit little asian kicking bitch, a GEEK PLOT for fuck sake, Kevin Smith, an aged, crankier and wiser McClaine, a very well used YIPPIEKAIYAYMOTHERFUCKER, McClaine ON a fighter jet......... my god your a prick.
MORIARTY: TAKE THIS WORKPRINT REVIEW DOWN. by TheDohDoh	Aug 31st, 2007 01:18:56 AM
You can't print this w/o printing the good ones too.
phoenix by gudge	Aug 31st, 2007 01:19:39 AM
if you already know you dont like your films being remade and fucked with - leave it alone. personally, my fav film is Fight Club. but guess what - the books fucking ace too. and, oh my god..... bits are changed! Where the extra scene at the end? why didnt the narrator get his balls chopped off on the bus, instead of putting Marla on the bus and getting threatened to take his nuts in the police station? thats it - iv decided. David Fincher is a cunt. He fucked with the original.
Differences between workprint and theatrical cut by MistaSparkle88	Aug 31st, 2007 01:20:10 AM
The only differences I noticed between the film described in this review and the version I saw at a preview screening yesterday are: 1) Myers' escape scene is different (as already mentioned by several previous Talkbackers) and 2) the ending after Laurie is pulled from the car is changed considerably. Either way, the film is still a huge mess.
PS: THE GRAVE STONE SCENE IS NOT IN THE THEATRICAL ONE by TheDohDoh	Aug 31st, 2007 01:21:03 AM
But it is in Carpenter's classic. And yes, it happens in BROAD DAYLIGHT. This scene is not in the theatrical H07. Another obvious mistake - Moriarty, do you not remember the original? Maybe go take a peek before you jack up the ambush on this one, 'kay?
yeah i watched the workprint by macgruder	Aug 31st, 2007 01:23:24 AM
and I loved it. I never saw the original Halloween, so the story was not a problem for me, it was all fresh. I liked it enough to buy the DVD for my penance of watching the workprint (sorry rob, i think you are a great director, i couldnt wait).
GOTTA TAKE A SHIT MASK = ASSES IN SEATS by Kurzinski Valentine	Aug 31st, 2007 01:26:04 AM
preach it brother. NO SHITMASK, NO TICKET...from me. ps. Rob Zombie is a sack of crap.
actually... by rocknrolldetective	Aug 31st, 2007 01:27:36 AM
No, the grave scene is not in the original in broad daylight. Loomis goes to the grave, and it is gone.
Work Print Or Not by phoenixmagi	Aug 31st, 2007 01:31:58 AM
Zombie doesn't get the character of Myers or what horror is all about. He is not talented at all. There was no point for this remake, or for remakes in general.
who gives a flying fuck about if it was in the original by gudge	Aug 31st, 2007 01:33:24 AM
stop nitpicking bitches. Say something constructive or fuck off. just because you have a platform to voice your opinions doesnt mean your 'opinions' are worthwhile. sure, the guys review was shit in my opinion (and i know i got a little heated about it), but its still backed up and in depth (even though wrong). Does it really fucking matter what time of day the gravestone was taken in A DIFFERENT FUCKING FILM? and please please PLEASE can someone tell me how michael escapes if its not rape
Gudge=Zombie by phoenixmagi	Aug 31st, 2007 01:36:23 AM
what's the matter Rob, gonna cry because you know you are white trash and a hack?
People will be blindly passionate about ANYTHING by IndustryKiller!	Aug 31st, 2007 01:41:39 AM
Jesus Christ, are there really Halloween remake zealots on this site? Is there any movie that comes out nowadays that doesn't attract a sect of fans that would throw themselves on a grenade defending its merits? It's a fucking remake of Halloween. If any project in the history of film should have to prove itself to be spectacular before getting the benefit of the doubt THIS is that film. If you really think Rob Zombie is so talented a filmmaker that anything he does, even a pointless remake (not a re-imagining) of one of the best horror films of all time, is untouchable to criticism then you, my friend, have been to Ozzfest one too many times. Methinks the hardcore apologists existing have nothing to do with the movie itself and everything to do with the idolization of Rob Zombie himself.
BEST COMEDY OF THE YEAR! Spoilers? by TORTURE PWN1	Aug 31st, 2007 01:48:07 AM
Forsythe as the family pet troll they keep around to apparently make sure the collective family self esteem doesn't get too high. Fat faced Mikey, poutng on the curb, stuffing his face with candy corn & pouting because poor baby doesn't get to go trick or treating intercut with mommy giving lap dances to hicks all to the tune of "Love Hurts". A guy getting up from taking a shit while neglecting to wipe his ass before opening the rest room stall door, not to mention said guy describing what he ate and why it's taking so long for him to drop the deuce. Laurie molesting a bagel in front of her mother. This movie truly is this years LITTLE MISS SUNSHINE! The only difference is,this movie's actually funny!
Myers escapes by raping his handcuffs off by Kurzinski Valentine	Aug 31st, 2007 01:49:08 AM
The guards then scream "He's fucked his restraints off! He's fucking! He's got no restraint(s)! Holy FUCK!" followed by Myers donning The Incredible GOTTA TAKE A SHIT MASK and blasting a footlong asscoiler through the sassy black receptionists face and into the door locks, shattering them in a fury of PURE EVIL SHITLOG. Myers is then seen explosively shitting himself as he runs down the hall, escapes out the front doors, and the audience is then handed 1 (one) GOTTA TAKE A SHIT MASK each and asked to leave the theater. The end.
hell no by gudge	Aug 31st, 2007 01:51:27 AM
i take every film on its individual merits. the reason i got so passionate is because of how unfair the review was. its by no means the best horror iv ever seen, but its a good film. and for what reason does this film have to justify even more than any other remake? im not going to call a filmmaker amazing on the basis of 3 films - one of which i hated. but to be fair Rob Zombie has a lot to do with me not judging books by their cover, since i refused to watch TDR for a long long time, and was eventually blown away by it. and im not apologising for Zombie. i havent made any excuses. iv laid down facts. all anyone else has done is post inaccurate points or just said it was crap. i mean lets be fair here - if u didnt want the opening 40 minutes of backstory this wasnt a remake. It was Halloween 4363456 or whatever number they are upto now. Its not like it was a franchise that was at the top of its game.
How was the review unfair? by Kurzinski Valentine	Aug 31st, 2007 02:00:11 AM
All the guy did was plainly point out the plot points as they unfolded. He then analyzed the parts which made no sense (apparently plenty) and asked the world...why? Perhaps you should answer them for us, gudgy.
@gudge by TheDohDoh	Aug 31st, 2007 02:01:20 AM
Yeah. Man, I agree with you totally. Moriarty botched it by posting this workprint review before proclaiming they wouldn't post any. AICN has bred a mindset for people to hate this film. It's seriously well made. I am almost done with Talkbackers. They don't even know what a good Halloween movie is anymore, b/c they've been shellshocked by so many bad ones. Michael Myers has gotten a new lease on life with this movie. It's been 30 years people. I love Carpenter's as much as a 25 year old guy can, but at the same time, I'm tired of seeing theatres clogged with bullshit horror. I want something creative and knowing. And Zombie has delivered. What should be a celebration of a new talent in horror maturing and stepping up his game but making a cool variation on Carpenter's original is being shot to fuck by know-nothings. Not to mention, this review--posted in response to me saying AICN is lacking Halloween coverage and aren't they?????---is a review of the workprint that cites scenes remade from the original film as GIGANTic FLAWS in this Zombie's. Over it.
Kurzinski Valentine by gudge	Aug 31st, 2007 02:03:12 AM
i already have. see my first post in this thread.
"One review of a workprint has destroyed the film!" by reflecto	Aug 31st, 2007 02:04:11 AM
"It couldn't possibly be the fillm being shitty itself! No, the 0% at Rotten Tomatoes is all about people unfairly judging a workprint! The stream of stinker reviews are all a product of a vicious smear campaign!" Oh, Doh, let me lick your salty tears. There is nothing mature about this film, or its characterizations (wait til you see Laurie's first scene) or narrative.
DohDoh by gudge	Aug 31st, 2007 02:06:51 AM
fuck em. if they wanna get upset let em. i enjoyed it. it was a good film. i know what you mean about talkbackers though man. They contribute fuck all intellectually (i know im swearing alot and u can argue im not being intellectual, but grow up kids), and just hate films they are supposed to. "HEY EVERYONE! GEORGE LUCAS IS A CUNT!" "HEY EVERYONE! TOM CRUISE IS SHIT!" "HEY EVERYONE! HATE THE HALLOWEEN REMAKE!" "HEY EVERYONE! LETS BE UNEDUCATED WANKERS!"
Nothing spells intellectual like the word "skullfuck" by reflecto	Aug 31st, 2007 02:10:04 AM
in the first 3 minutes of a film.
Agreed on the review style... by Chriss	Aug 31st, 2007 02:12:10 AM
... you're a pretty lousy reviewer. You spend longwinded paragraph about an unrelated film in a different genre to make a point that could have been done in 10 words. And "can I call you rob?" was just so trite, arrogant, and not at all funny. As someone pointed out, you're no where as clever as you think you are.
Mike Myers won't change your tired by The Nazi of Grammar	Aug 31st, 2007 02:15:12 AM
The bastard.
re:Nothin spells intellectual like the word "skullfuck" by gudge	Aug 31st, 2007 02:17:15 AM
WHAT? thats your comeback? point proven DohDoh! Also, i couldnt give a fuck if its a workprint. On top of that, i dont think theres any smear campaign. I just think your a bunch of fucking idiots.
Review confused me by MignolaFan	Aug 31st, 2007 02:17:27 AM
I just got back from halloween and I don't recall people having sex in Michael's asylum room and there is a scene in the movie where Michaels Mom gives him a pic of his little sister and him, How is this review the theatrical cut again?
Well I liked it alright by MikeCSVU	Aug 31st, 2007 02:17:35 AM
Watched this last night. Sute the final version might be changed round a bit but i thought it was alright. It's supposed to be a reimagining isn't it, now a remake and on that level it was fine.
Shit! I didn't even read the review.... by The Dum Guy	Aug 31st, 2007 02:17:38 AM
Was the workprint better? Did it show a kinder side to Michael? Anyway, at leatst it didn't have Busta Rhymes.
The theatrical is better by default because of no rape by reflecto	Aug 31st, 2007 02:20:04 AM
Beyond that it is still steaming excrement.
I swear by TheDohDoh	Aug 31st, 2007 02:21:17 AM
If you can't walk away from this movie saying "Zombie did the absolute best he could" and "damn, that felt surprisingly like watching a wellmade horror movie instead of 1hr30 of girls getting slashed and stupid teens jabbering" well, wtf. the world is over for you as far as horror is concerned. i guess when you jock aliensvspredator2 for being a carnage fantasy, it'll be all good. i just don't want to see zombie ripped apart for being smarter than people are allowed to be in horror nowadays. back to the reviewer: dude, who are you to say michael myers is not a serial killer? in the original, that's absolutely what he is. a killer who escapes from a mental hospital. and he's show as a child, but it goes immediately to him stalking chicks. you know why? b/c they wanted to make a boatload of cash. there's a reason why the same investors are still locked into the series (rip). they're businessmen. their franchise was dying after bullshit sequels, so they let a smart dude make one and take some risks. and now AICN wants to rip the guy a new asshole. it makes no sense. there's plenty of beautiful homage to Carpenter here. a lot of the lighting is the same. there is fucking atmosphere. watch it. watch the workprint and the theatrical version. it's great. i like both of them.
Men can cry, Doh by reflecto	Aug 31st, 2007 02:24:13 AM
It's okay. Men can cry.
@MIGNOLA FAN / yep, review is a big turd of negativity by TheDohDoh	Aug 31st, 2007 02:25:43 AM
EXACTLY DUDE. The problems this guys has are with A) THE WORKPRINT AND B) THE FUCKING ORIGINAL MOVIE ITSELF. How he finds Laurie is explained in the theatrical but not the workprint. There is not rape in the theatrical. Michael Myers walks around in daylight for the same scenes and same period of time in the original as the reimagining. Michael Myers visits his sister's grave and digs it up in the original, but does it only here in the workprint, but this reviewer proceeds to blame zombie for all of that shit and Moriartiy seconds it all before heading off to bed to dream of his version. BULLSHIT. SHAMELESS.
Men can cry, Doh by gudge	Aug 31st, 2007 02:25:56 AM
is that cos you cnouldnt come back to what i said? seriously man. its bad enough crying. but telling people about it.....
Sick and Tired by phoenixmagi	Aug 31st, 2007 02:27:09 AM
of the Zombie apologists justifying this film based soley on 'at least Busta Rhymes isn't in it'. well true the last one has busta but it had the original incarnation of myers not some wrestler and it didn't have zombie who has no idea what makes a horror movie successful. No fan of the original, shit of horror itself,could like this mess. its an insult to the original which is one of the greatest, if not the greatest horror film of all time. this movie is all about ego and Zombie saying 'im the master of horror let me make Halloween the way it was meant to be made'. what a douche bag
Plus The Original by phoenixmagi	Aug 31st, 2007 02:32:52 AM
has that truly great character moment where after myers kills the boyfriend and pins him to the door with a knief, takes a step, tilts his head from side to side, admiring his work. like he is starring at a Picaso painting judging its merrit. good shit. you will never see a moment like that in this piece of shit Zombie made. Nor will you see Loomis' reaction of utter horror when Myers' body is gone at the end. No. Zombie just kills him. Donald P. was Sam Fucking Loomis.
its called 'sarcasm', phoenix by gudge	Aug 31st, 2007 02:35:53 AM
would you like to tell me what does make a successful horror film though please? i just checked, and kids horror 'The Mummy Returns' is the highest grossing horror of all time. The Ring made $230mill. so maybe you are right - Zombie doesnt know what makes a horror successful. but he knows how to make a horror film thats fresh and innovative, even with a franchise with with 8 incarnations before it. and its not about 'how its meant to be made' - its about being told 'go on, have a go' and trying to be creative. FUCK! you guys are FUCKING IDIOTS
@phoenix / THAT SCENE IS IN THIS!!! by TheDohDoh	Aug 31st, 2007 02:37:40 AM
Hey man, that exact scene is in the new one, complete with Myers staring at the boyfriend he just pinned. Man, this is what gets me. There are lots of scenes from the original in this and they are done well. Also, IN THIS ONE, LOOMIS IS NOT SUPPOSED TO BE A SYMPATHETIC OR HEROIC CHARACTER. HE MAKES MONEY OFF OF MICHAEL, LIKE ALL OF THESE FUCKING QUACKS ON CABLE NEWS. IT'S AN UPDATE SON!!! GET WITH IT.
FUCKING IDIOT by gudge	Aug 31st, 2007 02:38:59 AM
cocking Myers head would suggest human emotion fuckwit. He didnt and wouldnt cock his head because he is an evil and uncaring bastard. Loomis explains he doesnt know right from wrong. If anything from what u just said, the original got it wrong since you fickle bastards keep saying he was 'just a slasher' in the first one.
@ gudge / He does headcock by TheDohDoh	Aug 31st, 2007 02:40:16 AM
Hey gudge, he does cock his head in that scene, like observing his work. It's a throwback to his work on animals. He's taking in the scene. It's pretty inhuman.
Why... by spaceworlder	Aug 31st, 2007 02:45:20 AM
...does the review spend a whole paragraph talking about Die Hard 4? I thought this was Halloween review.
Gudge by phoenixmagi	Aug 31st, 2007 02:45:33 AM
happily fuck head. Suspense. Gore is not scary. Seeing the murder is not scary. the idea that someone may murder or is about to be murdered is scary. the beats leading up to it. the fact something unknown is out there and creating drama before the main event is scary. ZOmbie lacks tact and brilliantness like that. He focuses on the kills. a kill is what, over in a matter of seconds? bUT THE MOMENTS LEADING UP TO IT, SCARING THE SHIT OUT OF PEOPLE DICK HEAD WHEN THERE IS NOTHING SCARY ON SCREEN MAKES A GOOD HORROR FILM. and Doh head it may be in the film but it is prob no way in hell as beautiful as the shot carpenter. has. prob not subtle. he prob pins the guy in one foul swoop and moves his head quick. porb up close too and not far away as the original.
Halloween is a ripoff of The Texas Chainsaw Masscare by ThePilgrim	Aug 31st, 2007 02:46:16 AM
The mask- John said he got the pale mask idea from leatherface.---- The teens in both films feel into harms way after someone went to the killers house.----------------- Bob's death is alot like Jerrys death.------------------- Laurie finding her dead freinds is alot like Pam finding the bone room.----------------- Both films end with the killer still on the loose and the lead female in ruins. Both films featured a female heroine- hallowen is often credited as the first film- Jammie Lee tries to say as much but it was TCM that did it first with Marilyn Burns as Sally.----- Halloween is the suburban version of TCM.------------ Now lets talk abotu flaws- this one her eis my fav.------------ Michael is seen wearing his mask long before the girls drive to the store where the alarm is still ringing, the alarm would have had to be ringing all day, unnoticed. -----http://www.imdb.com/title /tt0077651/goofs-------- theres the rest of them. Lastly lets attack the whole no backstory backbone of H1- the novel dug in a little deeper and the original draft gave away a little more- but in truth the real reason michale myers doesnt have a backstory in H1 is becuase John wanted to film the shoot th eopening shot with out anycuts using a steadycam. This is painfully apparent because Judith boyfreind isn't up and back down the stairs within the course of 60 seconds or so... Just what did he do up there show her his chest and hed back out.... You can only film so many minutes on one mag, and this scene does have a cut made too it just before he grabs the clown mask.--------------------Not that John isn;t brillaint, not that this film isnt great- the teens in his version died not becuase they were doing drugs or having sex- they died because they were not paying attention. All the big name critics and scholars thought otherwise- saying it was the sex and the drugs and the knife was the penis and michael was the repressed type. We really do read into these film more than we should- John accidentally made a greatfilm by leaving so many questions unanswered. not becuase he knew they would do this but because he was limited in budget and time and he had some scenes he wanted to see realized such as the opening shot.---- In Johns Halloween- Bob is stabbed 6 inches off the ground to a door with a chefs knife. Atleast Rob Zombies workprint kept the kills more real and less improbable. Whi knows if the Focus Group destroyed that, but one of the things I liked abotu Rob's take was the fact that Myers didn't do any creative kills like Jason or any of the other horror films made today- for the most part myers was a knife stabbing choking type again- he used a tree limb in one scene and fork in another but every other kill was by balde or by choke. And no improbable deaths like Bob hung on a door death in H1.-----So think real hard before you slander all of what Rob pulled off. It's not perfect I think my biggest issues with the remake's WP is how Loomis knew where to find Brackett in the cemetary? What knocked Laurie out? How did Brackett know to go to the wrong house? How did Loomis get the Cop Car? Why wasn't Brackket apeshit pissed when he finally saw Myers- considering what myers did to his daughter? Over seen shit like that.. As far as myers being in the street in broad daylight. He was standing on the side walk lookie looing at Laurie as she walked to school humming to herself. This 7 inch taller mike is in the middle of the street sans a car in broaddaylight cause Rob said he didn't believe in allowing Michael Myers the magic ability to know how to drive a car..... Myer hasnt been this good since Halloween 1 I too think the sequels jaded a shitload of fans.. Nevermidn the fact that many of them can't Admit that HALLOWEEN IS A SUBURBAN RIPOFF OF TEXASCHAINSAW MASSACRE- WHICH CAME OUT IN 1974! JOHN DIDN'T INVENT IT HE JUST RELOCATED IT AND TOOK AWAY THE SAW.
P.S. by spaceworlder	Aug 31st, 2007 02:47:00 AM
Hans Gruber sucks.
dohdoh by gudge	Aug 31st, 2007 02:47:10 AM
fair enough, i didnt notice that. eitherway, im still right going by his logic since the new Myers understands human interation to an extent (eg. kisses Laurie as a baby after he killed family), so yeah, i retract that i said in the new one he wouldnt. i still think hes downright fucking evil in it though. The old Myers shouldnt have done it at all due to being the 'ruthless killing machine'. FYI. Hes not the fucking Terminator
spaceworlder by phoenixmagi	Aug 31st, 2007 02:51:40 AM
for your comment on Gruber alone you have no credibility
FUCK i'M DRUNK by ThePilgrim	Aug 31st, 2007 02:54:14 AM
AND IT SHOWS- TYPO'S ASIDE YOU KNOW MY ABOVE COMMENTS ARE RIGHT!
call me old fashioned but...... by gudge	Aug 31st, 2007 02:55:15 AM
didnt the opening kill take fucking ages? didnt we expect the first kill from the start, and it built and built? do we not build up tension as we see young Michael being a psycho in training? Did the killing of his family not last as long as in the original (wearing the same clothes i add). i understand suspense makes the scares, in fact i wholeheartidly agree. but lets throw something else into the mix - THIS ISNT THE FUCKING 70s! we had 35 years of suspense horror, and to be fair u know its fucking coming. iv seen it so many times nothing really makes me jump these days. On top of that, we are of the Jackass generation - people love gore. FINALLY - he isnt a ghost. He isnt the Boogeyman. Hes just a fucking nut. So he kills people - hes not doing it for kicks - so why drag it out? Now fuck off halfwit
@thePilgrim by TheDohDoh	Aug 31st, 2007 02:56:30 AM
Dude, me, you and gudge gotta be sure to team up on Moriarty tomorrow in the talkbacks. You know your shit. You're forgetting that Clarks' original Black Christmas helped inspire Carpenter's Halloween, especially his "Killer Cam" viewpoint, which most people attribute to Halloween. There are some odd edits in Zombie's Halloween, especially when you see both versions. In a way it works. Somehow Rob Zombie's version feels as dreamlike as Carpenter's. I really love the esclation of Michael Myers in the new one though. Not because it's "XTREME!!" BUT BECAUSE IT REALLY BUILDS ON THE TERROR OF A KILLER WHO WENT FROM HUMAN TO PURE EVIL.
Gudge by phoenixmagi	Aug 31st, 2007 03:01:43 AM
by you saying he isn't the boogeyman shows you know nothing about the michael myers character and only idiots like zombie love hardcore gore. oh and if people love gore so much why did hostel 2 bomb genius. it should be like the 70's movies had balls then mother fucker. you are zombie aren't you ass kisser?
ill be Rob Zombie if it makes you happy by gudge	Aug 31st, 2007 03:10:10 AM
How does me pointing out that hes not a supernatural being make me know nothing about the character??? sorry, but people dont get shot and walk off, and all the other shit thats 'killed' him for him to come back. This film is about a psychopath, not some dude that is unbeatable. Im 23 years old, i dont believe in supernatural beings, theres nothing under my bed. I am, however, scared of a psychopath with a knife. Hostel 2 bombed because its not that good. I liked it, but not because of that. I liked the fact it was from the killers point of view. It bombed because America is made up of fuckwits like you. Titanic = highest grossing film of all time. Spiderman3 = 11th. The DaVinci Code = 23rd. Artistic merit does not equal boxoffice success
I didn't forget about Billy- the way back I-machine by ThePilgrim	Aug 31st, 2007 03:13:34 AM
Questioneer: Were there ever plans for a sequel to Black Christmas?------ Bob Clark: I never intended ever to do a sequel. I did a film about three years later, started a film with John Carpenter, it was his first film for Warner Bros. (which picked up 'Black Christmas'), he asked me if I was ever gonna do a sequel, and I said no. I was through with horror, I didn't come into the business to do just horror. He said, Well what would you do if you did do a sequel? I said it would be the next year and the guy would have actually been caught, escape from a mental institution, go back to the house and they would start all over again. And I would call it 'Halloween' -------------------- Questioneer: Sooo, was 'Black Christmas' directly responsible for 'Halloween'?---------- Bob Clark: No, that's not really true. The truth is John didn't copy 'Black Christmas', he wrote a script, directed the script, did the casting. 'Halloween' is his movie and besides the script came to him already titled anyway. He liked 'Black Christmas' and may have been influenced by it, but in no way did John Carpenter copy the idea. (Bob Humble Fucking Clark!)Fifteen other people at that time had thought to do a movie called 'Halloween' but the script came to John with that title on it.
ps by gudge	Aug 31st, 2007 03:14:11 AM
just cos im swearing that doesnt mean you have to become a potty mouth. what would your mother say?
Mike Myers isn't a tennis pro. Mike Myers won't change by hktelemacher	Aug 31st, 2007 03:15:51 AM
your tire. That's because the Shrek money allows him to be a little choosier about the jobs he takes. Yeesh.
Have You by phoenixmagi	Aug 31st, 2007 03:16:19 AM
noticed how the film is not being advertised as a Rob Zombie film? just as Halloween? they know the name rob zombie won't bring in the crowds so they leave his name out until the credits. the movie studio is ashamed of him! hahaha
oh, and ThePilgrim by hktelemacher	Aug 31st, 2007 03:17:32 AM
the Halloween script didn't come to Carpenter like that. It was called The Babysitter Murders and it wasn't even his idea to retitle it Halloween. That came from the producers.
Funny, because by hktelemacher	Aug 31st, 2007 03:18:48 AM
every promo I've seen has really flaunted the "FROM ROB ZOMBIE" angle. He's a name brand, too, y'know, and that alone will sell another sliver of audience.
Yablin's came up with Halloween by ThePilgrim	Aug 31st, 2007 03:18:59 AM
I know I'm a psycho halloween freak- want me to prove my cred...
@phoenix by TheDohDoh	Aug 31st, 2007 03:20:44 AM
Michael Myers has always teetered on being merely a serial killer and a supernatural presence. What I like about Zombie's take is that he uses the chartacter's sheer non-sensical growth to show you that something is growing inside of him that is not logical. That he filled with evil and it is manifesting itself in ways that relate to his being locked up for so many years. It's building. Zombie's skillfully lets him acts out as a psychopath on the loose a la Carpenter's version, while allowing the audience to sense that this motherfucker is the world's boogeyman without proving that that's the case. I for one, hope Zombie makes a sequel to this tackling the supernatural aspect. But Zombie is against sequels, as is Carpenter (EFLA not withstanding). But that is primely what I think is so great about Zombie's version. This manifestation of evil. It makes Michael the film's central character, but it's more of a study than an explotative device. It's kinda genius. You guys can go wack it to Hatchet if you want. But Zombie is the one redefining our image of horror.
The review hit it on the nail by stewiegriffin	Aug 31st, 2007 03:20:56 AM
sums up everything that's wrong with this flick. And who cares if it's a review of the workprint? Unless they went back and re-wrote, re-cast and re-shot the entire mess, no alternate ending is going to keep it from being so lame. Here's some advise for Hollywood, if ain't broke, don't fix it.
so? by gudge	Aug 31st, 2007 03:22:27 AM
whats your point? its not even like iv come out and called this movie amazing. I really liked TDR, this i really enjoyed but it will be a while before i sit down with it again, and House was fucking shocking. Who else gets their films titled with their name? Tarentino.... Craven..... Roth (cos Tarentino bums him)...... im having trouble now. Maybe his names not on it because hes modest. Maybe his names not on it because ITS A 29 YEAR OLD FUCKING FRANCHISE THAT DOESNT NEED HIS NAME ON IT. People that care know. Thats it, end of. how many straws must you clutch at? iv comeback to everything youve had to say. this is getting pathetic "WAH WAAAAH!!!! his names not in the title. must be shit" grow up kiddo. Youll be telling me how big your dad is next
@phoenix / PS you are a twat! by TheDohDoh	Aug 31st, 2007 03:22:35 AM
I guess Dimension is show ashamed of Rob Zombie's film that they decided to reward him with a major two picture deal this week. You guys are out of your league. If you're going to talk shit, back it up by knowing your stuff.
Right, Irwin Yablans being .... by hktelemacher	Aug 31st, 2007 03:23:42 AM
the producer. Executive producer, rather. Excuse me.
He is not by phoenixmagi	Aug 31st, 2007 03:24:03 AM
a psycho he is evil in its purist form and if you don't get that you don't get the character. evil never dies, can't be killed, reasoned with, or be stopped. he is unbeatable and you don't know why. that is why the character is legend. he is not some bundy or manson. no redneck or white trash like you who enjoys graphic gore in your horror. he is the devil. if you missed that you missed the point of the movie but that's ok. millions around the world got it and it the rest is history. yippe kay-yay mother fucker
DohDoh by gudge	Aug 31st, 2007 03:25:53 AM
"You guys are out of your league. If you're going to talk shit, back it up by knowing your stuff." iv been wanting to put that for ages, but i was already being pretty arrogant and didnt know how id be seen..... but now i got a partner! BRING IT BITCHES! WE KNOW MORE THAN YOU! ha ha
"he is evil in its purist form" by hktelemacher	Aug 31st, 2007 03:26:10 AM
Hence, the Shatner mask.
DEFENDERS by noncents	Aug 31st, 2007 03:26:44 AM
I skipped through this turd-ball because my patience for hackfests are paper thin. In all truth or at least my truth--80 percent of movie's suck balls because hollywood isn't artist friendly, but hack friendly--too many pushers of product--originality is lacking--the validity of Ford's pretentious ramblings isn't my main concern--what concerns me is that people are getting paid to be hacks--also--the hacks that comment on this site--they are more part of the problem now than ever--the difficulty of being creative and intelligent is something none of these commentators can touch upon--finding flaws in obvious creations is hindsight twenty-twenty, mediocrity in all its glowing adulation--your comparisons are only available after the fact--the clear sight of a filmmaker is determined by his artistic vision, while critics art is the crapbirds that fly only after the carcass of film rots underneath--to unwind a film that has been crafted by hacks marks your own lacking in the department of---well, I just won't say--THREE MOVIES that worked for me--HOT FUZZ-GENIUS--SUPERBAD--subdued performance and not the f-bombs--and CASHback--nuances-comedic entries, but worthy of my attention..
Joseph Wolf got prints made for Halloween as a favor by ThePilgrim	Aug 31st, 2007 03:28:08 AM
from MGM, and He produced A Nightmare On Elm Street. He's dead now, but he is a big reason for both of these cinematic Horror icons being here. They didnt have the seed to print Halloween on film to distrib. It was done as a Favor To Wolf Who was friends with Yablins... I know tons of Halloween Factoids..
shocking review by sbannerman	Aug 31st, 2007 03:28:12 AM
I enjoyed the film and im a huge fan of the original. With any film there are things that people dont like. This remake was a great film by Rob Zombie and i love that he kept the 70s style film making that made Devils Rejects so very good. As for the reviewers erm review. There were so many mistakes in that. So if Rob does read this.....top job Rob.......dont let the crap reviews of this (and even more so the venom being spat from people that have seen the workprint edition) bother you in the slightest. You done good man!!!!!
evil never dies? by gudge	Aug 31st, 2007 03:28:36 AM
im going to use Saddam Hussein as an example. He was evil. Hes dead. Billions around the world got it and the rest is history. Yipeekayaimotherfucker.
I don't want to have to defend this movie, but..... by The Dum Guy	Aug 31st, 2007 03:29:03 AM
For the love of jumping Jesus on a rusty pogo-stick, I swear I didn't love this movie, shit, I almost didn't like it, but it wasn't bad. Compared to almost every horror movie made in the last 20 years, bar, New Nightmare, The Descent, Silence of the Lambs... wait, I won't keep naming movies, but it was better than most. My only real complaint is that in "real life" if I had met Myers as a kid, I would've smashed his skull with a rock, but only 'cause he seemed like a whiny fuck. I wish he was just weird and never said much as he did as a kid.
For the Record by phoenixmagi	Aug 31st, 2007 03:29:16 AM
I do enjoy some gore in my horror. everyone does. but just a dash I'm not no hillbillie like you who holds the hostel movies in high esteem. I don't like watching a human anatomy lesson when I shell out 10.00 bucks for a movie and another ten for snacks. I go to be entertained that is why america shunned trash like hostel 2 jerk weed. and zombie is a hypocrite giving shit for there being halloween toys yet a myers toy based on his movie is being released.
A LOT of people claim to have walked out by reflecto	Aug 31st, 2007 03:34:39 AM
tonight over at IMDB. My my.
WHAT A FUCKING IDIOT! by gudge	Aug 31st, 2007 03:36:08 AM
No! No! Bad dog. Sit! Iv already said Hostel 2 wasnt that good, and the point of Hostel was that it was a film about people PAYING TO FUCKING TORTURE PEOPLE! you knew what it was before u watched. if it made u uncomfortable, then it worked. thats the point dipshit. The gores fucking necessary. JESUS! For the record, England has no hillbillies. Do you really think Rob Zombie designed the toys, and worked in the plastic factory, and stocked the shelves etc? You are a fucking retard.
You are a dumbass by phoenixmagi	Aug 31st, 2007 03:39:13 AM
its the idea of evil not dying that myers represents. suddam was a man. myers is evil. a symbol of evil that can't be beaten. god you are stupid no wonder you liked hostel. you are what's wrong with the young movie going public these days. they can't sit through a film without getting up ever five fucking minutes or stop texting think just because there is blood, guts, 'splosions something is great. its all about story kid. don't just play with the box
Let's be fair though by reflecto	Aug 31st, 2007 03:44:13 AM
I don't remember anyone being tortured in Hostel 2 for at least 40 minutes, and it was about 90 mins long. Eli Roth is an arrogant prick but he can do character.
for the last fucking time..... by gudge	Aug 31st, 2007 03:44:20 AM
i understand thats what Myers was. HES FUCKING EVOLVED! the Halloween franchise was a joke. a fucking joke. it started well but the audience wants more (like u said, story dumbass). just like film has in general. Unlike yourself, i actually do know what im talking about. Im doing Film at Manchester Uni, last term i did evolution of genre, next term im onto the history of horror - maybe ill come back then and wipe you ass some more. i suggest reading up on Metz and Altman, dipshit
I was a film student too jackass by reflecto	Aug 31st, 2007 03:47:16 AM
You ever hear of minimalism? Less is more? The audience does NOT want this Michael Myers. Halloween was about mood and suspense, not in depth exploration of the monster. And oh Jesus I can't believe you mentioned Robert Altman. What the fuck?
In Defense of Ford... by Cheif Brody	Aug 31st, 2007 03:48:13 AM
...the reviewer DOES make a valid point. No matter WHICH version he reviewed...Zombie giving Michael Myers a "past" with easily definable "reasons" for becoming pure evil personified, basically undermines what made "the shape" so terrifying in the original incarnation. We didn't NEED his backstory...he was a better "boogie man" without all that "serial killer" mumbo jumbo baggage...just a nameless...faceless...killing machine. Period. When Zombie's script first leaked, THAT was the major complaint from many here at AICN. That, in personifying Michael's motivations, it only serves to make Michael LESS scary, as it reduces him from a "mythic" creature to just a regular old psychopath with a fucked up childhood. By filling-in-the-blanks, Zombie undermines his antagonist's allure. Which is fine (back to Ford's original core beef) if he is making a film about ANY OTHER PSYCHOPATH. If it's one thing Michael Myers DOESN'T need...it's motivation. He just IS. I would have more respect for Mr. Zombie, had he written an ORIGINAL script...with an ORIGINAL title...with an all new ORIGINAL psychopath. How long has it been since a "new" slasher was intoduced? We've been saddled with Michael, Freddy & Jason for how many decades now? Rob missed an opportunity to create HIS OWN Leatherface, here. By fucking with a classic (like it or not, it IS a classic), Rob simply appears to be stealing the NAME "Michael Myers"...and the TITLE "Halloween" to get more asses in seats with a re-imagining...thus taking the easy way out. I had the same feeling when Hannibal Rising was released....Who CARES what crazy fucked up shit from his past lead Lecter to be sitting in front of Clarice in that cell in Silence of the Lambs? Hopkin's Hannibal was pure evil...and that's all I needed or ever wanted to know. Rob, the next time you go back to the drawing board...and you want to supply "motivation" to your killer's character developement...come up with YOUR OWN idea, bro. I'd have more respect for what you put on the screen than if you simply pilfer someone else's ideas that didn't need any "improving" in the first place. This "feels" like "cashing in"...as did all the sequels that followed the original. Rob...You're better than that.
HA Ha Ha by phoenixmagi	Aug 31st, 2007 03:51:56 AM
as christain able said you don't need school to be in the business kid just talent. and you will never make it what's your real name for in 10 years I wana netflix your name and see one of you cinematic adventures. I hope you are studying horror so you can learn a thing or two. and if you like hostel 2 that shows you got no taste, roth is not talented and knows nothing of character you wanker as you britts say. ha ha you are studying. yeah you are gonna be big. ha ha.what's your name I really want a good laugh in a few years.
then u should know better by gudge	Aug 31st, 2007 03:59:52 AM
if youve done film then u should understand where hes coming from. and its not that this is not the Myers the audience doesnt want, its the Myers YOU dont want. as for his backstory, you really dont care how he got there? i feel like a broken fucking record. Every single point iv made has been answered with 'but thats not the Myers we love!" iv got news for you - Michael Myers isnt that good. Hes one dimensional and not that scary. Hes Lurch Addams with a mask. Once youve seen him once, thats it. The sequels were not scary - they were a joke. He reminds me of the Great Khali out of WWE, just a big fucker with one move. But hes supposed to be a great big undead badass according to you. Thats not scary cos its not realistic.
so yeah, this is a review of the WORK PRINT by irc-Hollywood	Aug 31st, 2007 04:01:08 AM
he makes reference to a number of things not in the theartical
Not a fan of the original but... by MyManD316	Aug 31st, 2007 04:02:58 AM
Holy batshit Christ if it wasn't forty times better than this turd. I don't like the original, at all, but it was a fucking Picasso compared to this shit. And your really DO have to compare the two seeing as how Zombie literally stole direct scenes from the original instead of "reimagining" it as he hyped this movie to be. I'm not a big proponent of remaking movies, but I'm not against the idea either as long as it 1) is different enough from the original and 2) is actually a good movie. The Ring remake wasn't exactly different, but at least it was a better constructed movie than the original. DOTD was different enough that it could have been called anything else and it'd still be good. This remake? Same bullshit, only worst. I actually didn't have much of a problem with the slasher fodder characters. I knew their purpose - to entertain me with their entrails. But fucking hell, Rob couldn't even deliver this! Ooooh, they all get fucking stabbed. A sliced throat. Baseball batted head. Nothing original, nothing particularly brutal and all done in such a sketchy way that you can barely make out the finer details of the gore. I'm done with Zombie. He promised balls to the wall carnage and evil, but gave us a slasher flick that would make Scream 3 feel like a pimp.
So if you tear down the monster the original and JC by reflecto	Aug 31st, 2007 04:04:54 AM
What exactly do you need to remake Halloween for, if it's all so worthless to you? Give me a fucking break.
LISTEN! by gudge	Aug 31st, 2007 04:08:03 AM
fucking hell, im not even an Eli Roth fan, and havent said i am! Fuck sake. Yes, the point of Hostel is to be gory, thats why it works. to be fair he struck fucking gold with that idea - it was always going to work. But at least he threw a combined 90 mins of plot into his films. Cabin Fever is one of the worst horror films iv seen in years - fucking awful character development. Eli Roth is a cunt. But Hostel works. are your really going to store my name for 10 years to check out? c'mon kid get a life. and who says im planning on directing movies. Im hoping to be a scriptwriter or critic, but im not disillusioned to be so sure ill succeed. Fuck - iv not finished yet - one step at a time. and yes, you need talent. shame your only point today thats right is that Eli Roth is a cunt. care to make a point about something iv actually said?
For those who have seen the theatrical ending... by MyManD316	Aug 31st, 2007 04:12:24 AM
Does Michael pussy out and have a "conscience" like in the workprint? I mean, wouldn't pure, unmitigated, evil have ripped those two kids apart, tore Loomis in half German suplex Laurie's neck?
Dr William Weir suggests... by drwilliamweir	Aug 31st, 2007 04:15:57 AM
... everyone have a nice cup of tea, then I'll rip your balls off and feed them to my wife. But first, I'm going to wait at least half an hour for you to drink that tea and hover juuuust out of your vision, making you nervous, before striking. Great horror is built on tension and too many rely on simple payoff. Hostel was a film completely centered on payoff that only worked in the final 3/4 of the movie as we knew what would happen if the protagonist(s) would get caught. Roth's mistake with his movies is not realising that by holding off, or through suggestion, he could create a tense atmosphere which would make shocking moments seem far more horrific. There's nothing wrong with an eye gouge, tendon cut or jaw removal, as long as they come when the audience least expects it... which is why pure gore films don't always wash with the Dr. So, anyone for tea?
speaking of tendon cut..... by gudge	Aug 31st, 2007 04:18:12 AM
finally got round to Sympathy For Mr Vengeance today. Fucking amazing tendon cut. i havent cringed like that in a long long time
theatrical ending... by irc-Hollywood	Aug 31st, 2007 04:45:28 AM
Michael doesn't "pussy out"
Gudge by IndustryKiller!	Aug 31st, 2007 04:47:36 AM
If you think a poorly written, laughably cliche backstory is an evolution is an "evolution", you just have bad taste. Your love of Die Hard 4 and apparent knowledge of professional wrestling would also seem to indicate this. So now that we've gotten to the bottom of this talkback's problem with you, I guess we can move on.
Gudge is a douche by shmu65	Aug 31st, 2007 04:48:28 AM
Dude, you discredited your dumbass by vouching for Die Hard 4. If you liked that film, you're a effing moron. I can't believe you actually think that film has any merit at all.
Also Gudge by IndustryKiller!	Aug 31st, 2007 04:53:59 AM
Before you go spouting off your collegiate achievements again, some of the dumbest mother fuckers I have ever met have masters degrees from very prestigious schools. And given that film is your major, trust me when I say your degree means absolutely NOTHING in this industry. It doesn't give you talent, it doesn't give you taste, and it sure as hell doesn't give you success. SO before you get holier than thou about education (whether you are telling the truth or not I haven't the slightest), just remember that. I wonder if rob Zombie minds that the lone guy defending his film is spouting off about Saddam Heussein being "evil" and, with a straight face no less, compares it to a character in a horror movie. I would like to find that out.
im not talking about education for talent by gudge	Aug 31st, 2007 05:02:40 AM
im talking about education for the love of film. ill prob end up in an office somewhere, but at least ill always have had a great 3 years studying something i love, rather than say business (which i was doing before but it wasnt for me). and the saddam comment wasnt straight faced, jesus. i know im poorly written - but its a fucking forum. im not trying to win the booker prize here. not to mention i started writing at 5am, and its now 11am n iv not been to bed. i dont know what a love of wrestling has to do with my taste in film - its not like i think its real. i dont see why im not allowed to enjoy popcorn action flicks as well as whatever else i may want to watch. i find it interesting that noone has gone against the points iv made on Halloween though other than "but its not the Michael Myers we like" - be men, dont use my personality to win an argument about a film i had nothing to do with creating.
ps. as for bringing up education..... by gudge	Aug 31st, 2007 05:06:52 AM
i brought it up because evolution of genre is important in this argument. i was taught about it at uni. sue me
Workprint review by a Rob Zombie hater...Simple enough. by Monkey_King	Aug 31st, 2007 05:10:15 AM
I'm still seeing it later this afternoon, then I'll return to post my 2 cents on this site and Rob's Myspace page for the film.
Ok Gudge by IndustryKiller!	Aug 31st, 2007 05:14:20 AM
I was going to write a tome as to why your assertion of quality is dead wrong, but lookie lookie Quint has already done it for me on the main page. Go read Quints review and you will be enlightened my friend. But then again you liked Die Hard 4 enough to actually defend it's merits, so its obvious you have an affinity for soulless clap trap. And when you say don't attack your personality to attack the film its quite unfair, given that it seems your personality and very core tastes being completely off is your reason for enjoying the film. There is no point in getting into specifics about why this remake is bad because its just so generally soulless, bland, and horribly written and acted that specification is totally unnecessary. If you cant see that its a problem with YOU, not us. I mean jesus christ look at rotten tomatoes. Thirteen percent??? the insipid TCM remake got a higher score. Get with the fucking program man.
Rob reads everything on this site!?!? by redfist	Aug 31st, 2007 05:23:33 AM
Really? Are you sure? Well....FUCK YOU ROB, FUCK YOU IN YOUR STUPID ASS.
now thats fair enough by gudge	Aug 31st, 2007 05:25:06 AM
your the first person to say anything in this thread about acting and that you felt it didnt have a soul. personally i did, but i can respect the opinion based on that. As for acting, doesnt really bother me in horror films. How many horror films actually have good acting (you dont have to point out the ones that do). but everyone else was just hating. I like Die Hard knowing its cheesy, but i still enjoyed it. It might be the kid in me, but i like watching shit blow up. It doesnt mean i cant appreciate other films though - thats totally unfair to be honest. you have no idea about my core taste of films, you dont know me. Die Hard was referenced, so i commented that due to the fact i really enjoyed it. Whats wrong with that? You dont like Halloween. I could attack your 'core taste' in film but i dont know what other films you like. But to flat out not give a film a chance like most talkbackers - thats unfair. Im gonna go read quints review now anyway. at least theres one thing to be said, im not being a fucking sheep and following what everyone else says. With Halloween, i completely backed up what i thought was wrong with the review - and you cant deny iv made good points even if u still disagree as a whole. i didnt try and back up my thoughts on Die Hard because i know its cheesy, i just pointed out some bits that made me giggle. I mean come on - John McClain standing on a jet? its fucking ridiculous, but it makes me happy inside because its fun.
Best thing about Die Hard 4 was that McClaneWAS McClane by DerLanghaarige	Aug 31st, 2007 05:26:57 AM
So i stopped reading after it.
I Had Zero Expectations by TheBladehelm	Aug 31st, 2007 05:28:37 AM
And this piece of shit movie couldn't even live up to zero. It was better than many other recent horror movies, but that's like saying ten pounds of shit is better than fifty pounds of shit. How drunk do you have to be to not notice that the 6'8" monster in the sheet and glasses isn't your boyfriend? Why would a crazy person stop off for a wardrobe change. I seem to recall that in the original he only had on a hospital gown, so getting some clothes MIGHT make a little sense, but in this one he's wearing pants and a shirt. Did he just decide that coveralls would be more practical? How does a single income white trash family have a pool? I'll say it, fuck this movie, and fuck you if you liked it, especially if you liked it better than the original. Fuck you right in your ear. Also, one bit of commentary about one item some people have beef with, and that's Michael walking around in the daytime. Umm, it's Halloween for Christ's sake. Lot's of people walk around on Halloween with masks on, that's the damn point!
Also, Rob... by TheBladehelm	Aug 31st, 2007 05:32:55 AM
Try casting some people in your movies because they're good actors, not because they're your wife, or because they were in horror movies in the 70's.
These AICN fuckups are always hilarious by Guy Who Got A Headache And Accidentally Saves The World	Aug 31st, 2007 05:38:04 AM
A workprint review prefaced by how wrong it is to review workprints. I can't believe some of you are actually defending this piece of shit movie though, must be fanboys with shitty taste in music.
"Can I call you Rob?" by User EGO	Aug 31st, 2007 05:38:40 AM
Jeez, what a prick. Couldn't make it through this guy's review as it induced a bout of ADD that I didn't think I was capable of. I did see the film tonight and it is good, definitely justifies the premise of a remake. Definitely better than Halloweens 2 through Resurection. I did read Quint's review and I got a serious sense that he had mentally written it before he ever set foot in the theater tonight. The TCM references were a good thing. Not the sliding door, I didn't even notice that but that moment it supposedly references in TCM is there, when one of the girls almost escapes out the front door and Michael quickly grabs her inside, and Michael slams the doore shut. We stay on the door for a few seconds just long enough to remind you of TCM. That was the TCM ref, as well as the last moment of the film. It played well with the audience I saw it with, the 12:01AM at Universal's CityWalk.
For the record the word I heard was by reflecto	Aug 31st, 2007 05:50:17 AM
Lionsgate was going to recut without RZ if he did not comply.
Mr ploppy by FILMFUNK	Aug 31st, 2007 05:58:20 AM
Makes another poo poo
THIS REVIEWER IS AN IDIOT... by Wilclas	Aug 31st, 2007 06:35:11 AM
...So, Michael is just suppose to be EVIL? Simply that!? No explanation whatsoever? C´MON, you gotta be pretty dumb to believe that... If you´re going to show a realistic portrait of a serial murderer (cuz that´s what Michael is, no matter you think) you are obligated to show the social/psichological facts that lead him to became one. That´s just logic... Movies about PLAIN EVIL characters are for kids. Or what, you think the Star Wars prequels shouldn´t explain WHY DARTH VADER BECAME DARTH VADER? YOU WANT TO BELIEVE VADER WAS "JUST AND EVIL MAN?!? BUH-BUH-BUUU!
NO MATTER HOW BAD THE MOVIE IS... by Wilclas	Aug 31st, 2007 06:39:42 AM
...my point above remains. The movie SUCKS, but is not because of the Michael/past thing. It´s much more simple than that: THE SCRIPT SUCKS.
why release a Halloween flick 60 days prior? by datachasm	Aug 31st, 2007 06:50:37 AM
retarded... anyways my 2 cents is Zombie should have known better than trying to remake master Carpenters ORIGINAL material. TDR was a cool movie, and now this?
OH it sucks, so that last reviewer WAS a plant! by ricarleite	Aug 31st, 2007 07:11:35 AM

worst review ever by Automation Overlord	Aug 31st, 2007 07:23:49 AM
that review was terrible, this asshole obviously has sand in his vagina, and just wants to bash any remake. The fact that he used almost a third of his review to bash die hard 4, just proves that he's way to biased, dude that movie came out like 2 months ago, give it a rest. He's just one of these fags that lives in the past way to much and can't stand when they remake or bring back old characters. I love the original halloween, and i'm looking forward to seeing rob zombies take on the micheal myers mythos. Oh and by the way bruce willis was john maclaine in LFoDH, you obviously had you head so far up your ass to see that, you biased piece of shit
What the fuck Zombie? by NomoredirtyjokespleaseweareYanks	Aug 31st, 2007 07:29:15 AM
How can you show him being shot and killed? Have you no fu(gunshot)ing dignity, actual respect or are you you in it for the psychotic blonde headjobs after covering sherri in gore. Bet you sick fucks have fun. Stop fucking making so called movies and never remake a classic again you stupid long haired douchebag hack no-talent.
The problems with the TCM remakes.... by Mr. Profit	Aug 31st, 2007 07:32:32 AM
People really seem to hate the TVM remake. But the remake is not bad. The first remake film was good in my opinion. It was an effective slasher film that does it's job, was R rated, and didn't get all lame and tame on us. If viewed as a sequel instead of a remake the film works better because it's way better than part 2 and 4. Part 3 to me was really the 1st remake since it looked and felt different. Anyhow the MAJOR probelm with the prequel was the fact that midway through the film, I realized that no one would survive. Because if anyone did, the first film wouldn't have happened. And in the remake it's established that the Hewitt clan got away with shit witout being caught. They also fucked up with trying too hard to connect the remake with the prequel. There were too many stupid scenes like "Oh that's how he lost his legs" or "Oh its the evil fat lady that drinks tea". If they only made the prequel to connect both films, they should have ended it with the chick they find on the road in part one. And finally, I think the tone of the film though was great, and I think the direction was underrated. Leatherface was meaner and evil and his kills were better. The beating his boss with a hammer, hooking the girl out of the car, and other shit he did was great. But the stupid ending and it being so bleak turned people off. Either way Liebsman did a good job, he would have probably made a better "Halloween" remake than Zombie who just fell off and dropped the ball here, and finally if the remake of "Friday the 13th" is better than "Halloween" you got a serious problem. This shit is fucked. How dare he humanize and ruin Michael Myers. If this was the fucking case they should have just had him fight Jason in a cheap "VS" movie.
BTW... by Mr. Profit	Aug 31st, 2007 07:39:35 AM
Before anyone thinks I hate Zombie, I really liked The Devils Rejects, but I don't know what happened here. If he were going to do a remake, he was never going to capture what made the original a classic, so he should have done a remake with better character development, remix the kills to make them a bit more exciting, and not have stupid unrealistic dialogue like "Bitch" this and "Bitch" that. Does he think every fucking girl talks the way some stupid little bitches talk to each other on Myspace? People can knock "Death Proof" all they want, but at least the conversations between the chicks were better that they made you care if they were going to die. Here it's like, whatever. She's being beat by a 6'8 boogey man. Oh well. Fucking Friday the 13th Part 7: The New Blood had better character development.
"i'm getting tired of this kung fu shit!" -John McLane by BMacSmith	Aug 31st, 2007 09:35:00 AM
fucking great line in DH4. this guy is way to obsessed with the originals. get over yourself. this isnt high art.
get over yourself, Ford. this isnt high art. by BMacSmith	Aug 31st, 2007 09:35:46 AM
this guy is way to obsessed with the originals.
It's not the Michael Meyers has an origin.... by C.K. Lamoo	Aug 31st, 2007 09:57:22 AM
It's that he has a completely predictable origin straight out of the files of Oprah and Doctor Phil. A neglected child, with parents who are poor and thus lacking any sort of moral compass. God, who wrote this, the Republican National Committee? To be a great origin, Michael should have been raised by Ward and June Clever who one day come home to find Wally tied to the bed and skinned alive with little Michael holding a REAL Cleaver. Now that's scary . But then, America is confident these days that it has figured out evil and so we get the same old refrain, IT'S THE PARENTS FAULT.
Never good when it starts out "it's not terrible" by Gatack	Aug 31st, 2007 04:04:48 PM
or "not that bad". I've been reading some reviews that start off just like that. This project was way to ambitious a project for Zombie. Last House on the Left and other movies like it are more his speed. http://tinyurl.com/ytmdb2
Ford Farlaine is on the money. by darthbinks1220	Aug 31st, 2007 06:09:09 PM
Rob Zombie has alot to learn about filmmaking.
I Don't Know If Zombie Can Do "Scary" by LaserPants	Aug 31st, 2007 07:17:36 PM
He's more about exploitation, splatter, transgressive gore type horror. Which I enjoy, but none of his movies have been scary to me; I don't think he can do "suspensful' well. And Halloween 1 & 2 were suspenseful movies, not splatter movies. Btw, is anyone else tired of the "abused child turns killer" thing? I know I am.
THERE IS NO FUCKING RAPE SCENE DAMMIT!! by jojo-pimp	Aug 31st, 2007 07:28:13 PM
why do these gay ass reviewers keep saying that !i just saw the damn movie! no one even gets anywhere near being raped whatsoever!!! Ford Fairlane is a frickin idiot and probably didnt even see the movie!
FORD FAIRLANE DID NOT SEE THIS MOVIE!! by jojo-pimp	Aug 31st, 2007 07:28:59 PM
the police do NOT open fire on myers, nor is there any goddamn rape scene! fuckin idiot!!
He's talking about the leaked workprint version... by neutrino	Aug 31st, 2007 07:35:31 PM
which you would know if you had bothered to read the thread.
It all depends on which cut you support jojo! by reflecto	Aug 31st, 2007 07:36:01 PM
After all the workprint cut is the preferred Rob Zombie cut! It's his vision! Are you for his artistic vision, man? ARE YOU? Or are you with those PIGS at the STUDIO??!! ARE YOU A SELLOUT JOJO? ANSWER ME BEFORE I SKULLFUCK YOU!
I'll give you three lines from "Die Hard 4"! by MrMysteryGuest	Aug 31st, 2007 07:38:48 PM
"Stand still, Spider-Boy!" "Hee-hee-hee! Command Center!" and "Yippie Ki Yay, Mother F(gunshot)!"
Who cares about a leaked workprint!!!! by jojo-pimp	Aug 31st, 2007 08:03:10 PM
who wants to read a review of that when the actual final film is out??? this is just retarded! theres a reason they are called workprints! its cause most workprints suck until they are finished!
RE: Neutrino and Reflecto by jojo-pimp	Aug 31st, 2007 08:05:31 PM
read my last email! once again, who really gives a shit about a workprint! maybe rob changed his mind on his own...cause he definately does not seem like the type to bow down to studio demands...his last 2 films are examples of this! And rape scene or no, this movie was badass!
Workprint, schmorkprint. by Darkman	Sep 1st, 2007 08:14:12 AM
That's what I have to say. I honestly don't give two shits about the film, but reviews like this are why I love this site. I've long felt that it's more interesting and fun to find out what a critic hated (and why) than what they loved. Though in no way do I appreciate the slagging off of LIVE FREE OR DIE HARD, this is the most entertaining review since Vern's devestating TRANSFORMERS write-up. I look forward to reading more from you, Ford.
I hate you. by lagomorph	Sep 1st, 2007 08:28:07 AM
I hate you AICN for making me defend this film again. I'm not going to say it was utter fucking genius but, I thought AICN of all places would understand what Rob did to the Myers myth. Rob added a physicality to the killings that was missing or implausible in the original. That's why he chose a 6'8" killing machine for Myers. Zombie's Myers is an extension of Carpenters, he relishes in the spectacle of death, and we get to spend a lot of time with him, watching people die in increasingly cold blooded ways. I didn't think the gore was gratuitous and I think if you look back, you'll find Rob employs some very noteworthy sleight of hand in deciding what to show and not to show us. The finale is gruesome when Laurie is screaming covered in this maniacs brains. I like the fact that, though Zombie paints a troubled childhood for Myers, as Dr. Loomis says it wasn't any one thing that made Myers who he is. He is the perfect storm of inner and outer circumstances. I think Zombie shows us the child Myers so that his innocence is in our peripheral vision from then on. Isn't that what scares us now? Teenagers scare the living shit out of me? They could careless as long as someone will bleed? I agree with Laserpants. I don't think the movie is about scares, so much. It's more about showing the fragility of the human vessel through an exploration of brutality. In that way it's Rob Zombie's Halloween through and through.

Talkbacks

Ford Fairlane Returns With A Look At Rob Zombie’s HALLOWEEN!

User login

Quick Talkback

Talkbacks