The first watch last year made me like it a little. The second made me realize David Gordon Green made a masterpiece that should be displayed on walls and respected for centuries to come.
Bravo. Simply Bravo.
Nope, we saw a horror movie with Michael Myers shoved in to get funding. It's not brilliant. It's just as bad as Halloween 5.
shareYou are wrong, it's the deepest Michael Myers movie ever made, the only which really deeps in the junguian meaning of the character.
shareYeah yeah yeah, we all read the page long explanation by DGG to justify this mediocre slasher flick. It's crap. They didn't have a trilogy plan. So they picked up another script, added Michael Myers, claimed the transfer of evil based on perception, made the funniest slasher, and then added the showdown with Michael at the end because they had to. It's a bad movie. Seriously, we all laughed when we saw him murder with that stupid clown mask the first time. It was even funnier to see the pathetic love story.
shareWell you are wrong. You know what junguian archetypes are? That's what this movie is about. Michael Myers doesn't matter, he is an idea, and this is the only film in the saga (with the first one) which really understands that.
shareDuh. As I said, we all heard this lame explanation the first time. It's poorly made, the characters aren't interesting, the kills were laughable, and it's a poor ending to a flawed trilogy. We got people who love Halloween 5, 6, and 8 too. Each of those have their fans who say audiences don't understand their brilliance. They're still bad movies. It's okay, love your movie. Just don't assume people don't see the same themes. We do. We're not impressed.
shareSo you just prefer see a Big man Killing people randomly?
shareSure if it calls for it. I also prefer a script that isn't a mess like Halloween ends. Archetypes put aside, the film is a narrative mess because there are two competing scripts.
You like this and want to defend it. People defend Freddy's Dead too. You think we don't understand it because we didn't just read up on Jung last week like you did, but we understand. We just don't care for it because the themes aren't enough for us to overlook the flaws.
I don't agree with you, I think the two stories are perfectly engaged.
Can you answer my question, what do you exactly like of the saga Halloween, if you like it at all?
Yeah I do like the original movies. I don't care for Halloween 5, 8, RZ 1, RZ 2, Halloween Kills or Halloween Ends.
1. The shape Vs. The responsible final girl. No motive, unpredictable, and faceless evil with unrelenting pursuit.
2. The continuation of the first story was solid. The explanation of the family angle undermined the first movie, but it was passable.
3. The Anthology. It failed bit produced a fun litte flick
4. Bringing Michael back was done well for the slasher audience of the 80s. It's flawed but Rachel stood out as an awesome character.
7. Fan service movie. It's the 2018 movie with Kevin Williamson writing. It's dated by today's standards.
8. 2018, properly put michael back into the Formless evil. Failed with the shit teenagers. I swear thr fat one smells like cats followed him.
But Michael Myers isn't supposed to be deep. We aren't supposed to know what motivates him, the scary part was not knowing.
You can try to explore it but we should never know. Is he just a man stronger than your average man or a force of nature, the embodiment of evil?
The film could have been good but it ruined Michael's character. Michael should never work with someone, but seems to work with a random kid and is beat up by the kid. It's a joke.
You can watch the two films prior to this then.
shareWhich I already have.
The point is this film ruins Michael Myers. The character doesn't seem the same character as the other films.
I also felt this and kills lack the tension that made the original what it is. Michael didn't just kill back in the original, he stalked as well.
I will grant that this is different but it could have been different without also making Michael a shell of who he was
He stalks in this film too. He stalks Laurie outside her house, probably remembering who is her. He also stalked people in Halloween 2018 and Kills.
The thing with the DGG trilogy is that it humanises Michael at the same time it maintains the mystery around him and his motivations (different to Rob Zombie films, where Michael was totally humanised). I love it, also love how Ends expand the lore about Michael powers as something whoi can be transferred through pain and trauma, something which happens both Laurie and Corey. You are free to not like, but I think is the best and most interesting Halloween sequel of all.
Oh and I get it, it's certainly different. I'm personally not keen on the whole power thing as I think I prefer the ambiguity of what Michael is but I can see what they where trying to do.
It does feel like another movie at times with Michael added to make it a Halloween film.
Don't think it's one I'd watch again in a hurry. Also not keen on people who are like if you don't like it your stupid like the title of this post. Like people can understand a film and what it is trying to say and still not enjoy it
Well there is enough ambiguity about he and his power,s but it also leaves enough clues to make your own version. I didn't like they forgot the Myers house subplot from Halloween Kills, for example.
shareThe house thing was odd. It seemed to suggest that Michael was after Laurie then there was a thing about a pattern then a thing about his house yet now he lives in the sewers 😂
shareHalloween 5 is highly regarded by many who are old enough to appreciate it—with it's courageous & gothic subverting of expectation, detail of character, examination of Michael, and study in trauma. It had a Swiss-French director, and if you're at all striving to be a well-rounded cinephile you would enthusiastically immerse yourself in it's European-style horror aspects. It is also is the only entry to bring such a distinct autumn harvest atmosphere with it's farm, barn and forest settings. This flick was adult, and featured sexy costumes—finally, in a series which had up to that point been far too reliant on the vanilla of suburban babysitting.
You're a fool to diss Halloween 5: The Revenge of Michael Myers. In fact, your comparing of Ends to Halloween 5 brings about a complex reaction where I ponder Ends as an intellectual masterpiece, and perhaps long to give it a tad too much credit. I feel pity for you... you grew up thinking this was a series which should be about superhuman strength and with a 7-foot professionial wrestler spilling gallons of blood. If all those who admire it for the ferocity of the featured horror "icon" were to depart the fandom, the series could actually fulfill it's potential as a thoughtful and exciting seasonal delight.
You are right, fans of Halloween are as toxic as the fans of Star Wars, for example.
For me Halloween has much more in common with Twin Peaks than with other slashers, but the toxic fans just want a big man killing people again and again. We have the Michael Myers rip off whic is Jason Vorhees to do that, David Gordon Green (and Rob Zombie, being fair) has been the only one has tried to exploit the junguian potential of the character so far.
Lol. Okay, your actually acting like the star wars fans who now think the prequels are good because Disney 'ruined star wars.'
You and anagramYYZ should really hang out more. Peas in a pod.
What? Of course the prequels are good, in fact are the ones who made deep to the Star Wars universe, if not it just would be remembered as The Goonies, Ghostbusters or other 80's pulp flicks.
What the hell you can say is bad about the prequels?
I agree, one of my favorite theater going experiences was Ep. I The Phantom Menace. You can always find cringe-worthy scenes since these films are also supposed to appeal to kids and sell toys. The trick is to not miss the forest for the trees. The best part of it was it’s use of our knowledge of the established universe to forge a sort of boundless anticipation. The political intrigue of Palpatine (and his obvious alter-ego, Sidious) manuevering his way in the hierarchy of the Senate of the Galactic Republic, and creating a crisis. This would otherwise be a slow-burn, but since we know he’s the Emperor and the boy is Vader, we are obsessed with every word, every detail, and it gave us much!
I just wish I could go back in time & do my part to discourage the Jar Jar Binks-hate culture. Lucas obviously wanted us to like this character, and intended to eventually use him in some sort of Dark Side Sith apprentice twist of Ep. III which would have been cool and devastating. If the character was first embraced, we could later have had many great and powerful evil moments instead of goofy lameness of Obi-Wan riding a giant lizard doing battle with an six-armed robot w/ an organic power source that Kenobi blasts with an uncivilized weapon. Lucas was being condescending as revenge, and doubling down on the corporate merchandise culture because he felt we didn’t deserve his best story craftsmanship.
You see how respectable the trilogy started with Liam Neeson and Christopher Lee already planned for the next, and on-location shooting in Tunisia and so forth? This then moved to being a static work, completely studio bound w/ animated characters/settings and goofiness? That is Lucas reacting to the toxicity of his audience.
Still, very entertaining times in cinema.
Halloween 5 sucks. It always did.
shareSo...
You've watched it a mere two times, and the second time made you wildly change your opinion. And, to boot, in the name of the thread, you feel the need to insult people who don't agree with you after your second go-round?
My, you think a lot of yourself and critiquing and intelligence, don't you?
And I don't get why a movie has to be a "worst" or "best" to begin with, it can be middling
You are correct.
share