MovieChat Forums > Halloween (2018) Discussion > It was a decent sequel, you're all just ...

It was a decent sequel, you're all just impossible to please!

posted 6 years ago by CodyXBrenda (332)
15 replies | jump to latest

Honestly, why have we reached a point in our society where NOBODY can appreciative what we have? Sure, this movie was not a masterpiece by any means? But this whole thing with everyone saying "I was disappointed" is getting really old! It was never this bad, like 15 years ago. It's only gotten worse, over time. Just be glad you saw a sequel that wasn't trash, unlike the one we got 9 years ago! I just saw this today with my sister and it was actually good, but not excellent. I mean we were both on the edge of our seats. It's a real shame that nobody can have fun, anymore. You all have to be so damn trivial and not appreciate anything and that's what's really getting in your way of enjoying it. I really miss the days when nitpicking was only kept at a minimum, now it's just a nervous tick, anymore; it seems.

Nobody seems to have tastes in horror, anymore. How come crap like The Walking Dead is praised (yawn!) but apparently it's a problem when it comes to something popular like this? Reviews mean nothing to me, anymore! I miss the days when people were actually satisfied with stuff. I guess those are days are long gone, what a pity!

I swear, every new movie that comes out; people do nothing but complain, regardless of how good it is, instead of saying what they enjoyed from it. Sure, there's always room for criticism but it seems like you guys are letting the bad overweigh the good and that's just ridiculous! Everything is just hyped, then when it finally comes out, people just pout about it and complain that it "didn't live up to their expectations"! I mean seriously, why? Why has it got this bad? Might as well ban Thanksgiving, while we're at it!

Seriously, stop letting nostalgia do this to you!

[–] modica (4169) 6 years ago

I have been a fan of this movie since I first saw it as a teen many years ago and I will tell you that this movie doesn't come close to the atmosphere, mood and overall creepiness of the original. People aren't impossible to please these days and that is the problem. Most of the younger viewers have become so accustomed to jump scares, body counts and gore that true horror movies are called boring while movies that are not scary are thought of as great. This new movie feels like Hollywood just trying to get the money of young people who have no idea about what a real horror movie is. I was really bored with this movie and felt as if there was zero suspense throughout all of it. Sorry, but Halloween II(1981) was better than this.

[–] CodyXBrenda (332) 6 years ago

Ugh, there is no God!

BTW, that was a figure of speech, I actually believe in God but wonder why he lets all of this bad shit, happen and does NOTHING about it!

The next time someone says "I can't wait for the next Friday The 13th" I'm just gonna fucking cringe, because final product will ALWAYS fucking disappoint anyone! Jesus Christ! Ungrateful doesn't even begin to describe it and that's why I loathe the 21st century, so much!

[–] modica (4169) 6 years ago

Oh please, just stop whining. You don't know what you are talking about when it comes to horror movies, so just go on and be happy that my opinion isn't what most of the young people have about this movie. Most probably liked it, because they don't know any better.

[–] CodyXBrenda (332) 6 years ago

No, you people need to stop their damn whining and start appreciating things. God, Millennials are the worst!

https://nationalpost.com/life/this-generation-is-well-and-truly-garbage-why-millennials-are-the-worst-according-to-a-self-hating-millennial

[–] modica (4169) 6 years ago

You came on here crying about people not being happy with anything anymore. I did not like this movie, but I didn't rant and rave about it. I just stated my opinion and moved on. I still can enjoy the original and forget that I ever saw this one, which shouldn't be too hard to do since it was one of those movies that is quite forgettable.

[–] CodyXBrenda (332) 6 years ago

No, our generation is garbage. That's all!

Not trying to shoot down opinions, but sometimes they go too far when it involves constant nitpicking!

[–] zephyr_cape (2979) 6 years ago

Why is it that we owe the filmmakers gratitude?

[–] Megan1988 (324) 6 years ago

*Spoilers*

I enjoyed this one. Did I like it better than the original? Nope. I even like II [1981], and part 4 better, but I enjoyed it. The only Halloween films I don't really care for are 6 and Resurrection. I am 30, and I appreciate good horror movies. I think some are overrated, and some are underrated. I do agree that it seems like a lot of people can't be satisfied anymore. I feel like people are always complaining when a new Pirates of the Caribbean movie comes out.

I didn't like Resurrection because Laurie gets killed in the first twenty minutes, and the rest of the movie just didn't have that Halloween atmosphere, in my opinion. I didn't like 6, because I didn't like what happened to Jamie's character, either. I like the idea of a weird cult trying to control Michael, but it backfires on them. I didn't like the baby story-line.

A lot of people don't like part 5. I like part 5, the only things I didn't like about it was the killing off of Rachel, and Dr. Loomis being a jerk.

Anyway, we're talking about this version. I give it a 6/10. I would have liked to have explored more of Laurie's PTSD, and her strained relationship with her daughter. I didn't like that a kid was killed off. I was actually surprised by the new psychiatrist being nuts. I did NOT see that coming! I didn't like that they showed too much of Michael's face. I get that they wanted to show that like all of us, he's aging, so he is human, but they showed too much of it. I really like the rest of the movie, though. Michael getting his mask back is a great scene, and I find the mask in this version pretty creepy.

[–] SuperVillain (93) 6 years ago

"I was actually surprised by the new psychiatrist being nuts. I did NOT see that coming!"

Lool really? Were you just not paying him any attention up until that point?

[–] Megan1988 (324) 6 years ago

LOL, yeah, I paid attention, I just figured he would be a psychiatrist who was just obsessed with finding out why Michael was the way he was. Like Laurie said, I thought he was the "New Loomis"

[–] SuperVillain (93) 6 years ago

Thank you for taking my post more in jest than ridicule. :]

Early on in the film, when the patients are being processed before the transfer, the Dr. says that he's on Michael's side.. and I was immediately taken back by how blatant that was.. plus he just acting suspicious the whole time. Why would he allow some journalists to come fuck with some crazy serial killer? How did he survive the bus crash? Why is he allowed to join the lieutenant without divulging what happened on that bus first? (And gets to sit in the front seat?) Why does he keep doing whatever he wants no matter how many times the lieutenant tells him not to.. I thought they were trying to make it obvious and a tad comical that he'd betray them at some point.

[–] Megan1988 (324) 6 years ago

No problem :) Wow, I guess I missed the line about him being on Michael's side. That's on me.

[–] AdamWaldron96-2 (178) 6 years ago

The film is just okay. To me, it’s like a 5/10. It’s a safe, mediocre sequel. I’ve been a fan of the series when I first binge watched them in preparation for the Rob Zombie remake about a decade ago. This is not the worst of the series, it’s better than 4 through 8 (I rank this at 6th) but it could have been better. To me, hype killed this movie. I don’t know whether to blame myself for believing in the hype, or the general audience for praising the crap out of it.

Since we are complaining about those who don’t like the movie, here’s what I hate about people who enjoyed it. I hate the ones who are pissed that some of us have different opinions, and can’t seem to accept that. It’s like those who liked or loved the movie think that everyone needs to be close to a unanimous agreement on it. Yes, we’re in a day and age where there are a lot of nitpickers and complainers. Welcome to the internet, where we’ve been granted a tool to exploit the shit out of our first amendment right. If you can’t handle all the trolls, assholes, nitpickers, constructive critics, and just regular people in general, then either write more angry comments at how they piss you off, or take a break from here so you can appreciate your time elsewhere.

If this film was at a 21% on rotten tomatoes, or heavily panned by everyone, I can kind of be on your side here, but that’s not the case. This film is for the most part accepted by everyone as a good movie, it’s just some of us who didn’t. If a film is universally loved or universally hated, there are always going to be people in the minority who object to like it or hate it. I know people who hate Get Out, but like Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom. I know people who hate Deadpool. I know people who think the IT miniseries is better than the movie. I know people who thought The Haunting of Hill House was boring as hell. Their tastes lie elsewhere, and I just have to accept it.

[–] CodyXBrenda (332) 6 years ago

Yes, I'm aware that IT 2017 got some flak and some people prefer the miniseries. I still think the miniseries did the whole nostalgia thing a lot better and it had the 50s/60s setting, unlike the late 80s setting of the new adaptation. So I do have a soft spot for the miniseries, even if some parts of it, was terrible. Mainly the second half, with the adults in the 80s/90s setting.

With all of that said, I still think this movie deserves at least a 6.5, and not a 3 or 4. Defiantly not an 8 of 9. Nothing will ever beat 1, 2, and 4 and maybe even H20. There were some problems. Killing off that kid was fucking stupid and some of the characters are not very interesting and Laurie was kinda over the top, also that psycho doctor was just a rehash of Wynn from 5 and 6, but the kills and suspense really nailed it. So it was a passable sequel. At least it had some good quantities, unlike that Rob Zombie crap!

Outside of the first one, I don't get why people like the Rob Zombie films. I'll admit that the first one was decent and I kinda liked the first half where they explored Micheal's childhood, but the second one was terrible and made no sense and was full of continuity and plotholes galore. Also the ending was very depressing, when they showed Laurie/Angel at the psych ward, while a remade version of Love Hurts plays, making it even more sadder. The only good scene from RZH2 was the part where Annie Brackett was murdered, that's it. The rest was just a total shitshow and Loomis was just downright mean and awful! Worse than he was in H5.

I sorta like Halloween 6. It's a lot better than 5. I did like a few things about H5, but the negatives overweight the positives, unfortunately. I mean H6 was a mess from the start. The whole Thorn plot was kinda interesting, but the fact that Michael knocks up his niece in the PC version was just stupid and bad writing. I can understand that Wynn wanted to copy Michael's DNA and harness it through Jamie's baby to try to replicate the evil inside Michael. Also, killing off Jamie was stupid and they should've waited until the finale to kill her off and maybe Danielle Harris would've returned. I will say that I liked Paul Rudd (AntMan) and Donald Pleasence (R.I.P.) but I can see why H20 decided to ignore 4-6, because of the mess that H5 and H6 made.

[–] AdamWaldron96-2 (178) 6 years ago

Kind of glad to see I wasn't the only one who thought Sartain supposed to be a Wynn throwback. I saw a video online where someone said Sartain is supposed to represent our over-obsession with those who perpetuate violence, and how we over-analyze and study killers to try to get in their heads, figure out what makes them tick. While I think this idea was established already in the beginning with the podcasters, Sartain being a fanatic did nothing overall, other than drive Michael to Laurie's house.

Maybe its because the Rob Zombie films were my first Halloween films in the theaters, but I kind of rewatch them over some of the other sequels. I don't think they're great, but they could be better. I do think the remakes get the brother/sister aspect down better than the 1981 part 2 did. Feels more natural. In 1981, it felt like it was added there so Loomis had a reason to go to the hospital. I kind of like how Laurie in RZ's H2 is just so messed up that she acts like a bitch, mostly because, to me, this is fairly realistic to people who I've met who have survived terrible ordeals. They're not always like Annie who is just trying to move on with her life, sometimes they're like Laurie who just acts out and lets her past be the catalyst for her piss poor decisions and attitude.

I will defend Loomis in Halloween 5 another day, but Loomis in RZ's H2 I kind of found funny, mostly because its Malcolm McDowell and he's a riot. If you've never seen the outtakes for the first remake, I urge you to watch it because Malcolm McDowell is hysterical. I'm guessing Rob Zombie heard people say they liked Malcolm in the outtakes, and so he wrote Loomis to be a comedic asshole in the second one to allow McDowell to act that way. Not all of it worked, I will say that. Questioning his assistant on her outfit and insulting her by calling her a clam digger, to me, was funny. Telling his assistant that he'll beat her when he's ready for her opinion and grabbing her didn't feel right.