Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

the original HALLOWEEN and its sequels

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • the original HALLOWEEN and its sequels

    I'm quite a fan of HALLOWEEN, HALLOWEEN 11 and HALLOWEEN 111 but I got tired of the series after that. I saw HALLOWEEN 10 because Jaime Lee Curtis was back but I don't remember much of it. I'm thinking maybe I should check out the rest of the original series now.

    What's interesting about the rest of the series? Is any one of the sequels particularly good? and if so, what makes it good?

    My mind is open.
    "I've been to college, but I can still speak English when business demands it."
    - Raymond Chandler, 1939.

  • #2
    the original HALLOWEEN and its sequels

    The 4th installment is by far the best of the sequels IMO. It's also very well shot and director Dwight Little makes great use of the autumnal color palette. Pleasance is over the edge but enjoyably so and the whole movie just works really well.

    Once you get beyond part 4 it is painfully downhill.

    Comment


    • #3
      H20 is good. At least I remember thinking so at the time. 4 still holds up well - Harris is one of the best child actors out there (though obviously all grown up now). She's good in 5 too but can't completely save it.
      Rock! Shock! Pop!

      Comment


      • #4
        I prefer the first 3 films. 2 is my favorite with Michael and 3 is woefully underrated. I think 3 is a better Halloween movie then the first by a long shot.
        Alex K.
        Senior Member
        Last edited by Alex K.; 03-19-2013, 06:00 AM.
        "Ah! By god's balls what licentiousness!"

        Marquis de Sade, The 120 Days of Sodom.

        Comment


        • #5
          H1, to me, is a perfect film. As such, I really don't give any real consideration to the sequels, except for H2, mostly due to its nostalgia factor and Dick Warlock's great turn as MM. H6 was interesting in so far as the controversy surrounding the production went, vandalism of the masks, the various cuts of the film, etc.

          As for the RZ films, they're better not to talk about.

          Comment


          • #6
            HALLOWEEN 3 is an amazing film, one of my favourite horror pictures ever. Great concept, and some really creepy sequences. I like HALLOWEEN and its immediate sequel too. To be honest, I think I prefer HALLOWEEN II to HALLOWEEN, although I acknowledge that Carpenter's original is the 'better' film by objective standards. However, I would have to admit that, for me, HALLOWEEN isn't among Carpenter's best films.

            I remember HALLOWEEN IV being pretty good but not particularly memorable. I don't think I ever really warmed to any of the other films in the series. I didn't like the Rob Zombie 'reboot' for its obsession with 'backstory', removing the enigma that made the first two films so effective. However, I did enjoy (hesitantly) Zombie's HALLOWEEN II. It was trashy and unoriginal, but memorably mean-spirited and delivered with some aplomb - not great shakes but worth watching (imo, of course).
            'You know, I'd almost forgotten what your eyes looked like. Still the same. Pissholes in the snow'

            http://www.paul-a-j-lewis.com (my photography website)
            'All explaining in movies can be thrown out, I think': Elmore Leonard

            Comment


            • #7
              According to Justin Beahm, who knows his shit, the original Carpenter film is getting a theatrical re-release.
              Rock! Shock! Pop!

              Comment


              • #8
                I only like the original HALLOWEEN.

                III is not a HALLOWEEN movie and is rather silly imo.

                For some reason I don't mind H2O...it has some good moments and it's good to see the adult Laurie back.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Ian Jane View Post
                  According to Justin Beahm, who knows his shit, the original Carpenter film is getting a theatrical re-release.
                  I hope it does. It will be great to see it on the big screen finally.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    No doubt it will be a digital screening. They'll project the blu-ray on the big screen. It might look fine on the digital scale, but it won't be filmlike will it? For that you need a luminous monitor. Hmmm.

                    I don't insist Halloween III be an entry in continuity with the series. Carpenter's original concept, as I recall from an interview or a commentary somewhere, was to make a stand-alone film under the "Halloween" umbrella for that time of year. I appreciate Halloween III as a stand-alone genre film. If it's silly, I didn't notice and I don't mind. I thought the pace could have been tightened up, however.
                    Richard--W
                    a straight arrow
                    Last edited by Richard--W; 09-08-2012, 06:25 PM.
                    "I've been to college, but I can still speak English when business demands it."
                    - Raymond Chandler, 1939.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Richard--W View Post
                      No doubt it will be a digital screening. They'll project the blu-ray on the big screen. It might look fine on the digital scale, but it won't be filmlike will it? For that you need a luminous monitor. Hmmm.

                      I don't insist Halloween III be an entry in continuity with the series. Carpenter's original concept, as I recall from an interview or a commentary somewhere, was to make a stand-alone film under the "Halloween" umbrella for that time of year. I appreciate Halloween III as a stand-alone genre film. If it's silly, I didn't notice and I don't mind. I thought the pace could have been tightened up, however.



                      Naming HALLOWEEN 3 HALLOWEEN 3 is a crass attempt at making more money off a successful film.
                      I would have more respect for it if it was just titled SEASON OF THE WITCH.

                      Anyways as I said I find the druid story ridiculous.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: the original HALLOWEEN and its sequels

                        Crass? They were mere pikers back then

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I agree with Koukol about the title, now that he mentions it. After doing Halloween II as a direct sequel instead of a stand-alone the concept of using "Halloween" as an umbrella title for stand-alone films was no longer valid. Halloween II turned the concept into a continuity franchise. Season of the Witch is a perfectly good title by istelf, although not all that accurate a description of the story.
                          "I've been to college, but I can still speak English when business demands it."
                          - Raymond Chandler, 1939.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Well it was Yablans who wanted a sequel to Halloween, not Carpenter, Hill, or Wallace. As a matter of fact, Wallace turned the H2 directing job down because he thought the H2 script was crappy.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              I love the first film. Love it. I'm kinda lukewarm on the second. III stands well on its own, even though it does suffer a bit from an acute case of the 80's. I remember thinking 4 was okay, but that's about it. But the first one is so great, one of the few movies that can still give me a bit of a jolt when i watch it.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X