Rob Zombie's Halloween

I agree with both sides of what people are saying on this thread, I mean how could you not. No one wants to see another horror remake, Especially Halloween. BUT....I really don't think this guys in it for the money, and don't think he expects to make a name for himself making remakes...he just really believes in this project. Read the interviews. Carpenter is backing him, thats something. He's probably the biggest horror fan of all time. He know what makes a good horror film. We'll all just have to wait and see.
 
When I first saw the trailer my first reaction was "that has to be the lamest thing I've ever seen - a remake of THE Halloween - no way" but by the end of the trailer when I saw Zombie was directing it went to the coolest thing ever.

Halloween is one of my favorite movies. I think it's great on many levels. I think the craft in terms of suspense = Hitchock at moments.

Zombie's House off 1000 Corpses is shlock for the most part. But Devil's Rejects is fairly brilliant IMHO. The growth between those two movies is staggering. I'd put Rejects on the same level as The Thing easily, and I love that movie as well. But lately Carpenter couldn't carry Zombie's stinky gym shorts. Seen Ghosts of Mars or Vampires?

I think Zombie is a great filmmaker and I have a feeling this will increasingly be proven. He loves the genre, he loves the original. To me it's like seeing a band you love playing one of your favorite Stones or Beatles' songs.
 
Last edited:
The Halloween series is definately a guilty pleasure; but the original is a masterpiece.

RZ is the real deal. House and Rejects blew me away. He is another filmmaker bringing back what is good about cinema.
 
Rob Zombie's a rip off artist. House of 1000 corpses was a rip off of Texas Chainsaw... Does this guy have any ideas of his own? He should stick to what he does best -- music.
 
I never liked Zombie and the remake is really boring and will probably upset the hardcore fans of the series by delving far too deep in Michael Myers back story.

I am sick of remakes/homages that do nothing more than copy or try and recreate, there is no need for it. If you are going to take something, please, please, please, try and make something unique about it.
 
jpeck said:
I never liked Zombie and the remake is really boring and will probably upset the hardcore fans of the series by delving far too deep in Michael Myers back story.

I am sick of remakes/homages that do nothing more than copy or try and recreate, there is no need for it. If you are going to take something, please, please, please, try and make something unique about it.
Click to expand...

Agreed.
I never liked Rob Zombie movies, but i had hope that he would do something with this series, but in the end its was just bland. He didnt really do anything new.
For that, i much rather watch the original.
He didnt add anything to it. Didnt make it his own i think.
 
Phil Maker said:
Rob Zombie's a rip off artist. House of 1000 corpses was a rip off of Texas Chainsaw... Does this guy have any ideas of his own? He should stick to what he does best -- music.
Click to expand...



damn dude this is the 100th time... you make a movie.
 
i saw the film guys,thier is this website that shows all the new stuff,i cant believe they had holloween though,but it was pretty good,if you want to know more about the detials just pm me,i dont want to kill it for the others
 
Saw it last night... I'm a HUGE fan of the original.

With that said, I still liked this one. Not great, but not bad either.
The original is still by far the best, but this one is better than all the sequels that came along and destroyed the Halloween name, save the second one.

Halloween I and II are still great in my book.

Some people are really going to hate some of the changes that Zombie made though. :)

I just went with it and had a pretty good time overall.

Mike
 
Kyser said:
Saw it last night... I'm a HUGE fan of the original.

With that said, I still liked this one. Not great, but not bad either.
The original is still by far the best, but this one is better than all the sequels that came along and destroyed the Halloween name, save the second one.

Halloween I and II are still great in my book.

Some people are really going to hate some of the changes that Zombie made though. :)

I just went with it and had a pretty good time overall.

Mike
Click to expand...

Did he try to explain a bunch of back-story?
 
Cinematography and Script of Halloween

Cinematography and Script of Halloween

**** Light spoilers within this post ****

I saw Halloween today, I can tell you that this re imaging suffers from a really poor direction and image. There was three things about the cinematography that really ruined the experience for me and had me thinking, "why would they even film it this way, its distracting and not appealing". Frankly the cinematography looks amateurish. Here are the three things I personally think went wrong on the cinematography.

1. Over use of Depth of Field- I don't know why Rob Zombie told his DP to film this way, but it is just distracting. You have shots that would have been much better with everything in focus. The camera kept changing focus back and forth between characters, making me dizzy frankly. I usually love when movies are shot using a narrow DOF, but it has to be done tastefully and not in a distracting manner in which Halloween was done.
2. Shaky cam- This has to go side by side with the framing issues. I felt in too many scenes, especially the action oriented ones the camera would just randomly move up or down; I guess to illustrate urgency? This also made me dizzy and I couldn't really get what was going visually half the time. Had there been no sounds of screaming or dialog I would have not know what was happening in the story. I mean the most over kill moment was when Dr. Samuel Loomis was chasing Myers at the end the Camera would just go up and down randomly; I felt no suspence from this choice of Camera movement. In my opinion the only time you do a camera shake is when a character fall (you move it up and down), the land is moving (dinosaur steps, earthquake, ect.)
3. Framing- Finally, there were a ton of shots that would have worked much better had they have been wider and captured all the action in the frame. Through out this movie, it felt as if I was watching an illegal cam recording because there were stupid extreme closeups of character's cheeks and just random other extreme closeups. With a wider angle, not only would it have been much more coherent visually but it would have been creepier. The framing issues in this movie was one of the main problems that prevented me from liking it.

Also as for the script, it is pretty hard to fail at rewriting a slasher film. But there were some key aspects that I felt should have been explained:
1. You have Micheal who we see as a small little (yet psychopathic) runt but then we move 15 years later and he is the bloody hulk. I was like WTF! I really couldn't have understood why he was as strong as he was, he was ripped. Also, in psychology usually they try to ween patient's vice; which for Micheal was his masks. It made no sense that the hospital gave him supplies and openly accepted that he made all these masks, when it was (in my opinion) his reason for killing.

Please, let me hear if you thought the same or thought differently, thanks.
 
Last edited:
indiraider said:
There was three things about the cinematography that really ruined the experience for me and had me thinking, "why would they even film it this way, its distracting and not appealing". Frankly the cinematography looks amateurish.
Click to expand...

I thought the cinematography was the best part of the film. I really liked the way it was shot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top