Halloween: Review By JR

slysnide

"Thing From Another Planet" was terrible. JC's "The Thing" from 1982 rocked! And it was actually based on the short story "Who Goes There?" which is supposed to be made into a movie for a 2009 release. idk if that project is still a go. One of the guys who worked on the '82 film is supposed to direct it.

4 years agoby @slysnideFlag

Saquin Turok 'X'

Not seen this remake and won't bother. The originals are normally better than any remake, which are usually just sub-standard cash-ins. The only remake which just shaded the first is The Thing, which was a remake of The Thing From Another Planet. Can't think of any others.

4 years agoby @teesterxFlag

JR

lol

4 years agoby @supbitchFlag

slysnide

Well in comparison to the original Chainsaw, the new one was bloodier/gorier, as it actually featured blood. The original had no moving blood at all. Just the aftermath from the death of Franklin, (as there's blood on Leatherface's apron) a bloody wound on the girl's head, and some blood splatter on the wall behind the hook girl which was only featured w/out motion at all. It was just there. No gore at all. The new one had a leg getting cut off, teeth bashed out of the mouth, an ax to the back, a gunshot suicide, a hook ripping into someone's back, a bathtub of blood, and multiple wounds inflict Leatherface during the course of the movie.

I'll go edit my "TCM" (1974) to fit the description well.

4 years agoby @slysnideFlag

JR

true hallowen 2007 has no gore just a lot of blood

4 years agoby @supbitchFlag

Vamp

Well you know Rob Zombie's Halloween wasn't really gorey at all. I liked the old Chainsaw better, and I'd have to say that it was no where near a Comedy. I liked it more than the new one, but I saw the new one first. If you want a gorey movie Sly watch The Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning, that was a bloodfest no doubt about it!

4 years agoby @vampire2000Flag

slysnide

True. It felt like something for the fast paced gorefest genre. And yeah, that type of horror flick is worthy o it's own genre so as to not be confused with the old stuff.

And the old chainsaw was a dark comedy, with no blood or gore, and the chainsaw played a minimal role, but Leatherface, the hitch-hiker, and the cook made it great. The new one felt more creepy and had a good score, but it wasn't too gory. It kept the realism as to what it would really look like to have your leg cut off rather than blood everywhere. I liked the setting of the new one WAY more too.

4 years agoby @slysnideFlag

Vamp

Hey now, it wasn't a piece of sh*t, it just really didn't feel like a Halloween movie.

4 years agoby @vampire2000Flag

T.Clark

I wasn't even born when the original halloween was released. You'd expect someone like me to like zombie's movie better cuz it's for my generation. But i don't cuz it was a piece of sh*t ha

4 years agoby @insertusernamehereFlag

Vamp

The original was waaaaayyy more intense than the new Chainsaw. Wow. . . . . I never thought I'd hear anyone say that about the original ever

4 years agoby @vampire2000Flag

JR

well youre right but reason for remakes are not just money but for the new pepole who want a better picture effects and more better stuff like that and thats how i am now there is a lot of old movies i like but horror films back then were meh some were good but i didnt like the old halloween felt like when a strnger calls without the phone

star wars

aliens

predator

jaws

nightmare on elm street

the exorcist

terminator

and a few others so i do like some old movies but not all of them i hated the old chainsaw but liked the remake same with hitcher and dawn of the dead i thouht they were better

4 years agoby @supbitchFlag

Vamp

Understandable, but there are some of us, who prefer the old stuff, over the newage crap.

4 years agoby @vampire2000Flag

JR

ok it wasnt scary but neither was the first but this was more enjoyable is what im saying its just my opion i like this better

4 years agoby @supbitchFlag

slysnide

And why does this guy keep changing his name & profile picture every hour?

4 years agoby @slysnideFlag

Vamp

So am I. . . . .

4 years agoby @vampire2000Flag

slysnide

If it wasn't scary then how can it be scarier than the first? I'm lost on this.

4 years agoby @slysnideFlag

JR

ok it wasnt scary but it was scarier than the first

4 years agoby @supbitchFlag

slysnide

"Halloween III" was an attempt by John Carpenter & Debra Hill (RIP) to make the Halloween franchise into a Twilight Zone like series, cuz it was the studio that had them go with the Shape for film 2, but they allowed them creative rights to #3, though they didn't direct #s 2 or 3, just helped write them, but the film failed miserably. Would've done better as an independent w/out the "Halloween" banner atop it. Plus it was too deep. The first 2 were about the boogeyman stalking and killing babysitters, while the 3rd was about a mad CEO that wanted to kill all the children of the world with his Silver Shamrock Masks. Way to big a jump in style from the first two.

4 years agoby @slysnideFlag

Vamp

It was intense at the theaters I'll give it that. I think you could call this a blenderized remake, I mean I thought it was great, but it wasn't as good as the original one was nor any of the ones before it, except maybe Halloween III: Season of the Witch, which was also a good movie, I just found that it made no sense in the series.

4 years agoby @vampire2000Flag

T.Clark

PLUS, i'm not a "fanboy" of the first one...it's just better than this. This isn't even scary, it's gory and disgusting. I didn't like it not cuz i'm a huge fan of the original, but cuz it's just a BAD movie altogether, michael fan or not

4 years agoby @insertusernamehereFlag

slysnide

This movie wasn't even RELATIVELY scary. High body counts just means that the director lost any sense of creativity. After all, there's nothing scary about gore!!!! How many times to I have to say it??!!!! And it's set-up to hate all the victims anyway, and especially Laurie Strode. She's not even relatively similar to the original character. Last time I checked, remakes had to have the same characters with their sam personalities. Acting was only good on Malcom McDowell's part as well. And Brad Duorif & Danny Trejo I guess. The only thing good about the film was the visuals, and the fast paced aspect to it. Which makes it not even worthy of being referred to as a "remake" so much as it should be called a "New Horror Flick." If you watch it without thinking of it as a remake of the AMAZING ORIGINAL, then it can still be worth a 2.5.

4 years agoby @slysnideFlag

T.Clark

This is a disgrace. All u could do is come up with a paragraph and 2 sentences bout how this movie is good and i could give at least 9 on how it was terrible. Sorry bud, but this does NOT deserve five stars

4 years agoby @insertusernamehereFlag

phanikrishnab

The saying in the movie Michal is the perfect alignment of internal and external factors is really amazing...

4 years agoby @phanikrishnabFlag

phanikrishnab

More than that while Michale decides to slauter his pop n sys the song Rob Zombie used from Led Zappelin love tragedy is really impressive...it really f*cked the haters......

4 years agoby @phanikrishnabFlag

phanikrishnab

The saying in the movie Michal is the perfect alignment of internal and external factors is really amazing...

4 years agoby @phanikrishnabFlag

Vamp

This one is a good one. Don't ever say that about the original ever again though. The first was the BEST, and don't forget it.

4 years agoby @vampire2000Flag