Baroness Jamie Lee Curtis is returning to the Halloween franchise

The only way I'd be interested in seeing this is if JLC showed off her shenis.

She'll probably appear in the final girl's dreams as a ghostly guide. Perhaps even as the FG's dead granny Laurie.

Her cock is what drove Michael to kill in the first place. Not some stupid Celtic curse.

It's a direct sequel to Halloween 2, ignoring H20 and Resurrection.

She's way to old for a direct sequel to Halloween 2......

She looka like a man.

R5=Adrienne King

Here's an interesting piece of trivia from Halloween: Resurrection:

[quote] Jamie Lee Curtis agreed to do her part, only to make sure her character, Laurie Strode (or herself) wouldn't appear in another sequel. (At the time of the film's initial release, executive producers Malek Akkad, and Moustapha Akkad tried to explain it by claiming Jamie Lee Curtis "was so impressed with the screenplay, that she wanted a large part in it". She has publicly stated that was not the case, she was under contract to do it.)

This does make Jamie look a bit foolish now. Does she need the money so badly or did she just become nostalgic for playing Laurie?

No, Kevin Williamson, it doesn't make her look foolish. It's the 40th Anniversary, John Carpenter is producing, it won't be Scream-influenced. It's a chance to do it right this time.

It's a shame they're going to ignore Halloween H20 too, which was a pretty good film (especially when compared with the horrible 4th, 5th and 6th parts), but I imagine Josh Hartnett has no desire to reprise his role as Laurie's son. But I doubt Laurie is going to be childless in the new film so they're probably gonna create new children characters for her.

I like H20 but if this corrects the horrible Resurrection, then I'm all for it. Plus, with John Carpenter doing the score, we'll get to see Laurie on screen with her theme playing not the horrible H20 score.

The only good thing about Halloween Resurrection was seeing Tyrannosauros Banks killed onscreen. I'm pretty sure every ANTM contestant had dreams like these at least once:

Hollywood RIP. It's totally run out of ideas. Now the rebooted reboot get rebooted. It's pathetic.

I hope the feisty Marion Chambers is back with a new pack of cigs and her old ginormous pink turtleneck.

Hooray! Love Jamie Lee as Laurie Strode. I do wish this would pick up where H20 left off, though. Not a masterpiece, but I liked it, even with its "Scream"-like tone in places. And whoever said that Josh Hartnett wouldn't be interested ... are you kidding me? What has he been in the last 15 years?

But it doesn't. It picks up after the second film (which was awful).

I hated the second part too (even the third one was more enjoyable). I couldn't keep my eyes off Jamie's horrible wig and I still think revealing Laurie was Michael's sister was a huge mistake - the main reason the first one was so scary is because Michael picked just a group of random teens as his victims, simply because they happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, so the audiences thought to themselves "Man, that could happen to anybody". That whole brother/sister thing suddenly made the whole thing a lot less scary.

[quote]It's a direct sequel to Halloween 2

Oh, goodie! She gets to wear that beautiful long wig again.

I wish John Carpenter would direct a sequel to THE FOG. I like it even more than Halloween.

Halloween H40 is written by Danny McBride. WTF?

As long as they keep it out of Rob Zombie's hack ass hands.

[quote] As long as they keep it out of Rob Zombie's hack ass hands.

This x 1000

McBride's Alien Convent turned out to be a huge mess so this does not bold well for H40.

Agreed. The Zombie movies were complete ADD shit. Regarding Halloween II, though: For 35+ years I've been wondering, why was she wearing such a cheap-ass wig? The producers, having made $$$ off the first movie, must have had money to buy something nicer. Why didn't they?

Wait a minute ... Danny McBride, that idiot from Eastbound and Down, is writing the story? Why? Who is he fucking?

Ugh. How many times have they started this franchise over? Jamie Lee Curtis "left" the franchise after 2, then again allegedly after H20, then again after Resurrection. FFS.

She never "left" after H20. She was under contract to do Resurrection.

Honestly, the new movie can't be worse than Rob Zombie' s efforts or Halloween 5.

Jamie's relationship with the Halloween franchise reminds me of Cher and her Farewell tours.

I thought H20 was a great end to her characters storyline. Shame that fucked it up with Resurrection.

Oh that Jamie Lee Curtis. Between Halloween and Activa, she won't rest until she make me shit my pants!

Does she really have a penis?

Just a small one.

Raspberry is my favorite "Activa"

R12 God, look at how slow she is to react to that string around her neck. Isn't the instinctual response to [italic]immediately[/italic] touch the thing that's choking you?

Or perhaps the director told her not to reach for her neck until it's all in the shot? Either way, that's some truly shoddy filmmaking. I never say this but I could definitely do a better job.

Why pick it up after part 2? She was stabbed by Michael and fell off the building of the nut house she was in in Resurrection? She could survive that. Better than just ignoring it. Anyway it sucked that Laurie supposedly died in Resurrection but glad she's alive in the new one.

R35, they probably want people to forget everything that happened after she fell off the building. Plus she was so fucked up by that point knowing she killed an innocent man. Audiences want to see a forthright, energetic Laurie Strode, not a loon. Has Kyle Richards signed on to play Lindsay?

[Quote] Has Kyle Richards signed on to play Lindsay?

I didn't even think of this. You know she would lol

She better not be throwing around that Baroness shit all over the place! Mike Myers will go medieval on her ass!

This could be good. If the events in only Part 1 and 2 happened. I imagine that they are going to flash forward 40 years after the event. I'd like to know what became of Laurie Strode. Wouldn't Michael being his 60s or something?

It doesn't "bode" well, either, R23

Did she wear a wig in part 2 cuz she chopped off her hair? Anyway, the Halloween movies have THE most fucked up continuity of all horror movies franchises. Of all movie franchises basically. The horror world is stoked as fuck for Jamie's return. Let's just hope it is plainly decent and does her and her character well and brings the scares and creepy mood of the first film. Oh, and Halloween 2 was good. The hospital setting was creepy. Even though she was the only damn patient there. Whatever!

"I'm ready for my Closeup, Mr. Demille!"

Yes, R42, her hair was shorter than it was in Prom Night so they slapped that monstrosity on.

So does she still have Josh Hartnett as a son and Michelle Williams as a daughter or did they magically get zapped out of existence?

Only gays care about bad wigs in movies.

I'll always love the disco sequence from Prom Night. They should have put that in the remake.

The Prom Night remake was an abomination.

[Quote] The Prom Night remake was an abomination.

Not even Johnathon Schaech could save it.

Halloween 3 was the best of them all

R45, Michelle Williams was not her daughter. She played Josh Hartnett's girlfriend, Molly.

The guy that played her date in Prom Night died of AIDS

Any love for Terror Train around here? I think that was the best 1980's slasher film and Jamie looked really good in that pirate shirt of hers. Of course it would never get made today, with its homoerotic undertones and the tranny killer.

Will Laurie be a "functioning alcoholic" in this new/old continuity as she was in H20? Will she still be sneaking in extra drinks while her boyfriend is in the restroom?

Michelle Williams was not Laurie's daughter, but rather she was Josh Harnett's girlfriend. Josh, the nephew of Michael Myers.

I loved 'Halloween 5: The Revenge Of Michael Myers." The deluxe DVD set has an alternate cut of the movie with different storylines and sequences which better explain the film. Someone needs to splice the two cuts together!

The late Nineties comic books actually weaved all of the continuities together in a well-done way. Laurie had Danielle Harris and gave her up when she faked her death, thus making 'Halloween' 4 & 5 in the same continuity as H20. Also, 'Season Of The Witch' was added into the continuity because of the Thorn/Druids connection in 5 & 6.

BTW, the evil Druids/Samhain/Thorn plots of 5 & 6 arose from the novelization of the first movie.

Halloween 5 will always suck no matter which way you splice it. (see what I did there) But I think you're referring to Halloween 6 which has the producer's cut and the theatrical cut.

I typed 6 and somehow I changed it to 5! Eek! It's my favorite after H1, so I know it is 6.

[Quote] Halloween 3 was the best of them all

No.

[Quote] The guy that played her date in Prom Night died of AIDS

I didn't know that.

[quote]Halloween 3 was the best of them all

No, but it has the best score.

Since she looks like a truck driver in drag, how about a sequel to Road Games: "Road Games 2: The Driver's Seat"?

r40 brings up a good point. Both characters are AARP age at this point. Laurie can just use her Life Alert button to call for help.

I'm definitely interested, but doesn't this just sound like a remake of H20? It's hard to believe that movie is almost 20 years old by itself. Jesus.

The setting is supposed to be an almost deserted nursing home.

The plot is Michael Myers just wants Laurie to share some of her Activia with him . She refuses to give him any and Michael has been irregular for years and it's why he's so grouchy and killing people .

How many Halloween movies are there and which are Rob Zombie's?

Has Michael been dead for 40 years in this new universe?

In the Zombie version, you almost want Laurie to die. Why make them white trash?

[quote]Has Michael been dead for 40 years in this new universe?

No, the new movie picks off right after the second one ended so 40 years has not passed.

She should just do the horror conventions. She did one once with the publicity that all the money would go to a children's hospital in L.A. She of course had lines for hours.

Anyone know if Michelle Williams and Josh Hartnett are cumming back too to repraise their rolls?

The only way I'll accept them skipping all of the movies after Halloween 2 is if they give me back my money for them.

Let's call it $ 50 and call it even.

FYI ......... Michelle Williams' character Molly was killed in the script I read for H20. As I recall Laurie and her son were the sole survivors.

Wasn't Tyra Banks' death a deleted scene ? I didn't think they really ever showed enough of her to warrant a death scene in the released movie.

[quote] "The movie picks off with..."

[quote] "Repraise their rolls..."

Mommy, what's wrong with people who ruin English?

"Waitress, may I have some repraised rolls to go with my retried beans?"

Tyra's death is not shown in the movie nor on the DVDs in any deleted scenes. The "working copy" is what is on YouTube which has her death.

Tyra's dead body is shown in the actual movie but not her strangled and stabbed death scene.

Unless they're going to give him a zimmer frame, I can't see 68 year old Michael being up for the killings these days.

R67 no offense but you can't possibly be that dumb

How the fuck can 59 year old JLC play a 17 year old Laurie Strode in the new movie, that according to you takes place in 1978

OBVIOUSLY it takes place 40 years later in 2018.

I hear Michael has some Viagra and a hankering.

Here's Tyra's body from the theatrical cut of the H:R. She's smiling with her eyes, even in her death.

I'm intrigued at how they're going to pull this off. Are they gonna start off with Jamie telling the story and then flashback to the early 80s and have that be most of the movie and then at the very end Michael chases after her along with his oxygen tank?

R30 winner of this thread!

[quote] the guy that played her date in Prom Night died of AIDS

Casey Stevens

The girl who played Jamie in 4 and 5 grew up into a real white trash slut.

Exhibit A

These people are too old to be doing this shit. Maybe Michael can chase her around on his Rascal scooter.

I don't think Prom Night 2008 can even really be called a remake of the 1980 movie. It was completely different.

So this is now the FIFTH timeline in the franchise? And the FOURTH direct sequel to Halloween 2?

Whatever they pitched to her must have been pretty damn clever for JLC to agree to this. She probably wants to work with Carpenter again too.

Remember when talking about age Michael isn't human.

Since when isn't Michael human? (I'll admit I haven't kept up with the series). And, R48-the Prom Night remake had some good points-I learned that you can slit someone's throat and the whole thing can be accomplished nearly completely bloodlessly.

Little Tommy Doyle is all grown up!

I hope Kyle Richards reprises her role as Lindsey.

From my understanding, to those of you slamming "Hallowe'en 3," the idea was to create a separate Hallowe'en universe where new movies would be released independent of each other (like "Twilight Zone" or "Black Mirror"). The third one was fucking amazing, spooky, weird, would never be made today. I believe there is more than one thread on here about it, and it is now rightly considered an underrated classic. Just think if Carpenter, Akkhad et al had been met with some success with their vision vis-a-vis H3 and going forward, and the incredible output of original horror movies we could have had. Probably would have continued to this day: annual "Hallowe'en" movies being released, each one being totally anticipated, hype being built up online, etc.

Instead, we got a bunch of whiny fanboys having their say and a subsequent handful of useless "let's carry on, then" sequels, scaring absolutely nobody, with Michael in the jankiest of janky imitation masks, and cinemas churning out comic book retreads on the regular.

In short, don't shit on H3! It was supposed to be what it is!

Your scolding has killed the thread. And it's HalloWEEN, ya pretentious twit.

R94, nothing kills threads on the DL except pouting caftaneers who have nothing to say in reply to the truth.

And it's HalloWE'EN to those of us who don't have Austrian bodybuilders and NY reality-show mavens for politicians, ya uneducated rube.

Halloween may not be that great but it was scary as fuck to a 7 year old

^^ Halloween 3

[Quote] The girl who played Jamie in 4 and 5 grew up into a real white trash slut.

She's posing nude. Whoop de doo.

[Quote] I don't think Prom Night 2008 can even really be called a remake of the 1980 movie. It was completely different.

It was different but in the worst way. The word [italic]generic[/italic] comes to mind.

[Quote] he Prom Night remake had some good points-I learned that you can slit someone's throat and the whole thing can be accomplished nearly completely bloodlessly.

The pg-13 curse.

At least Prom Night 2008 was watchable. Maybe the times have desensitized us or people in the 70s/80s were pussies but I could barely finish the original Prom Night. Everything was terrible.

R99 I'm a little confused. The original while camp was much gorier than the remake.

If DL had it's way, a Halloween 3 remake would target peanut allergy and aspie kids.

Halloween 3 was great, just not as a Halloween movie.

I love the word "shenis" as used in this thread.

I watched Halloween 3 this weekend. Good cheesy fun.

Another fan here of "Terror Train" (1980). I'm surprised it has never been remade.

I just thought it was so ballsy of her to come back and reprise the role!

R106

For Jamie to come back after stating that she wanted the character killed off is an interesting choice. I'm optimistic that whatever Carpenter's pitch was to her that it must be quite good for her to sign on.

It was a big, hard choice but she's just not one to tuck and run!

I HATE Danny McBride, I'm so upset he gets to work on this!

I see what you're doing there R106/R108

R110

LOL. She's one of the few actresses that I don't think is completely full of shit. I guess it must be all that Activia.

R110 I was just saying there is a lot of really stiff competition out there, but she always gets up and works harder and meets it head on!

Very witty there R112/R106

I loved all the Halloween films except for the shitty Rob Zombie ones. I was actively routing for that Laurie to get slaughtered. Especially in the 2nd one where every other word out of her mouth was mother fucker. 5 had the worst mask but I genuinely liked 6. Especially the hot brother and Paul Rudd. 3 is great fun and I enjoy watching it every October. My only wish for Resurrection would have been that Busta Rhymes and his kung fu shit would have died a quick death.

I hope Laurie is the film's 'final girl'. Extra drama points if Michael Myers kills of Laurie's kid in this movie.

Filming begins later this month.

What do we think the plot will be?

I'm curious about that as well. Is Michael still obsessed with Laurie that he stalks her and her family?

R117 Something decent hopefully.

I must pretend I am a Baroness.

DL fave Zac Efron joining the cast?

[quote]On Michael Myers patrol. #JamieLeeCurtis #HappyHalloween

R121 I wonder...

Original Michael Myers actor returns for his final confrontation with Curtis.

With a walker?

He's pretty spry for a 70-year-old. Much more than Trump, in fact.

Omg. I'm both scared and excited.

So will Zac's character be related to Laurie??

I want to enjoy this, but I fear it has ‘Escape From LA’ written all over it...

Kyle Richards should be in it.

Zac is not in the movie.

First day of filming completed. I guess that's how she'll look in the movie.

She looks like Wendy Williams.

Weirdly, she looks like she's morphing into John Carpenter.

Glad to see her without that aluminum boy cut she's been sporting the last ten years. Even if she's got Kelly Clarkson's 'do.

I love the new still. I buy that's Laurie 40 years later.

When is she coming out as a hermaphrodite?

The culture can take it now....

Filming wrapped. Says the movie is "astonishingly scary".

We'll be the judge of that, Lady Haden-Guest.

This better be good.

You have to admit she is in fabulous shape for her age.

[quote] She's posing nude. Whoop de doo.

You're so matter-of-fact about such things, Vanessa Williams.

Since they’re ignoring continuity, why not also bring back Ellen Ripley from the dead and have her team up with Laurie Strode to battle MM?

This franchise is as hot mess!

They should've cast Tim Allen and called it Black Christmas with The Kranks.

[QUOTE]This franchise is as hot mess!

They’re trying to fix that.

Interview with Nick Castle. Says he didn't even know this would be a movie until about five months ago and that it feels very much like the original.

I wonder when we will see a trailer.

r146 Filming officially wrapped on Monday (confirmed below by VP of Feature Film Development at Blumhouse) and it's coming out in October.

I want to say we're months away from a trailer still but these horror movies can't possibly take very long to edit, right?

I'd expect a teaser trailer by the summer. These days, movies start editing before they're even wrapped. They send the editors the files and they get cracking on the scenes that have already been shot.

I cannot wait to see this. Some pluses are that John Carpenter is back as a producer, that JLC is sporting her blonde ’do from the first movie (and that it’s an infinitely better wig than the one she wore in H II), and that they’ve dropped all of the bullshit storylines that came after the original. This film will be like a true sequel to the original film, which is great. No more familial bonds or man in black/thorn bullshit.

This is not a direct sequel to Halloween II, it’s a direct sequel to part 1. Michael was never burned up in a hospital. I’m assuming that in this film, Michael simply disappeared into the night after Loomis shot him off that balcony in part 1, and Laurie has been looking over her shoulder for 40 years wondering when and if he’ll ever return.

Since H2 never happened in the new movie's continuity, did Laurie end up marrying Ben Tramer?

Maybe, lol. Judy Greer plays her daughter in this. Maybe she’s Laurie and Ben’s offspring?

[QUOTE]This is not a direct sequel to Halloween II, it’s a direct sequel to part 1.

For Michael’s sake, I hope there’s no stairs in the movie.

^LOL

Is Nurse Marion in this? I would love to see Nancy Stephens reprise her role again.

Fucking Zac Efron. Again? Seriously he must give the best head ever because he's sloppy ass must be a mess now. When will Hollywood get it that Zac is a washed up hack that does not sell tickets, no matter how many shit fests you shove him in. He's box office poison. Pedophile producers, set your net elsewhere please and stop using Zac's roided up coke hole. It needs a rest.

Um...Zac Efron isn't in this.

Yeah, that was just speculation that has since been refuted. I was actually the one who posted the speculative Insta photo as some outlets ran with it as a possible casting announcement. Sorry for any confusion.

I’m looking forward to H60 in 2038 which will tell us this film never happened and that they’re going to reboot the franchise again with a direct sequel to the original starring Jamie Lee Curtis.

Is this where we’re at in terms of Hollywood running out of ideas? They’ve stopped remaking classics. Now they’re remaking the sixth sequel in a franchise. It’s pathetic.

I really want to see the movie but I hate Danny fucking McBride.

[bold]Danny McBride says the new Halloween references every other Halloween movie[/bold]

[quote]“This picks up after the first one,” said McBride. “The Halloween franchise has kind of become a little bit of like choose your own adventure, you know like there’s some many different versions, and the timeline is so mixed up, we just thought it would be easier to go back to the source and contnue from from there. It was nicer than knowing you’re working on Halloween 11, it just seemed cooler, ‘we’re making Halloween 2‘. We do [reference the other movies]. For fans, we pay homage and respect to every Halloween that has been out there.”

Official poster is out and it is simplicity itself.

OP......Its Jamie Lee Haden-Guest, Baroness Haden-Guest to peasants like yourself.

I'm so excited for this.

I had a thought they will actually add a supernatural/spiritual element to The Shape, which is in keeping w/ Carpenter's and Hill's original vision.

Maybe they'll make him something like a ghost or spirit.

Oh Paul, I can no longer stall.

Will she be able to fully commit to the role? She's bound to be spending lots of time on the crapper after eating all that Activia.

[bold]Jamie Lee Curtis promises new 'Halloween' will be terrifying, says it goes 'full-tilt boogeyman'[/bold]

[quote]“I’ve seen a trailer and I’ve seen some footage, and it’s terrifying,” said Curtis, who reprises her role of Laurie Strode 40 years after first facing off against Myers in the John Carpenter-directed classic. “They went full-tilt boogeyman. And I’ve never said that in my life, and I will say full-tilt boogeyman for the rest of the year as I go around talking about this.”

[quote]“And as soon as I read what David Green and Danny McBride had come up with … and the way that they connected the dots of the story, it made so much sense to me that it felt totally appropriate for me to return to Haddonfield, Ill., for another 40th-anniversary retelling,” Curtis said. “There was the idea of, ‘What do you call it?’ If I had had my druthers, I probably would’ve called it Halloween Retold. Because it’s being retold. It’s the original story in many, many, many ways. Just retold 40 years later with my granddaughter.”

Looking forward to it.

OMG, R168.

Let me go empty out the bucket under my vagina.

A friend of a friend saw a test screening in L.A. this week and said it was absolutely excellent. Apparently, Laurie is living in the woods somewhere like some sort of survivalist and Michael was captured a few moments after the events of the first film and is about to be transferred and...well...that obviously doesn't go according to plan.

R171 Oh please, my Paul...

[Quote] well...that obviously doesn't go according to plan.

It never does.

r173 Now I'm wishing they made a separate, 10-minute cut where everything does indeed go according to plan, and just troll a random theatre with it.

I'm not trying to stab her--I'm trying to cut her clothes off to see if she really has a shenis.

R174 That would be awesome.

Tweets from a CinemaCon attendant, Eric Vespe:

[quote]"Except for Star Wars I can't think of another movie where the same actor is playing the same part 40 years later." "This new movie is hella scary... I just used a young person's word. You all tweet that I said that." - Jamie Lee Curtis

[quote]Laurie is with her daughter and young granddaughter Halloween night 2018. She says Laurie has turned into a warrior hellbent on protecting her family "and determined to keep Michael locked up forever."

[quote]First footage of Halloween looks great. New story is that after he was shot by Loomis Michael was recommitted and Laurie has been preparing in case he ever breaks out.

[quote]Some teenagers were talking amongst each other. "Wasn't it her brother that killed all those people?" "It wasn't her brother, that's something people made up." So, yeah. Bye-bye sequel storylines!

[quote]There was a shot of Myers, post break-out, tormenting a girl in a bathroom stall. His hand goes over the door and drops a dozen bloody teeth on the floor. They're not messing around with this one. It's great to see the mask back in action.

[quote]Also Laurie is never once shown as scared in the footage we saw. She's a woman on a mission, just as much a hunter as Michael. Love that take.

R177 ahhhhh! Thanks for the update.

I'm so psyched for this.

[quote]There was a shot of Myers, post break-out, tormenting a girl in a bathroom stall. His hand goes over the door and drops a dozen bloody teeth on the floor. They're not messing around with this one. It's great to see the mask back in action.

That sounds wicked creepy! Thanks for sharing!

I can’t wait to see this!

R177 Sounds good so far.

Isn't the original Michael back, too?

TYPICAL HOLLYWOOD LIBERAL VIOLENCE AND YET NO MENTION OF APOLOGY TO MY GOOD FRIEND DANA WHO IS APPARENTLY MORE CULPABLE BECAUSE SHES SPOKESWOMQN FOR AN ORGANISATION INHAPPEN TO BELING TO AND IM SORRY I WINT BE GETTING A TICKET

R183 Speed kills!

Undergoing additional photography right now.

[quote]Sources tell me that the agenda is to tweak the finale following a recent test screening (without getting into it, yes, it took place).

That hand is more frightening than the mask.

Her hands are fine.

SPOILER ALERT:

Film ends with Laurie force feeding Michael gallons of Activia and he literally shits his guts out finally killing him for good.

The franchise can never end, even 40 years after the original was released. It's like Michael.

That trailer tomorrow better be good.

Why would Laurie spend 40 years preparing for MM to get out?

If there is no familial tie and ZERO continuity, then Laurie was just another random Haddonfield-ite that was in Michael's way. He was killing babysitters in his hometown. That's it.

Why wouldn't Laurie move to Canada or Mexico or London if she was worried about Michael (for no reason) breaking out and coming after her. It's not like she was anything special to him in this continuity-less timeline.

Will the nod to H20 be Laurie's vodka in the freezer?

R191 Very good points.

H20 made sense because of 'Halloween 2' where it was revealed that Michael was Laurie's brother, and thus he kept coming for her.

While H20 sidestepped the other sequels (without erasing them from continuity), Laurie was justifiably worried about Michael coming for her (which means she knew he didn't die in the hospital fire).

In H20, Laurie is prepared for the day when Michael will return for her and her family, which now includes her son. She also drinks a lot to deal with the fear and stress.

All of that makes sense because Michael was shown to specifically be coming for her.

For this new movie to have Laurie worried for 40 years that a geriatric killer who's been locked up for all of those 40 years seems incredulous. Why would she worry? He's not her brother. He never specifically came for her at the hospital.

All that happened was Michael went on a killing spree in Haddonfield in 1978 and killed some random babysitters. Laurie escaped death because of Dr. Loomis. End of story.

Of course, I'm going to see the movie because I've been a Halloween movie geek for the last 40 years. They should just slice 'Resurrection' from continuity and left the rest. THEN it would make sense for Laurie Strode to be worried in 2018.

It can work, though, if they make it more of a PTSD thing. Then the worry makes sense.

Where are the pix of her hermaphrotite penis? its legendary and she has 2 genatalia. kool

[QUOTE]Film ends with Laurie force feeding Michael gallons of Activia and he literally shits his guts out finally killing him for good.

That’s actually how I want to go.

PTSD for 40 years over a few hours of your life?

Maybe he wrote her threatening letters.

We’ve got unfinished business. See you soon, cunt.

XOXO Michael Myers

[Quote] Will the nod to H20 be Laurie's vodka in the freezer?

Lol

[Quote] They should just slice 'Resurrection' from continuity and left the rest. THEN it would make sense for Laurie Strode to be worried in 2018.

A terrible sequel but such a time capsule of a movie.

[Quote] PTSD for 40 years over a few hours of your life?

Is it really that farfetched?

From what I've seen and heard, this might be end up being pretty stellar. I'm optimistic. I always hated the brother/sister twist and John Carpenter did, too. He credited it to being drunk while writing the sequel and feeling like he was remaking the same movie but not as good. If all these goddamn superhero movies can be rebooted, retooled, and fuck with different timelines, why not Halloween? After all, it was always the closest thing the horror genre has ever seen to a soap opera. People die, come back, people who should be dead are still alive, there are numerous family members coming out of the woodwork, there are cults, alcoholism, white horses, white trash...it goes on and on.

This story just cannot be re-told too many times!

Laurie Strode, singing her classic '78 hit "Just The Two Of Us" while getting ready for target practice.

10 second trailer.

Looks awesome. Any gay horror nerd bubble butt bottoms want to see this and fuck afterward?

Was gonna post that same clip R202. Can’t wait to see this!

[quote]Isn't the original Michael back, too?

Yep, Nick Castle is back.

Is the trailer getting released at midnight?

r207 It's getting released 23 hours from now, if I've done my math correctly. Jason Blum did a little countdown on his Twitter today.

We already went through these motions -- H20 was all about Jamie Lee returning to the role. I don't understand this bizarre reoccurrence of the same material and concept. Danny McBride is a white trash tater tot.

What’s your bright idea, Einstein?

Fuck this movie and H20.

I never liked the family angle either. The first movie’s plot was simply Michael sees Laurie and stalks her and her friends. That’s it. H20 nixed the Thorn Trilogy (thankfully), but kept the brother/sister angle. They should have done then what they’re doing now and made H20 a direct sequel to part 1. And I like that they gave JLC the blonde wig (which, btw, looks way better than the one she wore in H II). I never liked Laurie with short dark hair.

The trailer has arrived.

That prison intro is ridiculous but artsy enough so I'll give it a pass.

The closet bit at the end is terrifying as fuck!

[Quote] Danny McBride is a white trash tater tot.

Lmao

[Quote] The closet bit at the end is terrifying as fuck!

Too easy.

[quote]Too easy.

I fully understood in my mind what was coming, yet I flinched all the same. The magic of horror.

Gives new meaning to the phrase "the closet kills"

Love that trailer.

So is this a sequel to the first or second film and if they're forgetting all the later installments why are they paying homage to them in this film?

It’s a sequel to the first movie. You have to forget part 2 on.

Wouldn't Michael be 70 years old?

The sitting president was in his sixties when he was moving on those women like a bitch so... creepy old men can be incredibly agile when the motivation is right, is what I'm saying.

R221, 58-early 60s.

Can’t stop watching that trailer.

I have no idea what you're all getting wet over - that trailer looks awful. It looks just like every other generic, jump-scare filled horror film these days. I was hoping they would go for a similar tone and atmosphere the original one had, but I guess the target audience for this one are stupid teenagers so it has to be dumbed down.

R225 = Sean Cunningham, bitter the Friday the 13th remake got canned.

I think the only true way to get that vibe of the original would have been to have Dean Cundey as cinematographer again. Is he retired?

R227 He isn't, but unfortunately he works mostly on stupid rom-coms these days.

I think it looks great and I like where they're going with it. I have a friend who went to a test screening and said it's easily the best sequel in the franchise and is more of a horror drama than a straight out slasher like many of the sequels. I think I can get on board with that.

I heard there were issues with the ending R229. They just did some reshoots last week.

Yes, that's what I've heard, too. Maybe it was a vague one like the original film. People hate those kinds of endings these days for some reason. That ending is why the original is so great to begin with.

Will she expose her 2 genitalia???

[bold]‘Halloween’: Jamie Lee Curtis, Jason Blum Dish on Michael Myers’ Return[/bold]

[quote]This is Curtis’ third time revisiting the character of Laurie Strode. She previously returned to the part in 1998’s “Halloween H20: 20 Years Later,” an experience that she found disappointing. Carpenter and his producing partner Debra Hill were originally supposed to be involved, but ultimately passed on the project.

[quote]“‘H20’ started out with best intentions, but it ended up being a money gig,” said Curtis. “The film had some good things in it. It talked about alcoholism and trauma, but I ended up really doing it for the paycheck.”

^^ Money quote:

[quote]It turns out, they have Jake Gyllenhaal to thank for it. The actor is a family friend — Curtis refers to him as her “unofficial godson” — and he tracked her down while she was on vacation in the mountains with her husband, actor Christopher Guest, to put in a plug for David Gordon Green, the reboot’s director. Gyllenhaal urged Curtis to take Green’s call. The two had worked together on 2017’s “Stronger,” which Gyllenhaal told Curtis was the greatest experience of his professional career.

Do you like me [italic]now,[/italic] DL?!

[Quote] Maybe it was a vague one like the original film. People hate those kinds of endings these days for some reason.

Heaven forbid everything isn't wrapped up in a neat little bow.

Wanna bet the movie is gonna end with a jump scare in the very last second?

[quote]r195 Where are the pix of her hermaphrotite penis? its legendary and she has 2 genatalia. kool

She doesn't like to discuss it.

Horror drama is what H20 tried doing. It was terrible.

I want to see both endings now though I understand that's not how this works.

So i just watched Halloween 2 (1981) for the first time. What's the consensus on Jimmy? Did he live or die?

Hey, I tried out for that part- what does she have that I don't?

R240, there are two endings to H II. In one, the last you see of Jimmy is when he slumps over the steering wheel in the car with Laurie. In the TV version, a blanketed figure sits up in the ambulance with Laurie at the end. At first glance, you’re led to believe that it’s Michael, but then the blanket falls and it’s Jimmy. Laurie cries “We beat him!” and ‘Mr. Sandman’ starts playing.

I believe Jimmy was intended to survive, but they cut that last little bit out of the theatrical version and just ended with Laurie alone in the ambulance. There were quite a few deleted scenes that were added back into the TV version and there are a few others that have still never seen the light of day. There's one that's been discussed where the press come into the hospital, trying to reach Laurie. There's another where that female reporter we see at the Myers' house is killed on the side of the road when Michael hitches a ride with her to the hospital. There was also one where Michael tricks a nurse into coming into an empty room by setting out a child's toy (maybe a jack in the box) and hiding in the closet, waiting to pounce.

These have never seen the light of day and probably never will. I'm still not sure why they cut the scene where Michael kills the power in the hospital. It's pretty important considering the hospital is cloaked in darkness for the rest of the film and it's never explained.

That scene where he kills the nurse by the road is in the novelization of Halloween II, which is excellent btw.

Fun trivia: this added scene in the TV version of the original Halloween where Laurie answers the door in a pink robe was shot during the making of H II and filmed inside of the famous Nightmare on Elm Street house. It was one of a couple of new scenes filmed to lengthen the original film’s run time.

R242 Thanks for answering. The version i saw was with Jimmy on the steering wheel.

R243 They should definitely have put those deleted scenes back in. Especially the scene with Michael cutting the power.

[quote]“What I loved is that it surgically excises all of that dead tissue,” Curtis says of the script for the new Halloween, which was written by Danny McBride, Jeff Fradley, and the film’s director, David Gordon Green. “This is growing from just that original movie, 40 years later. There may be people who love the other movies, great — [they have] zero relevance to this story.”

[quote]Green’s Halloween doesn’t entirely ignore the other sequels.

[quote]“This film isn’t one to narratively recognize any of the films other than the original Halloween,” says the director. “But we very much enjoy the other films and there’s a lot of very subtle shout-outs to a number of things that I think the big fans — the people that know the films scientifically — will get a kick out of, hopefully.”

So simple and yet so scary.

I hear it just had another test screening (I assume with the new material they shot during reshoots) and it tested WAY better and and people seemed to love it. Something tells me this one's going to be a winner.

[bold]'Halloween' Director on Why It Took 80 Drafts to Get the Script Right[/bold]

[quote]We started incorporating all the follow-ups and then it got overwhelming trying to engineer something that made sense. Some of the plot points became a little stretched thin as the franchise went on. And so ultimately finding those frustrations, [Danny] McBride came to me and just said, "What’s the Michael Myers movie that you really want to see?" 'Halloween I' was, to me, the most pure and, in a lot of ways, the most simple. I get the real connection with the terror of a movie that isn't so lost in its own mythology.

Movie poster by Bill Sienkiewicz.

R251 Yikes, is that the actual poster?! Looks like fan art to me.

No, I believe that's just the film's Comic-Con poster.

[bold]Jamie Lee Curtis Embraces Sobbing Fan, ‘Halloween’ Saved His Life[/bold]

[quote]During a question and answer session at Universal’s San Diego Comic-Con presentation at Hall H on Friday. An attendee choked up while telling star Jamie Lee Curtis that he escaped a life-threatening incident in which another man cut his phone line and tried to break into his house.

[quote]He said he thought to himself, “What would Jamie Lee do?” And ran out into the street screaming for help.

[quote]“Because of you I’m a victor and not a victim,” he said. Curtis left the stage to embrace the fan and gave him a long hug, kissing him on the cheek. “These kind of emotions are real,” said a visibly moved Curtis.

[quote]Earlier the actress had said, “What made Michael Meyers so frightening was its randomness.”

I really admire Jamie. For one, she's been sober for a long time and that takes a lot of work and discipline. And the AA program really encourages carrying for others in a unique way. Plus, she's had a great career, mixing in all genres. I'd love to see her randomly get an Oscar.

So they cut out all the sequels so they could make it an unofficial sequel to the terminator franchise?

R256 Yes.

Shut yer pie hole, r252, 'Bill Sienkiewicz is a LEGEND in the comic book world.

New trailer. Absolutely frightening.

I cannot wait for this! Has anyone seen an advance screening?

Will this be an Oscar nom for Jamie? Best Supporting Actress?

I know a few people who went to a NYC test screening a month or two ago and they say it's solid, but doesn't really invent the wheel. They say there's a ludicrous twist about how Michael escapes that came out of nowhere and made no sense. They said to not even bother guessing, because it's so stupid and out of left field that it kinda messes with the climax of the movie a bit.

They did say Jamie Lee was brilliant in the film and there's potential for her to be a dark horse candidate if the studio pursues it. It's also apparently one of the better sequels in the series (as if that's saying much.)

LOVE the new trailer.

The new trailer made me afraid of Michael Myers again.

Oscars 2019 is going to come down to Halloween vs. ASIB for Best Picture, and Jamie Lee Curtis vs. Gaga for Best Actress.

The new trailer is much better than the last one, but I still have a feeling the movie itself sucks. I will still see it for Jamie though - I could watch that woman in anything.

Slasher movies do not get nominated for Oscars. I hate to break it to you, R265.

The new trailer is amazing and I honestly cant wait for it.

[quote]Slasher movies do not get nominated for Oscars. I hate to break it to you,

Exactly. The Academy can’t sanction all that violence and death.

Get Out just won the Oscar for Best Screenplay. So you need to rethink your little theory, Becky.

R270 Get Out is NOT a slasher film nor is The Silence of the Lambs, they're both horror mixed with other genres, but they're not slashers.

Slasher are a SUBGENRE of horror, usually the most hated and critically despised subgenre of horror but a SUBGENRE nonetheless

Doesn’t matter, cunt at r271. SOTL is an extremely violent film, and ten times more horrifying than the first Halloween film. And during Oscar season that year, everyone was pointing out that the Academy hated horror films and never nominated them. And then it did get nominated and won, and won big. Tell us again that slasher films never get nominated.

Unwritten rules are meant to be broken.

Can't she get any other offers? Surely the role has no challenges, at this point...if it ever did.

Who cares if slashers get Oscar noms? The fans dont.

[quote]and ten times more horrifying than the first Halloween film.

Are you insane? SOTL is not even scary. Halloween is terrifying.

R275 BOTH are scary, one is a slasher and one is not

R272 again cunt rag whore, slasher movies don't get Oscar nominations, especially the ELEVENTH one in a series, it's RIDICULOUS to even put those words in the same sentence

There was "prestige" with SOTL, there is none with Halloween part 11

Cannot wait for this movie. Just seeing these images with the real Halloween music was amazing.

I was waiting for Get Out and Silence of The Lambs to be thrown in my face. R271 says it all really.

I hope the diarrhea she gets from eating all that Activia doesn't affect her performance.

The trailer is exactly like this clip from Halloween 2. In fact, the whole trailer is like greatest hits from the other films. I think it was poor form to deny the existence of the other sequels. A lot of people worked and contributed to those. It's like Jamie Lee is the prom scream queen and she's coming in and ordering all the prom decorations to be changed, shitting on the prom committee's efforts.

Actually, I think it takes a really brilliant actor to pull off a believable performance in a horror film. Notice how shitty a lot of horror movie acting is? That's because it's not a respected genre, so not too many big stars or great actors are going to attach themselves to them, because, at best, a critic might say they're the best part of an otherwise lackluster film. Even some very good horror films get crapped on by critics for literally no reason.

Jamie Lee is known as the scream queen for a reason - she always elevated every horror movie she was in. I'm sure they could have cast 100 other girls as Laurie Strode and they would have been passable to shrill, but Jamie Lee did something special with that role. She made Laurie feel like a girl you'd actually go to school with. She was very believable. She was different from the other scream queens that popped up in the 80's. Women like Linnea Quigley, Brinke Stevens, Michelle Bauer, etc. performed with a sort of detached campiness. They were fun, but never terribly realistic and almost like drag acts.

R281 true bit it's like good acting on a soap opera, it's rare but occasionally you see it

Scream and soap queen, she was on Guiding Light, Young and the Restless and Days of Our Lives (where she was killed off by a serial killer!), Barbara Crampton has said that both soap and horror movie acting requires a bit of a tongue of cheek camp to it because you're dealing with RIDICULOUS things that don't happen in real life and you have to sell it as being believable , and the dialogue on both goes into ridiculous territory

The trailer is similar to that scene in H II because they’re paying homage to every sequel in some way, shape or form. I can’t wait to see how they reference H III. There’ll probably be some little kids running around wearing Silver Shamrock masks.

R283 They are. You see the masks in the trailer

The new trailer is frightening.

Can't wait to see it.

I'd love to see a reference to Halloween 3: Season of the Witch in the new movie.

I'm probably the only person in the wold who actually enjoys Halloween 3. I know it's not a great movie, but it's nostalgic, fun and entertaining for what it is. Perfect for a Fall night curled up on the sofa with a bowl of popcorn.

If you watch the trailers, you can see a bunch of kids running around in Silver Shamrock masks, so there's your Halloween III nod. The lady in her kitchen who gets hammered looks like a dead ringer for Mrs. Elrod from Halloween II. I guess that's their nod to that one.

[QUOTE]I'm probably the only person in the wold who actually enjoys Halloween 3.

Yes, you are.

I'm surprised she'd be back doing another sequel. In one of the extras on the Halloween blu-ray she seemed rather apologetic about her horror film career saying "I don't like horror movies" immediately followed by "I live a full life" as if "Halloween" was beneath her.

[quote]r281 I'm sure they could have cast 100 other girls as Laurie Strode and they would have been passable to shrill, but Jamie Lee did something special with that role.

No. She was cast because was the daughter of Janet PHYCHO Leigh, and that let unknown directors pretend they were Hitchcock.

It also made for good publicity for these B level films.

[QUOTE]In one of the extras on the Halloween blu-ray she seemed rather apologetic about her horror film career saying "I don't like horror movies" immediately followed by "I live a full life" as if "Halloween" was beneath her.

Then the money for those old yogurt commercials started running low and she changed her tune real quick.

Halloween 3 does have one of the best horror soundtracks ever, really it's superb. *Maybe* the movie could've worked if it didn't look so cheap.

Look cheap? H III looks anything but. That Dean Cundey cinematography takes it to another level.

Surely you jest. Plus the absurdity of that old man being Jamie's love interest.

I jest not. The look of that film is not a cheap look. It looks miles above the cheap slasher shlock that came out around the same time. And Jamie wasn’t the love interest, it was Stacy Nelkin.

It doesn't look miles above squat. The original Halloween was dirt cheap, but it wasn't noticeable or distracting.

Uh oh, another one butt hurt because MM didn’t come back for part three. I can see your old ass now, pitching a fit in the theater because Michael wasn’t in it. Grow the fuck up, gramps.

Halloween 3, that's a pathetic obsession if ever there was one. But hey, it's your waste of time not mine.

The town in Halloween III was very creepy. It was near San Francisco, wasn't it?

^A lot of it was filmed in Sierra Madre. The scene where Challis calls his wife on the pay phone to tell her he can’t be with the kids and then takes off with Ellie was shot in the exact same shopping center from H II where Michael bumps into the kid carrying the boom box.

The lunatic at R299 is clearly off her meds.

The lunatic is the person trying to convince it that Halloween 3 is a good movie.

And yes, damn near everyone who bought a ticket came out the theater disappointed that Michael Myers wasn’t in there.

Just for a second imagine that the film coming out on October 19th was a direct sequel to Halloween 3 rather than having Michael Myers in it. Nobody on the face of the earth would give a shit about this movie.

R303, lunacy confirmed.

Give me a break. Michael Myers is the star of the show and without him you don’t have a Halloween movie. Even John Carpenter has come to recognize that.

Sorry for trying to be logical about a horror movie, but how is the premise of this movie even plausible? Michael Myers would have to be over 60 years old, and we're supposed to believe he has the energy and interest to go around killing teenagers at this advanced age? All the 60 year olds I know just want to sit around on their asses and watch TV.

Jamie Lee Curtis is the star who would not go away. She has never made a movie work that wouldn't have been perfectly fine without her.

I think straight guys would like her alright, because her breasts are big...but I have no idea why gay men would give her the time of day.

Actually, R301, turns out a lot of Halloween III was filmed in Loleta up near Eureka. According to this, the area hasn't changed all that much.

R307 plausibility went out the window starting in part 2 when they made Michael and Laurie brother and sister. By ignoring all the sequels that’s a stupid idea too. The fact Michael will be 60 is the least of the issues.

Halloween 3 is that bitch!

I don't get how people were surprised Michael Myers wasn't in part 3. Did they not see the trailer or tv spots?

This was the early 80’s. Most people went in blind back then until word of mouth started spreading.

I actually think Carpenter and Hill's idea of turning the franchise into an anthology was brilliant and I'm sorry it didn't catch on. Maybe they could have brought Michael back eventually, but the idea of an anthology series where there's a new movie every year that has a totally different story, but just happens to take place on Halloween would have been really fun. Plus, a franchise like that could have lasted forever. So many subgeneres to play in.

Holy shit, such a glowing review from TIFF! Love Perri Nimeroff and trust her judgement. Snider is notoriously hard to please and he's really loving it too. More excited now!

Surprised at the surprise here that people like JLC. She has a TON of goodwill built up with audiences of many ages, but most especially boomers. You don't think they're going to turn out in droves to see her back in action, 40 years after such a cultural benchmark in their lives? Oh, just wait and see...

The Nimeroff/Shnider review from R315...

I said it in another thread about this film and I’ll say it again here- they are really milking this teat dry.

R314 I like that idea. That would have been awesome to see.

R314, The concept could have worked IF they used JLC, and some of the other actors from the original Halloween, in the movies. Like how Ryan Murphy uses the same actors for each season of AHS.

Audiences are unimaginative and need some semblance of familiarity to keep a franchise going.

I'm so excited after watching the review at R317. The biggest letdown for horror movies is when they're not actually scary, and this movie sounds super scary. Can't wait to see it.

If the movie does good at the box-office, and it continues to get good reviews, it could get an Oscar nomination in the new "Fan Favorite" category that is new for next year.

Color me surprised. This Halloween is getting the best reviews in the franchise since the original. They must really have something magical up their sleeve. I keep hearing about this cameo from the original film and how Will Patton's character is somehow related to the events of the original. Is he related to Sheriff Brackett? Is Brackett the cameo? Well, a guy can dream.

The first reviews posted at IMDB are just as enthusiatic. There's talk of an amazing cameo in this film, but I've seen no spoilers. I realize Halloween II is non-canon with regard to this film...but I'm wondering if it could Lance Guest? Maybe in this alternate Halloween universe his Jimmy got together with Laurie after all? Or could it be Paul Rudd reprising his Tommy Doyle? There's supposed to be a little something from each of the previous movies in this one, with the most recent trailer giving away one from III. The possibilities are enticing. October can't come soon enough!

I keep hearing about this cameo, too, and I'm very curious. I kinda hope it's Charles Cyphers or Nancy Stephens. They're both still kicking. They've been able to keep it underwraps for awhile, so good for them.

I hope PJ Soles and Nancy Loomis are in the film.

It'd be great if it were Cyphers, R324. Since the new film retcons II out of existence, it would help re-establish the loss of Annie and that Laurie wasn't the only one who suffered because of Michael. It's going to be tough to ignore spoilers on this one...

One of the things I really liked about Zombie's films was Brad Douriff as Brackett and how he dealt with the loss of Annie. I found that relationship very moving and easily the best part of those films. It felt very real. I'd love to see a touching moment between Laurie and Brackett in this movie.

Brad Douriff was the absolute only good thing about those movies.

Re: involvement of Danny McBride — he and Halloween 2018 director David Gordon Green are college friends (yes, Danny McBride went to college) and have worked together on McBride’s TV series.

[quote]Uh oh, another one butt hurt because MM didn’t come back for part three.

Why wouldn't he be? It was part of the Halloween series, not some stand-alone.

[quote] I hope PJ Soles and Nancy Loomis are in the film.

They could come back as ghosts. Totally!

I bet Kyle Richards makes a cameo in the movie.

I misread that as Keith Richards and rhought he would be an incredible addition to the geriatric cast.

R333 I had the same thought. I'm sure she'd jump at the chance.

R334 LOL

You can't discuss H3 and not mention this wonderful shot:

I always had a thing for Tom Atkins. He’s sexy and slutty in H3.

I totally had a thing for Tom Atkins when I was a kid. Maybe that explains my daddy complex. I thought he was kinda sexy and I certainly never expected to see his ass. What was it with Halloween 2 and 3? They both had as much male nudity as female nudity. Was there a good gay in charge of Universal at the time? I don't think we ever got male nudity again in the franchise.

Cannot wait!

I'm a huge Carpenter fan. The Rob Zombie movies are literally the worst films I've ever seen and I was extremely annoyed that they were doing yet another sequel/remake. But I have to say, this does look really good and I'm so excited to see it.

In my mind, the Zombie films weren’t Halloween movies. I don’t even think about them in the context of the Halloween universe.

In my mind, the Zombie movies don't exist. They're that bad, I've erased them from my memory.

I don’t want to erase them from existence. They’re decent enough, especially compared to a lot of slop out there that passes for horror these days. But I just see them as separate, standalone pictures with different character names. They’re just “inspired by Halloween” to me. And the movies would’ve been better received if Zombie had just done that in the first place.

The cameo is going to be Dr. Loomis, Donald Pleasance, using previous footage. Much like Carrie Fisher appearing in the previous or upcoming Star Wars film... whatever it is. It will be towards the beginning and be very brief. Cat out of the bag....

The new movie is at 84% on RT, which is fantastic for a horror movie, especially a sequel.

R347 I don't trust film critics when it comes to horror films anymore, especially after they overpraised totally mediocre films like Get Out, The Babadook, It Comes at Night and The Conjuring so much.

Well, I know they'd talked about recreating Donald for a scrapped prologue in '78, so it's certainly not impossible. That'd be interesting to see.

These days, it does seem like whenever a horror film even attempts to do something a bit different, it's praised for just giving it a shot. No one cares if it's actually a good movie or not. It's like a participation trophy.

Halloween coming for an Oscar nod.

Yeah, right.

DEE doo doo - dee doo doo - dee

This one looks brilliant, and I'm so excited to see it!

Love that they are using the cheer from the first film.

I have a really good feeling about this one. It seems like a bigger event than H20 was 20 years ago and, at the time, that seemed like a huge deal.

The brother/sister angle doean’t ruin a show.

Following the litlle girl Jamie does.

Zzzzzzzz!

Wait — if Danny McBride wrote it, it might suck.

He’s God-awful.

First , delusions of Oscars for Jamie Lee Curtis.

And now you cunts are glorifying the preposterous, unscary sack of shit that was Halloween 3?!

LAURIE, YOUR SPAWN IS OUT-OF-CONTROL!!

We all know this is just the Bipolar Movie Maniac talking to itself from different browsers, anyway.

Don’t crap in my trick-or-treat bag and tell me it’s Baby Ruth bars!

First , delusions of Oscars for Jamie Lee Curtis.

And now you cunts are glorifying the preposterous, unscary sack of shit that was Halloween 3?!

LAURIE, YOUR SPAWN IS OUT-OF-CONTROL!!

We all know this is just the Bipolar Movie Maniac talking to itself from different browsers, anyway.

Don’t crap in my trick-or-treat bag and tell me it’s Baby Ruth bars!

❤️❤️❤️❤️

🙌🏽🤘🏽✌🏽👍🏽

Tom Atkins looks like Rip Taylor!

Tom Atkins looks a lot like hottie actor Christopher Stone (Dee Wallace’s late husband).

[Quote] First , delusions of Oscars for Jamie Lee Curtis. And now you cunts are glorifying the preposterous, unscary sack of shit that was Halloween 3?! LAURIE, YOUR SPAWN IS OUT-OF-CONTROL!! We all know this is just the Bipolar Movie Maniac talking to itself from different browsers, anyway. Don’t crap in my trick-or-treat bag and tell me it’s Baby Ruth bars!

I've seen the movie and Jamie Lee gets a few scenes where I feel like she's never been better. If that random guy could get one for Get Out last year, y'never know. I found her performance really moving in this. Better than anything in H20.

And yes, the movie really is as terrific as people are saying it is. Suspenseful, scary, moving, and even a little funny when need be (but never in a parody kinda way).

R365 yes Christopher Stone was one of the many actors to play Bill Horton on Days of Our Lives on the 80s and again the 90s before his death

His onscreen daughter, Jennifer Horton's on again off again love interest at that time on Days of Our Lives was Frankie Brady played by Billy Warlock, son of Halloween II' s Michael Myers, Dick Warlock and Billy himself was in Halloween II briefly as Craig

Does anyone else find it strange that this film is called simply "Halloween"? One would think it's a remake of the 1978 one.

They dropped the subtitle early on. It was supposed to be The Triple Bypass of Michael Myers.

Halloween

The night he came to the home.

R361= Scat Queen!💩💩💩

r369, I bet you dollars to doughnuts it IS just a remake of the original with postmodern jokes to classic horror along the way.

R373 's comment is almost as bad as a razor blade in the Snickers bar!

"I've seen the movie" = "I've Googled test and festival reviews since I got the idea of impersonating an insider from the Call Me By Your Name threads."

DOES SHE OR [italic]DOES SHE NOT[/italic] HAVE A PENIS ? ? ?

Yes, there is VPL during her striptease in True Lies.

Actually, quite a few people have seen the movie. In fact, there's was an idiot trying to spoil it a few weeks back. I HAVE seen it and it's incredibly good. I think word of mouth will make it a huge hit. Plus, it crosses all demographics. You have the teen stuff bringing in the kids and all us older folks who grew up on the original movies will be going for Jamie Lee. I've heard people in their 60s talking about going to see this movie, which is nuts. When has a slasher movie appealed to 60-somethings in the past?

Driving Miss Daisy?

[quote]If that random guy could get one for Get Out last year

That random guy is an accomplished comedian, actor and filmmaker.

[quote]of Halloween II' s Michael Myers, Dick Warlock and Billy himself was in Halloween II briefly as Craig

Dick’s other son is the boom box boy Michael bumps into in the strip mall parking lot in H II.

I think the random guy that person was referring to was the actor who was nominated for Get Out. Not the writer/director. He really did kinda come out of nowhere.

And Dick's other son is not attractive like Billy or himself.

WIth like Dick Warlock he’d better be good.

How many actors from Days of Our Lives were in the first 2 Halloween films?

Nancy Stephens, Nurse Marion Chambers, playing Mary Anderson on DAYS IN THE LATE 70S, Brian Andrews, Tommy Doyle, was one of the young Mike Horton 's on DAYS in the early 70s, Kyle Richards, Lindsay in the first Halloween, played herself on a few episodes a couple of years ago, the aforementioned Billy Warlock, John Zenda, the driver in Halloween II whose throat Michael slashes was on DAYS as well, Ford Rainey, Dr. Mister from Halloween II, played Dr. Marlena Evans (Deidre Hall) father Frank Evans on DAYS from 1977-1979, he was in the storyline where Marlena's evil twin Samantha Evans kidnapped her and had her institutionalized and took over Marlena's life

I refuse to believe a gay man would be enamored of the HALLOWEEN series...or really, of Jamie Lee Curtis.

Who exactly is on the pro-side in this thread?

Is Kyle Richards still stalking her? Hope someone sends a NFI to be clear. Most awkward episode ever when the Baroness Guest was asked to announce Richards & Mr Kyle Richards donation to Cedars. JLC was deadpan when Kyle tried to remind her she was so happy to see her big sister from her days filming the original. Zero clue wtf Richards was or saying. Obviously done at request of Cedars unaware of ss filming for the show.

Separately, she’s the not gay Jake Gyllenhaal’s God Mother (Baroness God Mother? Baron God Mother?)

I liked her in Scream Queens. She got at least Stamos to show some skin. Sorry he’s hotter now imo than Full Homey whatever. He’s I think pretending to be married now.

R386 slasher movies have a BIG gay following

I way at the Halloween 35th Anniversary convention in Pasadena in 2013 and half the guys there were gay

She went into audience at ComicCon to a gay man who channeled her character when someone was breaking in his house.

Don’t do that. Anyone. Ever.

She’s Jake Gyllenhaal’s God Mother/Baroness

Had I known I have such large gay following, I would have brought along my harmonica.

R338, the 40th Anniversary convention is next week. Are you going?

I'm a gayer and a huge John Carpenter/Halloween/JLC fan.

[Quote] Is Kyle Richards still stalking her? Hope someone sends a NFI to be clear. Most awkward episode ever when the Baroness Guest was asked to announce Richards & Mr Kyle Richards donation to Cedars. JLC was deadpan when Kyle tried to remind her she was so happy to see her big sister from her days filming the original. Zero clue wtf Richards was or saying. Obviously done at request of Cedars unaware of ss filming for the show.

I remember that episode! Kyle made it seem like they were close.

Jamie Lee and the mask on Michael Myers actually look quite similar in OP's pic.

Is it true that her kids won’t inherit their parents titles because they are adopted?

The Halloween series really lost something when Donald Pleasance passed

I love Jamie Lee Curtis but I love Donald Pleasance more, his level.of lunacy concerning Michael is hilarious and fun and campy as hell to watch

R386, gay men are a big percentage of the horror movie audience.

I was shocked, too, to find out that gay men LOVE horror. At least a lot of them do. There are tons of gay men at this conventions and most of them are sweet as can be. Horror fans are wonderfully loyal. It's funny, because I remember feeling so adult and butch when I made the switch from fairy tales and Disney movies as a kid to horror movies. Little did I know that they had such a large gay fanbase. I'm not sure why it's surprising, but it is.

I wonder if anyone's ever done a documentary on why horror films have such a large gay fanbase. I think most people think of horror fans as creepy, drooling straight guys who go in to see tits and blood and live out their woman-hating fantasies, but I think horror fans mostly consist of gay men and women. At least in my experience.

There's definitely a fair share of deplorable redneck simpleton virgin horror fans from the Wal Mart/Denny's culture too, but I was surprised at the number of gays at these events. Why is that? Do they resonate with the (usually) final girl in the films like they do with Cher, Liza, Madonna et al? Is it the parade of eye candy in the movies?

I think a large part of it is that, the identification with the final girl or the heroine. A smaller, underestimated female defeats huge, hulking, relentless Man/monster it’s like the outcast versus the world. And it’s not like women aren't indentfiably marginalized also.

It’s David versus Goliath .

People on Goldderby are talking Oscar buzz for Jamie Lee Curtis for this, supposedly Blumhouse is expected to campaign for her as well, people who've seen the film say she's incredible in it and she's the heart of the film

Maybe it’s because gays subconsciously identify with the “Final Girl” leads, which get to be main characters in an effort to enlist more females in the audience.

But trust: demographics show that horror audiences are predominantly male.

I love Jamie Lee and Halloween but there is no way she will get an Oscar nomination for this. An MTV Movie Award, sure, but not an Oscar.

David Gordon Green is known for his humanists dramas, so I wouldn't rule Jamie Lee out completely for maybe a Golden Globe. Maybe she's given some really great scenes.

[quote]r402 People on Goldderby are talking Oscar buzz for Jamie Lee Curtis for this,

Oh my god...STOP!

If her mother didn't win for PSYCHO, she's not going to win for HALLOWEEN VII. or whatever this is.

Goddamn Blumhouse has been trying to win an Oscar ever since Whiplash. I hope actors or directors will win, but never for Best Picture- all that is blood money that he is making.

most think she is best known for for being born a hermaphrodite: has cock and puss, but

is more known in the biz and a BIG NAG.

If she played a trans person and revealed the goods, she might win that Oscar. Or at least, get nominated.

What's she waiting for?

[quote]I think horror fans mostly consist of gay men and women.

You don't get out much, do you?

I had no clue WE were such a core horror audience. I shall use this as my excuse next time I am chided for my love of horror! People find it quite shocking how devoted I am to the genre. Just like camping and backpacking, most find it unthinkable an intellectual and educated gay man would like something so "lowbrow".

^^ hiding the salami

The commercials have been great.

It's a tiny clip, but there's potential for this being something a bit deeper than usual.

Are there any hot guys to admire in the film or are there just Michael and the wenches of the Strode family ?

Like Michael Myers isn’t hot? Do you know how strong The Shape is? There must be a sheer mountain of rippling muscle underneath that coverall.

Already working on the next one.

That trailer had my adrenaline pumping. Very uncomfortable! I'm too nervous to go see it but it looks fantastic.

Last time we had a Halloween sequel a year later the result was the incredibly shitty Halloween 5. No need to rush it into theaters October 2019. Take two years at least.

Agree R420.... and they've been working on this one for an awfully long time! I began reading about it as early as late 2015/early 2016.

I think now would be a good time to retry the anthology idea.

Maybe spin off with an incidental character not involved in the Laurie and Micheal story, background character or something and move on from there.

I think audiences are more used to the anthology idea these days with shows like AHS and more informed so they wouldn’t be taken by surprise like the audiences were in 1982.

Michael Meyers spawns R422! Then we begin all over again with MM Jr...

I dunno 🤷‍♂️ R423. But if this upcoming movie really provides a good close to the story? Well, I would be happy to move forward with just the theme music and some new ideas.

Saw it yesterday. Between a B+ and an A-

That's pretty damn good. These have to be the best reviews of a horror sequel in a looooooong time. I even liked H20 and I remember those reviews being decent to poor. And it's the 11th entry in the franchise if you count the two Rob Zombie movies. That's definitely unheard of.

We don't talk about the RZ movies R426

I also like H20 R426. It gets a bad wrap and I don't know why.

H20 is definitely one of the best sequels.

What’s the word on the surprise twist at the end?

What is r386's damage?

Wrong, r426.

The Friday the 13th franchise has 12 entries.

Hellraiser also now has 10 movies.

r407 "All that blood money Blumhouse is making!"

That horrible, terrible man!

Giving people products and services they want!! Damn him to hell! People should only like what I like!!!

r407 needs to link proof that Jason Blum stiffed anybody of anything.

R425 I'm jealous! Where did you get to see it early?

The anthology idea was already tried -- HALLOWEEN III is one of the worst movies ever made.

Not "a bad wrap," r428!

Did you complain to Santa Claus?

I’d rather they tried the anthology idea again the drag old Micheal Myers out of the home again.

Hasn’t JLC said that this is her LAST time at this rodeo?

If they try to pick up the same story without Laurie Strode then what’s the point? Isn’t this one supposed to be some kind of definitive close to this story? That they are already working on a follow up makes me think this one might be kind of pointless then, at least as far a narratives go.

R436 I saw it at Beyond Fest in LA. Waited in line for 3 hours. Worth it.

So glad I can read reviews now and look online without being afraid of spoilers.

where is the pic of her hermaphrodite cock that lurks from her puss?

Will somebody please neuter the Curtis Hermaphrodite Troll?

It's an urban legend, hunty.

And it’s old.

For the last fucking time, she was born with both sex CHROMOSOMES, not GENITALIA.

[QUOTE]Because the road to Trump & the makeup of the Supreme Court (and the rest of the Federal judiciary) happened long before we ever heard of people like Nicolle Wallace. This was decades in the making.

The people want Michael Myers.

Color me excited for this one. It's got potential to be something really special.

H20 suffered from Scream-itis. Kevin Williamson was involved, and his influence is all over it. It also has a horrid name (Halloween: Water is what I always think of whenever I see the title) and the fact that it was filled with WB or WB-like actors didn’t do it any favors. I also hated that JLC looked like JLC and not like Laurie Strode. I know that the character had changed her name and identity in that film, but still, it just didn’t work for me. I’m glad that in this film, they’ve given her the blonde hair (a MUCH better wig than the one she sported in H II) and taken it back to basics with the storyline.

I always felt like H20 turned into a Scream sequel mixed with an Oprah episode about substance abuse. Apparently, Jamie Lee was recovering from that at the time and added that into it. From what I've seen, this new movie feels much more like the original film's Laurie Strode than H20 did.

I didn't think H20 was awful, though. I remember enjoying it a good deal at the time and it was certainly better than the last two sequels we'd gotten at that point. It looked even better once Resurrection was released.

I remember there being hype around H20, but nothing like the hype for this movie. It's everywhere and so many different demographics seem to want to see it. I've never seen this with a slasher movie, let alone a slasher movie sequel before. I think everyone's feeling like this could really be something special.

It has to have the original music

I saw a screening the other day. It's good, not great. They show Michael too much and there's not a lot of tension/creepiness. Some really good sequences and Jamie is fab as always. The only successful use of the score is the first scene into the opening credits. I'd still recommend it though, just don't expect the magic of the first one. It's also more gory than the others.

Thanks r451

No problem r452. I liked it don't get me wrong. I'm just such a nerd that my expectations were really high. xoxo.

How does it compare to the others, r453?

I liked the first sequel.

I'm definitely seeing it.

Thanks

R454 It's definitely worth seeing and if I didn't go to a screening I would pay to see it in a theater. I just love the original and aspects of the sequels, something in all the sequels. Yes I'm a fanboy nerd. It's definitely better than 4, 5 and 6 (I don't compare it to 3). I really liked H20 and thought Resurrection is the worst. It's got some pretty good scary scenes. I liked the first third and last third. The middle kind of sagged to me but JLC was great throughout. There's an unnecessary plot twist int the last third that was pretty stupid but after that it picked back up for me.

This movie has an 86% RT rating. It’s damn near on par with the original—a seemingly impossible feat back when this thread was created. I think it’s living up to expectations just fine, despite what some may say.

Its really good R456 and I would totally recommend seeing it. It has some great parts. I'm just speaking from a totally fan/nerd perspective.

I’m getting increasingly leery of this plot twist that keeps getting mentioned.

Movies like this shouldn’t need a twist. The first movie was certainly quite straightforward.

It's really not that big of deal in the grand scheme of the movie and is only a few minutes R458. I just thought it unnecessary.

Could the fan nerd kindly please stop spoiling the movie? Thank you.

What did I spoil about it? I made no mention of specifics.

Shenis!

I also saw the movie and found that twist silly, too. No, it's nothing REALLY stupid like Laurie has gone nuts and she's killing everyone or it's all a dream, but like the other poster said, it takes a few minutes to sort out, makes you scratch your head, and then is revolved quickly and never mentioned again. It's useless, but not a deal breaker. The rest of the movie really is pretty great. Easily the best sequel in the franchise and I enjoy 2, 3, 4, and H20 in their own ways.

Thanks r455.

My pleasure R464. Enjoy it in a theater. You'll have fun.

OMG Jamie Lee Curtis goes really off the rails in this interview LOL!

Well, God bless her for bringing some depth and texture to H20, then, r448.

What gives horror movies a bad name are pigs who just get their jollies off to gratuitous, unrelenting violence.

Then H20 comes along and delivers some great themes, character development and texture that's true-to-life and the pigs revolt and decry it as "Oprah!"

Well fuck that. It's LITERATURE, and when your story is actually relevant to life and others can learn from it, it's BETTER.

RANT OVER.

I'll let Michael get back to hacking r448's face off.

That’s a great interview.

r435, 3 directors and 4 actors told me that they didn't get the points they should have when their movies made hundreds of millions. One of his producers has been known to try to fob of the responsibly of covered insurance on to the stunt team (especially with wrecked cars) rather than the production insurance. They pay the crew 1/2 scale or less (they'll lie about the budget) and yet will work them 60-90 hours a week, the food that they feed them is pitiful, they do everything to screw the crew over. If you mention "Blumhouse" to any crew member that has been working for more than 5 years, they'll shudder- and say "never again" if they do work on the films (like I did), it's usually as favor to the director or actor, or they need the hours for insurance (and they'll say, "never again").

He'll lure name actors and directors with visions of money, but he somehow screws them out of their deals. The list goes on. But Hollywood doesn't care about the crew, all they care is about the money. And I'll be damned if he wins an Oscar for one of his films. But I'm glad Jordan won for screenplay.

If he's screwed so many people out of money, wouldn't people stop working with him? If it's true that Jamie Lee was paid scale for this movie and was promised a bit of the profits, you don't think she's going to speak up and say something?

r470- I could be wrong, but I don't think that Jamie has done a Blumhouse film before. She won't know she's screwed out of her full profits until next year. The people that I've mentioned have either negotiated very quietly with him or moved on, because it would cost more to litigate (especially with new directors or unknown talent). And he is a big power in HW. Maybe he's changed (the last time I worked for BH was 5 years ago), but I doubt it. I worked with New Line with similar budgets, and they treat us like people, not chattel- I'm still working with NL because of that, and I have jumped to bigger budget films. There is no such thing with BH- no chance of working on bigger films.

There was a short time he was getting older big name directors, but they know the game too well., and word spread. So back to unknown directors for him.

Oh and the people who will work with him are people new to the industry, unknown talent that needs exposure, or those who are lured by the promise of a quick profit. Supposedly he does allow directors a lot of freedom, so that is a draw- I've seen so many films micro-managed/directed by committee/studio on a daily basis.

Yeah it seems like the major draw of working with Blumhouse is that he might pay you scale, but you leave with your artistic integrity intact. That's a pretty rare thing in Hollywood. It seems like, if he likes a script, he'll stick by it and not make a million changes to it. I remember Jamie Lee talking about how H20 originally started off a lot like this new one with a lot of integrity, but the studio kept sabotaging it every step of the way and it became something she didn't really think was as special as it could have been. She said she should have been a producer on the film.

[Quote] It also has a horrid name (Halloween: Water is what I always think of whenever I see the title) and the fact that it was filled with WB or WB-like actors didn’t do it any favors.

Casting WB actors is pretty common with alot of horror movies.

R474 horror movie actors and soap opera actors overlap big time

Kevin Bacon, PJ SOLES, Nancy Stephens, Julianne Moore, Sarah Michelle Geller, Laurence Fishbourne, Amy Steel, Adrienne King, Sigourney Weaver, Ellen Burstyn, Barbara Crampton etc are all horror stars who started in soaps as well

Jamie cock Curtis...

At that time every studio was trying to replicate Scream and they were grabbing any and all teen TV stats they could get.

I suppose they thought that Neve Campbell being on TV was part of the draw but for me and my friends who were the target market, she was a minor part of a great movie. She had no bearing on us seeing Scream repeatedly.

Still at 86%. Never in a million years did I imagine that critics would like this movie. It’s literally been 40 years since Michael Myers was warmly received on screen by them.

[Quote] At that time every studio was trying to replicate Scream and they were grabbing any and all teen TV stats they could get.

Reminds me of this movie. You had actors from Roswell, Buffy and Dawson's Creek lol

I'm just glad those awful horror posters from the 90s are a thing from the past. Remember those? Where they'd line up all the movie's sexy teen stars and have them stare at the camera seriously or seductively and that was the entire poster? So lazy and dumb. It never told you anything about the movie except who was in it. I remember loving all the teaser art for the Scream movies, but they inevitably ruined it with the official posters. I'm glad I haven't seen that bullshit in awhile.

Hell, I wish actual artwork would make a return to movie advertising. There was nothing better than spying a gorgeous and lurid looking piece of VHS art at the video store and deciding to take a chance on it. Even the original Halloween had such evocative, beautiful artwork. The first two sequels did, too.

What's funny to me is that, originally, Halloween got terrible reviews for months and months until it made its way to NYC and The Village Voice reviewed it and gave it a rare. Suddenly, people started rethinking it.

This is totally getting nominated in the Oscars' new "Crowd Favorite" category next year. It's getting rave reviews, it's a sentimental favorite, and will make lots of money.

I'm surprised that John Carpenter isn't doing any press for the new movie. You'd think he'd want one last big hurrah, especially with the 40 year anniversary.

[Quote] I'm just glad those awful horror posters from the 90s are a thing from the past. Remember those? Where they'd line up all the movie's sexy teen stars and have them stare at the camera seriously or seductively and that was the entire poster?

Pretty sure those are still a thing. And they don't even have to be horror movies. Some of the poses the female characters have on the posters are ridiculous.

I remember having this poster hanging in my room when I was a teen. I still kind of like it - it's simple but very effective. But I agree - most of the others were horrible.

He is R482, just not traveling the way Jamie is.

Critics did not like HALLOWEEN when it came out in 1978, r478.

It was also a box office flop in its first, few months of release.

But gradually expanding the movie to more screens across the U.S. slowly built up a hit as two critics in Chicago and New York got to see it and FANS in flyover country reacted well.

Horror movies have always been controversial and many critics are opposed to the genre in total. Critics in 1978 were especially moralist.

It's only when masses of fans took to Halloween and spawned massively successful copycats like Friday the 13th that critics have to re-evaluate their assessments and admit that Carpenter and other horror directors were doing something right, and what it was.

You need to read more interviews or watch documentaries about Halloween:

I always find it funny that people paint horror films to be so sexist and cynical when they're actually mostly progressive and feature outcasts who get to triumph in the end. It's usually always the characters who are more interesting and less stereotypical who survive (for the most part.) They're also usually made by very liberal people. I remember seeing an interview with John Carpenter where he admitted that he was horrified that certain people thought he was some sort of fundamentalist because the sexually active women were killed in Halloween and the "virgin" survived. He said that it was never meant to be seen that way. Laurie only survives, because she's intuitive and has been paying attention and not been distracted by boys.

Some critics also interpreted Friday the 13th as socially conservative and moralistic because Jason always killed the teenagers who had sex. To them, it was a cautionary tale against fornication.

But the filmmakers have repeated to the media they never intended messages that way. They put sex in the movies because people like sex and nudity just like they put kills in the movie because people like horror, that's all.

WE WANT SEE HER PEEN

It’s especially Silly in the case of Friday the 13th Where it’s very clear that Alice and her boss Steve had a sexual relationship that he wants to rekindle and she does not and Friday the 13th part two Strongly implies that Ginny and Paul had sex with the whole watch out for bears joke.

And Part 3 may have started the whole virgin lives shit but Dana Kimmell was a dumb bitch. If I had a guy like Paul Kratka back then, I'd have been riding that Grade A prime cock morning, noon and night.

Jamie has something sassier than a PEEN to show you.

The writer of part three had intended it to be clear that Jason had RAPED Chris the night that she ran away from her parents. That’s why she was not interested in sex with Rick. There was no moral component to it.

Imagine if Chris had birthed a Voorhees baby.

So cute!

I believe Dana Kimmel was/is a devout Mormon who objected to the sexual content and asked them to cut it, making Chris seem more virginal than she had been intended to be. That's something I always liked about the Friday the 13th movies. That whole "virgin final girl" thing never really applied. You always got the feeling that the final girls were probably not virgins for the most part. Alice and Ginny definitely weren't.

I've never gotten the virgin thing, because it seems more like the exception than the norm. He Knows You're Alone and My Bloody Valentine both feature a girl who's torn between two men she's probably been intimate with before. I can bet all the characters in Prom Night were sexually active. Really, it seems like Laurie Strode is one of the real, true virginal final girls.

Nancy from Elm Street was a virgin. She’s an iconic horror character that I’d put right below Laurie Strode as one of the most iconic final girls.

R495 Dana Kimmel was a regular on the soap opera Days of Our Lives from 1983-1985 and her character, Diane Parker, was a prostitute, and she left prostitution behind and was in a triangle with the iconic Bo and Hope

So I highly doubt that her religious beliefs got in the way of roles for her, I mean she played a prostitute on a trashy soap and bedded lots of men

That Kimmel changing the script stuff was debunked a while ago. It’s all in the book “Crystal Lake Memories”

I think the rape plot was just considered too far so the production team left it vague.

Spoilers

Trish in Part Four was clearly interested in having sex with Rob before....well you know.

Pam in Part Five was an adult career woman and wasn’t her boss also her boyfriend?

Megan in Part Six was unabashedly sexual and made her intentions regarding Tommy VERY clear. In fact Six inverts expectations by having the pure, demure, and probably virgin Paula get the most extreme death. Even if we never see it.

Rennie in Part Eight was a goody goody but she was probably banging Sean every chance she could to stick it to her evil uncle. Not really, but if it was me and I had a chance with 1989 era Scott Reeves I can’t say I’d have refused him. Of course Sean was such a gentleman it would probably never have occurred to him.......sigh.

Jessica in Part Nine was a single mother (widow?) so she clearly was no virgin.

I want to love Halloween 2018.

I fear (tee-hee), however, that I won't be able to suspend my disbelief that an old, out-of-practice , 40 years later Michael Myers can still wield a knife or that his victims couldn't run from him/ overpower him.

Which is why I'm wondering if that actor who is playing the young research scientist and just happens to have Michael's exact height and body is part of the twist alluded to in previous posts by those here who've seen sneak previews of the entire movie.

It would certainly make sense as to why Micheal would be bothered with terrorizing the rest of that film crew R501

I've seen the movie and attended the panel this weekend R501.

James Courtney is 61 (the age of the character) and said he works out the same way now as he did when he was 30. The movie isn't PERFECT but there was never a point when I said "There's no way a 60 year old could do that"

Look at what Tammy Cruise is still doing in movies

No r501.

Ok, thanks, r503 and r504.

Let me know when this movie leaks online.

There is NO INDICATION that Nancy Thompson was a virgin in the Elm Street movies.

The movie doesn't say. But we do know she had a boyfriend played by Johnny Depp who was a football jock and "hottest in school" type who I'm sure wouldn't stick with a chick who didn't put out.

[Quote] The movie doesn't say. But we do know she had a boyfriend played by Johnny Depp who was a football jock and "hottest in school" type who I'm sure wouldn't stick with a chick who didn't put out.

[quote]There is NO INDICATION that Nancy Thompson was a virgin in the Elm Street movies.

Untrue. Like the gif above shows, Glen lamented how “Morality sucks” because his gf Nancy wouldn’t let him get any. She specifically made him sleep on the couch. And even in part 2, when Jessie and Lisa read from Nancy’s old diary, the entry alludes to the fact that Nancy desired Glen but was never physically intimate with him (“I know I shouldn’t watch him from my window, but...”)

Didn't Nancy have fucking bars on her window? Of course she was a virgin.

Glen was a football jock?

Wrong again, r510 and r511, who is probably the same poster.

Nancy and Glen didn't abstain from sex at Tina's house because "Nancy's a virgin" or she was opposed to sex with Glen.

In fact, Glen starts making out with her heavily before Nancy explicitly says:

[quote]Glen! Not now! We're here for Tina now, not ourselves.

That indicates Glen and Nancy probably HAVE done the deed several times before. So does Rod's suggestion that Nancy and Glen "got the rest" besides Tina's mother's bed.

Here's the full movie so you can watch the entire scene in context.

Again, NO INDICATION that Nancy's a virgin or saving her virginity. The scene starts @ the 10:00 mark:

Nancy didn't get bars on her windows until well after she established sexual relations with Glen.

Also, BARS ON HOME WINDOWS DON'T STOP SEX. For starters, Glen can still slip his wiener between the bars.

Can you think of any other ways that Nancy wasn't stopped by the bars? Or are you really that dull?

Nancy was a virgin because no one wanted to have someone like this for their mother-in-law.

Lots of good panels and interviews on Youtube.

To the “Laurie is the only virginal final girl” loon, please shut the fuck up. Nancy was a virgin, and Glen kissing her means squat. Again, the diary entry read by Jessie and Lisa in part 2 and her unwillingness to fuck him in part 1 are very good illustrations of this. She even rebuffed him after he climbed through her window. Tina was the slut. Rod saying “You guys got the rest” means that he was a horn dog, and that he automatically assumed that Nancy and Glen would be fucking too. But they didn’t, because Nancy didn’t want to.

[quote]Wrong again, [R510] and [R511], who is probably the same poster.

No and no.

Wrong and WRONGER, troll @ r519 + r520.

I think it's about time I blocked you.

Jason Blumhouse just said in an interview that they will mount something of an Oscar campaign for the film , most likely Jamie Lee Curtis ' performance, if Get Out can get multiple nominations....

[quote]I think it’s about time I blocked you

And? Lol, please do.

worst one

"Jason Blumhouse" lol

I saw the film. It's decent. Not as good as the trailer makes it look. Jamie Lee was good, but not Oscar-worthy.

she was such a grouch at comic con when fans ccame to say hi.

wtf is her problem....

p.s. she should stay off talk shows::::shows what a cold bitch she is.

Incredible prima donna on the set.

super creep.

R484 Katie and Barry look like they could be siblings. I wonder what Helen Mirren thinks of this movie now?

love the interviews where they ask Jamie bout the peen rumors and she flips out !!!!! soo good..

Why was she such a cunt to that nice boy on James corden show that she was on with . god dam, she went off on him as some uber feminist... the kid handled it well, im shocked he dint smack her fukin face and walk off.

Were they ever able to successfully carve a good pussy out of her cock?

The sequel is massively overhyped and overpraised by the online journalists. There’s not a minute in this movie that isnt overly reminiscent of all tbe sequels that the filmmakers claim to be ignoring. I was very disappointed. I’ll stick with the hot mess original timeline.

I saw it last night. I thought it was awful and I couldn't believe how bad it was. Does it hit the lows of Halloween 5, 6, or 8? Maybe not quite, but it's bland as can be and there's literally no emotion throughout. The new characters are pure cardboard, so we don't care when they die. If anything, it feels more like a Halloween/Friday the 13th rip off that's been buried since '82, but without the cheese or fun. It's just not very good at all. Plus, there's an AWFUL twist towards the end that drags the entire film to halt and makes you scratch your head.

Jamie Lee does the best she can and the last 15/20 minutes are pretty good, but you have to make it through 80/90 minutes of bullshit before you can get to it. Both Laurie's daughter and granddaughter have zero character development (along with the rest of the new group). I was very disappointed.

r526 and others might want to start weighing in on our BEST EVER Halloween movie poll and 2018 reviews:

This opened in the UK today. I was going to see it this morning, but couldn't make it, so I'm going to a showing after work, tomorrow afternoon. So excited!

R535 needs to go get laid. This film was FUCKING FANTASTIC.

I loved it from beginning to end.

Michael Myers needs to remove the bug from your distended asshole!

I love R538

I LOVED every minute of it

Second best in the series after the original

P.J. Soles is gonna be at the Chiller convention next week, along with a fascinating bunch of other has-beens (including DL icon Bai Ling).

r535 writes "...it's bland as can be and there's literally no emotion throughout. The new characters are pure cardboard, so we don't care when they die."

Agreed. It's the film's biggest flaw.

It had its moments, particularly the gas station scene.

It's unfair to compare it to the 1978 classic, and yet, one can't help marveling at the mood and atmosphere Carpenter created; things that are sorely lacking here. The genius of the1978 version is that it hooked you emotionally to those vapid, stupid teenagers, and when their demise comes, it creates a genuine response.

I prefer this Rambo Laurie Strode over the one in H20. The teenagers in this film were pathetic. As was the first 2/3 of the movie.

I saw it, too, and didn't care for it. It really does feel super disjointed and weird for the first 3/4ths of the movie. The final act is fun where Laurie finally confronts him, but everything else feels really off like they lost a reel of the movie or something.

I'm so surprised to see so much love for this one. It was almost unanimously positive during its film festival run and, now, I've seen a lot of people come out and say they didn't like it. I wonder how many will love it and how many will hate it.

in private if don't call her sir, she gets fucking mad!

It was only okay but it was never going to be as good as the original which was creepy from the get-go with the murder of Judith Meyers as a prologue. Plus Carpenter can say what he wants but a lot of the creep factor of the original is that he’s killing the promiscuous girls. The U.S. is a puritanical country so it made you empathise with them - they weren’t doing anything wrong but they weren’t good girls. Plus it gave a hint of sexiness with the young, virile Bob and then Myers posing as him under a sheet. And I always remember Judith Meyers’ boyfriend going upstairs with her for a quickie and pulling his shirt back on as he cane down the stairs. It was sexy. It had a fucked up factor whether intended or not.

Don’t know who thought Judy Greer would be good in this. Mostly, it was just gruesome without much suspense.

Don't ask her for autograph,

she turns in the the kraken....

This movie is praised by tools who live in basements and the tool girls who live in them too.

You guys should keep the spoilers in the thread we set up for reviewing this film -- you're popping a lot of cherries without consent.

Not as good as I expected. Has a good ending. Badly cast with the exception of Jamie of course (love her ) Judy Greer (even though they fail to convince as mother and daughter ) and whoever played the granddaughter. Who calls their Grandmother ‘Grandmother ‘? Whenever a major character is killed he is not mentioned at all. When will Hollywood realize the director off Pineapple Express isn’t very good ? How come John Carpenter didn’t direct ?

I thought it was a damn good time. Great kills. Jamie was fantastic. I want to see it again.

80 million dollar opening and B+ Cinema Score which means a lot of us loved it and 1/3 felt like R550.

80% on Rotten Tomatoes which is excellent for a slasher.

And I loved the message of empowerment. I think it fits the times-

If I really want to see a film I know to stay from threads until I do.

Why didn’t the cheating boy friend get killed? At least they gave Jamie a more convincing wig than They did in the first sequel.

Carpenter is my favourite director and I've seen the original over 100 times. I'm going to see this in just over 90 minutes time. Reader, it had better be good...

Im tired of that old lez and her lizard personality.

There is clearly someone here who was rebuffed by Jamie at Comic-Con and your posts and agenda are getting old.

So she isn't into signing autographs and you got her had a bad moment. Get a life.

She is actually known for being a genuinely kind woman. She is a little kooky in a good way, as well.

I didn't love it. It's been than 5, 6, and 8, but that's faint praise. It has all the elements in place for being something really special, but the dialogue has to be some of the worst I've ever heard in my life. Just terrible.

I'm glad I wasn't the only one bothered by Allyson calling Laurie "grandmother." Who does that? So awkward and very indicative of the quality of the dialogue. Nothing feels natural at all. The original film had natural, smooth dialogue you could believe young people would say. This one doesn't and it suffers for it. Hard to believe they wrote 80 something drafts of this and never thought to have someone come in for a dialogue polish.

Very interesting that a slasher (and this a pretty gory slasher) gets 80% rave reviews by critics on Rotten Tomatoes (and I am talking the creme de la creme critics- has this ever happened??) and yet we are easily split 50/50.

We are criticizing dialogue for christ sake!

I kind of dig this. You are a picky bunch of cunts! And I am proud.

I loved this movie and I am tempted to go back with some friends.

I just got back. I thought it was excellent. Several shortcomings, but overall a great sequel. The best thing is Carpenter's score, which doesn't have the simplicity and atmosphere of the original, but is excellent nonetheless. I'm actually going to buy the soundtrack if it's available. It's absolutely nowhere near the brilliance of the original film, but it's on a completely different level to all the other sequels. Given how many young damsels in distress Myers has dispatched over the years, I thought the final scene was particularly powerful and emotional. I loved it. I'm going to see it again next week...

[quote]We are criticizing dialogue for christ sake!

Probably because unbelievable dialogue can take you right out of a scene. It's actually a deal breaker for some of us.

R558- Some people cried over the final scene. Literally- CRIED!

So who to believe now - the ecstatic film reviews by the critics or the disappointed DLers?! I usually agree with Della when it comes to movies so I'm guessing this one is just an overhyped turkey.

They're showing this and the original back to back on Halloween but i don't think i can wait that long.

I'm listening to the OST now. It's absolutely remarkable. I'm a little biased, as I don't believe that Carpenter has ever done a bad score; but this is as wonderful (and modern) as it is scary and surprising. I think those two solo albums he did in the last few years has really reinvigorated his musical mojo. If only he would go back to directing now...

I just saw it, too, and I'm split. There's a lot of love and there's a lot to hate. For a film that says it's going back to the original and getting rid of all the sequels, it sure is trying to have its cake and eat it, too. Michael possesses enough superhuman strength to literally curb stomp some guy's head into something resembling a smashed pumpkin, there are evil doctors and subplots a la The Curse of Michael Myers, there are idiot cops who the film thinks are funny but they're really just annoying a la Halloween 5, etc. The characters are made of cardboard and you can't feel anything for them when they die. If this had been billed as just another run of the mill sequel, I doubt anyone would have had any major complaints, but since it's being billed as a true return to form and the best film in the series since the original, it's more than a little disappointing.

Jamie Lee is good, though and I kept wishing the film had more of her. Every time it's with her, it's pretty good, but when she leaves for a while, it starts getting tedious. The granddaughter is pretty boring to follow around.

Compared to the other teenagers cast the granddaughter was pretty good. I only liked the best friend/baby sitter . The black kid running away? The cheating boy friend ?

What happened to them I meant

Thinking about that, one of the things I liked about it was the randomness of the victims. Some people you desperately hoped wouldn't be killed were and others you desperately wanted to be bludgeoned to death weren't. During the head squashing moment, someone in the audience actually screeched "YYEEEEEESSSSSSS!!!!" Wanker.

I saw it and loved it. They always said that the film would pay homage to all the sequels, and that’s what they did. I cheered (inwardly) during the final sequence, and I think the last shot was setting us up for a possible sequel. This’ll hit $100 million quickly, so I don’t doubt there’s something in the works.

Love you R568.. Sick of these cunts.

Saw it tonight- meh. It was rather bland, not the least bit scary, but not so awful that I resented shelling out the money. Wouldn't feel compelled see it again, though.

Just came back from a screening of the sequel reboot. I was floored. It has surpassed part 4 as my favorite sequel of the franchise.

The creators managed to thread together the best elements of the original and the franchise as a whole (including Zombie's what I consider "fanfiction remakes") weaving together both a frightening and poignant homage that also manages to use ambiguity expertly in exploring the character of Michael Myers and the evil that surrounds him.

Midway through our first encounter with Myers, it's as if something descends upon or is awakened within "the Shape", causing the atmosphere and those around him to buzz with foreboding. It's an unsettlingly electric and effective sequence that, rather than explain to you why, simply allows you to feel and imagine the evil that permeates this man through creator John Carpenter's chillingly atmospheric score and David Gordon Green's assured, poetic direction.

Green has a firm grasp on the elements that made the original work - simplicity, realism and a little grounded pathos (and never seeing the Shape's eyes!) - playing with and and amplifying them. The simplicity is artful and unsettling, the realism disturbing and frightening, and the pathos painful and familiar. Also, the use of light and editing left me feeling unsure about whether or not I ever saw Myers' eyes save for one fleetingly chilling reveal which tips the hat to the mythos of the original and to Laurie Strode's first encounter with him. It's as if hid eyes are under dirty water throughout: you catch yourself thinking you've seen them and as soon as you do, they're gone. It was a wonderful technique I haven't seen in any of the sequels or the original, for that matter.

Jamie Lee Curtis gives her best film performance (she was also excellent in 2014's Scream Queens) since Freaky Friday here, shading her character with both pain and a will of steel. She's subtle, fierce and expertly gives us a realistic portrait of Laurie Strode as a PTSD suffering grandmother crippled by her past but fueled with the turbulent courage of someone with nothing left to lose. Her scenes opposite the shape are startlingly brutal and all the more satisfying for it.

It's easy to find out the myriad way in which this film could have gone wrong - watch Halloween ::gurgle:: H20, which also starred Jamie Lee Curtis on the franchise's 20th anniversary - and though it isn't a groundbreaking film, it's an excellent slasher pic that doesn't try to reinvent the wheel but puts the rubber to the road and lets it rip.

This is both a love letter to the original and to die hard fans, with mini homages cleverly executed and peppered throughout. The violence and gore are intensified for both current day horror fan sensibilities but also in service of the story, which is meant to highlight the savage and elemental quality of the evil on display. The kills are frightening, intense and surprisingly somber, which elevates and magnifies them.

Nearly halfway through the film, there's a beautifully rendered extended tracking shot during which the Shape swiftly enters a woman's home, bludgeons her to death with a hammer and after, with the oblivious nonchalance of a child switching toys, picks up a butcher knife. It's a chilling moment. Weapons are truly an afterthought for this kind of primal evil

The supporting cast is excellent, with Judy Greer and Andi Matichack providing the best, most nuanced supporting work since part 4s Ellie Cornell and Danielle Harris team up. Matichack in particular stands out as a young actress with a promising career ahead of her.

Expanding on his original score for "Halloween", with echoes of his other brilliant compositional work in film and shades of the score to "Suspiria" , Carpenter's music here is a fantastic variations on a theme homage to the most iconic score in horror film history; his own.

There's a plot point many have found disappointing involving a protege of Dr. Loomis' which I found successfully subversive and perhaps revealing of where the franchise is heading.

Cont'd.

. Whether or not you believe in evil, fear is universal and triggered by as many unknown elesments as it is the known. This sequel doesn't attempt to explain the 'unknown elements' but simply observes their mysterious, macabre chill.

Those who think MM would not have the strength he has I always thought of him something supernatural.

Saw it last night. Good not excellent. The original score was probably the best thing about the film. The director did a good job of getting the tone and mood just right. I agree about the lack of character development though. I may be in the minority here but I think when you do away with the familial connection between Michael and Laurie you lose part of the dynamic that makes the conflict between the two so emotional. Were they trying to imply that Michael had some sort of physical attraction to Laurie and he felt rejected by her? If it was all just random 40 years ago I don’t understand why he would stalk her again in 2018. Still it was a solid entry and certainly one of the better chapters in the franchise for sure.

[quote]If it was all just random 40 years ago I don’t understand why he would stalk her again in 2018.

She was the one who got away and, along with Loomis, the reason he was captured.

I thought it was Fate.

Laurie and Tommy, the two people to approach the Myers house that day also bore an unmistakable likeness to Judith and Micheal Myers.

I think that’s what set him off.

Watching the original you can make the argument that Myers is stalking Tommy as much as he is stalking Laurie.

[quote]Watching the original you can make the argument that Myers is stalking Tommy as much as he is stalking Laurie.

That's very interesting. I hadn't considered that before.

I never really noticed it until rewatching the film as an adult.

There is the jump scare where Tommy walks right into Myers after he is tripped and smashes his pumpkin. Micheal definitely was actively following Tommy at that point.

There is also that teacher’s monologue about fate going on in the background while Laurie is in class.

[quote] If it was all just random 40 years ago I don’t understand why he would stalk her again in 2018.

I agree with you on this one. Taking the brother/sister angle out makes the original so much better and scarier, but makes this new film kind of nonsensical. I mean, Michael isn't your ordinary person - he is driven by his instinct, like an animal, not by his brain. So it's very against his character to hold grudge against someone for 40 years. Some fancy intelligent serial killer (ala Hannibal Lecter) might do something like that, but not an animalistic killer like Mikey.

It was the bully who bumped into MM in the original film, not Tommy, but yes, MM was definitely stalking Tommy as well. The scene just after the pumpkin crushing where he’s slowly tailing an unsuspecting Tommy in that car as Tommy is walking down the sidewalk is terrifying. To put it plainly, when Laurie went to put the keys in the doorway and Michael looked out and saw her and Tommy, they instantly became his prey. What for can be left up to the viewer’s imagination.

He doesn't go straight for Laurie in the original film though, does he? He goes on a random killing spree in the neighborhood. In fact, he only attacks Laurie after she comes to the house in which he's hiding. And only then does he follow her back to Tommy's house.

Maybe he was “nesting” at Lindsey’s house and killed the others because they were invading.

He's clearly obsessed with Laurie. He watches her as she walks down the block form his house, outside the school, on the way home from school, in her backyard, on the way to the Doyles. He only stalks Tommy at the school in hopes of Tommy leading him to her, then he quickly takes off.

Some very interesting points here. What's odd is that, this time, it seems like Laurie is the one stalking Michael. He never directly seems to go after her. He goes after her granddaughter, which leads to that AWFUL twist and the granddaughter running through the woods to Laurie's house, but it never seems like Michael is even intending to go to her house.

The more I think about that twist, the dumber it feels. The entire doctor character could have been cut out completely. I feel like there was another way for Michael to get to Laurie's house. Wasn't there a scene in part 4 where he hitches himself to a truck and follows some characters? He could have done that.

I give it a solid b. H20 was a A-

That pic in the OP's link is hilarious. Jamie Lee with tits...HILARIOUS!

I never thought H20 was a perfect movie. From that awful mask that changed from shot to shot and still never looked right to the theft of the Scream and Mimic scores to the too-short finale, it has its flaws. Still, I think I prefer it to this one. I found Laurie much more interesting in that movie and I love the idea of her still running and trying to keep it together. The Laurie in this movie is just the creepy old lady hermit who lives in the woods and hates everyone. It's a little hard to root for her in some respects. I feel like, if this movie has removed a lot of the useless characters and subplots, and given Laurie more sense of genuine tenderness or emotion, it would have been excellent.

It seemed like Laurie and her granddaughter had a very clandestine relationship that they didn't want Laurie's daughter to know about ( i.e. the scene on the football field). I really liked that aspect and think it would have helped the film a good deal to explore that and show everyone how loving Laurie really was with her granddaughter even though she's cold and tough as nails to everyone else.

Is it true that they actually used a CGI mask in some H20 scenes? I never noticed it but some people say it's very obvious. I'd like to know which scenes those are.

Yes, there's a CGI mask in the kitchen garbage disposal scene. Notice how the mask almost glows and stands out from the rest of the image? It's very jarring. I think this is the only CGI mask in the film, but there are various masks used throughout.

From the trailers, I'm assuming it was sponsored by the NRA? Gun nut heroine.

I haven't seen the film yet, but can someone tell me this - does Michael return to Haddonfield just to finish off Laurie or does he simply come back to visit his hometown and she still happens to be living there (in that case - does he show any signs of even remembering her?)

R591, it was deleted from the theatrical cut, but there's a scene when Michael walks past a Haddonfield karaoke bar and heard Laurie singing "I Wish I Had You All Alone" That's how he gets clued in.

Michael forgot Laurie even existed until he saw her on TV doing Activia commercials. That's what made him escape and start the killings again.

R591 That's left a mystery, which is ultiamately what makes the film succeed.

In reality, Laurie is seeking him.

I do think it loses something with Laurie being the one to seek Michael out. I think they should have kept her as a crazy recluse, warning everyone about Michael's return, but not have her take such an active role in trying to track him down and kill him until he kills her granddaughter or even daughter and THEN she goes full on-Rambo. I felt like the stakes weren't quite high enough.

The film doesn't succeed as a film. It's a huge mess.

The film definitely succeeds as a film. It's a film whose filminess is quite apparent.

But Laurie ISN'T "cold and tough as nails on everyone else," r587.

She only has an issue with her daughter/Judy Greer and husband for pushing back against her paranoia. The movie wanted you to feel sorry for Laurie, hate the Greer couple and vindicate Laurie later.

r590, the whole "Battle Laurie" concept is just a lazy ripoff of Linda Hamilton in TERMINATOR 2.

r594 is wrong, r591.

Michael's rampage starts out as random — something the filmmakers and Jamie Lee have talked about extensively on the Con-Panel / press circuit.

But in the course of Michael's random killings in Haddonfield, he comes across Laurie's granddaughter, which leads him to Laurie, whom he recognizes and wants revenge on.