Andy

Favorite Halloween franchise sequel/remake?

53 posts in this topic

I'm sure most people will say Halloween II, but ya never know.

For me, it's between the first Halloween II and Halloween 6.  I know 6 gets a bad reputation, kind of a mess.  There's a lot I love about it though.  The atmosphere.   I really like the Tommy Doyle character too. Also, Michael just seemed PISSED off! 

Beetlejuice91 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Halloween II. (1981, as if that needs to be said.) 

It actually has my favorite kill in slasher films.

The Shape is at his scariest, just easing out of the darkness to kill. It's also picked up a few of the things F13 did right, with the gore and streamlined pacing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love Halloween II. I know Carpenter wrote it while guzzling six-packs but the hospital setting always struck a chord with me. The scene with Laurie in the basement trying to get through the window is one of the most suspenseful moments in my horror memory banks. Absolute bad ass of an ending too. 

Halloween was never the same after that. Hoping the new film finds something in that tone again. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Definitely Halloween II. I love the whole hospital thing.

For variety's sake, if I didn't pick Halloween II it would probably be Halloween 6 (Producer's Cut). There's a magic to finally seeing an official release of a movie you had as a bootleg that no one ever thought would get officially released. It's the last with Donald Pleasence too and it ends much better than the theatrical cut in terms of his character.

Beetlejuice91 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Halloween. Back when Laurie wasn't related to Michael and there was no true motive.

He was pure evil. He broke out of the asylum. He came home.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very firmly - Halloween IV.

After that, I'd say Halloween II. The rest I don't get on with much, to varying degrees. Resurrection's about the only one I really despite, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm waiting for John Carpenter's direct sequel to Halloween II which will erase that horrid timeline that happened after 2.  Two is good and H20 is ok just because it attempts to abolish the previous 4 movies. And I have no idea what they were thinking when they made 3.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DamonD7 said:

Very firmly - Halloween IV.

After that, I'd say Halloween II. The rest I don't get on with much, to varying degrees. Resurrection's about the only one I really despite, though.

I may be the only person who enjoys Resurrection. It's a really stupid movie but I found it fun. I liked seeing Rick Rosenthal back as well. I think it's the type of movie that people will enjoy more in the future because of how bad it is. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's nice to hear from someone that does! I guess that really does show, variety is the spice of life.
Actually, here's one, I really do like Danny Lux's version of the title music in that film.

Something I gradually took to heart in life with various films and tv shows and fandoms in general so on - everyone loves something.

It's a big wide world out there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Andy said:

I'm sure most people will say Halloween II, but ya never know.

For me, it's between the first Halloween II and Halloween 6.  I know 6 gets a bad reputation, kind of a mess.  There's a lot I love about it though.  The atmosphere.   I really like the Tommy Doyle character too. Also, Michael just seemed PISSED off! 

Halloween 6 was the first film I was exposed so it has a place in my childhood. It was one of the darkest of the Halloween films and Michael is just brutal. The Producer's Cut plays like a lot like the first one in terms of soundtrack and atmosphere.

 

My favorite Halloween films were 1, 6, H20 and 2 (love the organ theme). I haven't see parts 4 and 5 yet. In terms of the remake, I thought the first one only was good.

Andy likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I honestly cannot choose, since I love them all. However, there are two distinct timelines: The Thorn timeline, with Jamie Lloyd, and the H20 timeline, which ignores the events of H4, H5, and H6. In that case, I'm gonna have to go with the H20 timeline, since I prefer the story more, and it just feels more realistic (I'm not a fan of the thorn cult druid crap), but I still love the crap out of H4, H5, and H6 and their spookiness, especially the soundtracks and the different, varying masks. I still await a sequel to Resurrection to this very day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, RisQ_FeaR said:

I honestly cannot choose, since I love them all. However, there are two distinct timelines: The Thorn timeline, with Jamie Lloyd, and the H20 timeline, which ignores the events of H4, H5, and H6. In that case, I'm gonna have to go with the H20 timeline, since I prefer the story more, and it just feels more realistic (I'm not a fan of the thorn cult druid crap), but I still love the crap out of H4, H5, and H6 and their spookiness, especially the soundtracks and the different, varying masks. I still await a sequel to Resurrection to this very day.

You can still fit them into the H20 storyline if you wanted to. The original script had a reference to Jamie. Just say that she had a baby and split for her and the baby's protection. Michael kills Jamie, which further explains Laurie's alcoholism and overprotectiveness of John. All about the mental canon. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think my only problem is that Laurie seems to have made the hugely questionable choice to estrange herself from Jamie, to the point of faking her death, and leaves her alone in Haddonfield all those years despite knowing Michael is still alive.

Otherwise, I also agree that there's enough hand-waving that can be done to make it sorta fit. Although H6 means a horribly depressing end for poor little Jamie's story.

RisQ_FeaR and Beetlejuice91 like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, DamonD7 said:

I think my only problem is that Laurie seems to have made the hugely questionable choice to estrange herself from Jamie, to the point of faking her death, and leaves her alone in Haddonfield all those years despite knowing Michael is still alive.

Otherwise, I also agree that there's enough hand-waving that can be done to make it sorta fit. Although H6 means a horribly depressing end for poor little Jamie's story.

From what I read, Jamie Lloyd is born in 1980 and John Tate was born in 1981- so technically it's possible. Giving Jamie Lloyd up for adoption (aka abandoning her in Haddonfield) is entirely possible but it's odd because her parents (Laurie and Mr. Lloyd) "died" in a car accident and she would have remembered having a brother. To just take John would make Laurie a pretty bad person in my books and it doesn't suit her character or make much sense.

RisQ_FeaR likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/17/2017 at 7:48 AM, bewareofbears said:

From what I read, Jamie Lloyd is born in 1980 and John Tate was born in 1981- so technically it's possible. Giving Jamie Lloyd up for adoption (aka abandoning her in Haddonfield) is entirely possible but it's odd because her parents (Laurie and Mr. Lloyd) "died" in a car accident and she would have remembered having a brother. To just take John would make Laurie a pretty bad person in my books and it doesn't suit her character or make much sense.

Exactly.

 

On 5/17/2017 at 3:54 AM, DamonD7 said:

I think my only problem is that Laurie seems to have made the hugely questionable choice to estrange herself from Jamie, to the point of faking her death, and leaves her alone in Haddonfield all those years despite knowing Michael is still alive.

Otherwise, I also agree that there's enough hand-waving that can be done to make it sorta fit. Although H6 means a horribly depressing end for poor little Jamie's story.

You have a really good point, but I don't think she would know that Michael is still alive in Haddonfield. The reason being is that, at the end of H2, Michael was caught in an explosion and was burned to death. After this, everyone, including Laurie, felt convinced that he was dead for sure. In H20, before Michael's encounter with Laurie, she feels pretty sure he's dead, but she's still kinda traumatised by the events took place back in 1978 (probably PTSD of some sort), which explains her visions of Michael in public, nightmares, and her excessive pill taking and alcoholism. However, even though she felt Michael was truly dead, it still wouldn't make sense for her to leave Jamie behind, only to keep John.

DamonD7 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RisQ_FeaR, I have merged your posts please do not double post. If you need to add onto something please use the edit button.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I enjoy them all of course, but since we're choosing favorites, I'll go with part 4 The Return of Michael Myers along with Part 5 The Revenge of Michael Myers. I've always had a thing for the sequels it seems. For example, I love all the Friday the 13th Films, but if I have to choose a favorite, either 4 the New Chapter, or 6 Jason lives.

RisQ_FeaR likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Danielle Harris is just so good in Part 4. She elevates the whole thing, she's such a sympathetic heroine. A tough little cookie, too.

RisQ_FeaR likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jamie was supposed to be 15 in part 6!? What? That's...disturbing, to the say the least. I don't know why that's never clicked with me. 

Back on Laurie. In H20, she did say she faked her death. I don't think they actually said how she died in Jamie's timeline. I would say it is too unique of a situation to judge Laurie if she did give up Jamie and kept John. Two years before she had Jamie, she went through the ridiculously tragic night because she was Michael's sister. Then to have a girl two years later...there are a plethora of reasons why she would possibly give Jamie away. Laurie also would have only been 19 or barely 20. Still getting over the trauma, then pregnant and having a daughter while still fearing that Michael is coming back...could have been too much. Then John comes along. A boy to start a new life with as if Laurie Strode/Myers never existed. I dunno, don't think I would be in any place to judge her decision if she did give Jamie up. 

I know in the original H20 script/treatment, Jamie's history is described and Laurie rushes to the bathroom to throw up. Even if I think the Thorn cult was silly, I would have preferred they kept that since Laurie is already a flawed character in that one compared to the original. 

Regardless, I know they are wanting to move away from all of it with the next one. However, I wish we could have had a proper ending to the Strode/Myers story since Laurie's death was remarkably stupid in Resurrection. Personally, I choose to believe she survived the fall and did a brand new death faking. 

Edit- This series is way more of a hot mess than F13th...and that's saying something. 
 

RisQ_FeaR likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In part 4, if I remember right, they mention that Laurie was killed in a car crash.

H20 is really kind of a muddle, because they originally DID write it with Jamie and all that fully included in that timeline. Then changed their minds but didn't clear up the script completely, leading to a mixed message. Laurie faking her death was originally intended as an explicit link to H4-6.

RisQ_FeaR likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, DamonD7 said:

In part 4, if I remember right, they mention that Laurie was killed in a car crash.

H20 is really kind a muddle, because they originally DID write it with Jamie and all that fully included in that timeline. Then changed their minds but didn't clear up the script completely, leading to a mixed message. Laurie faking her death was originally intended as an explicit link to H4-6.

I imagine this isn't a popular opinion but H20 is the worst of the series in my mind. From the ever-changing mask to LL Cool J's romance novel ambitions to the small death count and weak kills to the awkward middle aged romance to Josh Harnett's stupid haircut to the cheesy Kevin Williamson dialogue. It tries to be all of these different things but never once simply tries to be a Halloween movie.

I don't hate the movie but it should've been 10x better. You've got Jamie Lee Curtis back in a Halloween movie and this is the best they could come up with? :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Come to think of it, doesn't H20 flat out 'borrow' chunks of Scream's musical score?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, DamonD7 said:

Come to think of it, doesn't H20 flat out 'borrow' chunks of Scream's musical score?

You're right. That's hilarious- I never realized it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Halloween II ('81)

After that, it's between 4, 5, and H20. I lean towards 4, but it would be 5 if not for the "Mayberry-esque" cops. Michael is just a brutal and ruthless force of nature in that one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now