You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
Re: Rob Zombie's Lords of Salem (Trailer)
No, not at all. I'm not saying if you like Halloween you're an idiot, but if their goal always is to make sure the dumbest guy in the room appreciates something there never would be a Mike Myers in the first place. We'd still be watching silent movies in black and white with dudes throwing buckets of water at each other. I mean, it wasn't terrible. I'd give it about half pot, but what's really the point of making something average?
Their thinking seems to be "we have this good cake, but a lot of people like beef so let's just add that". These days they don't even make the cake. They just go to Woolies or dig some shit up from the freezer and sell it. Ie. the scene by scene second half of the movie.
The irony is that I'm pretty sure most that liked the movie would still like it if they had had the balls to try something original for the third act. But you know, it's safer to make 50 million steadily than 10 here and 200 there.
Re: Rob Zombie's Lords of Salem (Trailer)
Poll = nail on head
That was precisely my biggest issue with Zombie and Halloween. As a kid that's why I loved the Halloween franchise above all else. Halloween was MY franchise. That was my homeboy. It wasn't just Michael, but even Halloween III as well. I loved the FEEL of the franchise. I loved the TONE. I loved Dean Cundey's dark and creepy cinematography in the first three, Carpenter/Howarth's music in the first three, Pleasence and his always legendary performances, even in cruddy films. I am who I am, and I am in the profession I am in today because of Donald Pleasence and those films.
THAT is how much of an effect Halloween had on me.
And why? Because it was always a smarter franchise. Something for a thinking man. Michael Myers was not Michael Myers, Michael Myers was simply... "The Shape". A force of evil, a force of nature. Something that is not understood, or controlled. A homeostatic balance from the powers that be, whether the Druids and Thorn, or Conal Cochran's explanation in Halloween III... "we don't decide these things you know... the planets do." Loomis spouting off about evil on two legs, all that jazz.
When Zombie "made it his own", he dumbed down the character all the way to the rapist hospital attendents in the film, where trailer park beer guzzlers could "understand dat der Mikey Myers keractar". Michael was scary all right, but in a Leatherface redneck psycho just tearing shit up. But the biggest problem was he gave Myers MO-TIVE. Myers was pissed off because mommy was a slutbag stripper whore, his sister was only meer weeks from taking on her stepfather at 15, daddy was non-existant and probably "one of the 100 maniacs" (NOES reference) from a gangbang of his mom, and he was kicked around at school. Sure it sucks, and he might be a scary psycho, but he gave Myers a face and he lost his mystique. At least when Thorn got introduced in Halloween 6 (far more in it's Producer's Cut incarnation), Myers might have had motive, but it was a universal motive, which kept his mystique intact. Zombie's Myers was just some psycho in a Halloween mask. I'm sure it appeals to some, but not to me.
As for Lords of Salem, I watched the trailer. It looks utterly terrible. Really bad. Seems like another Zombie circle-jerk. I might rent it when it comes out out of curiosity, but ANOTHER film with his wife in the lead... come on man.
