Forums Horror Collectibles
Is Rob Zombie a Hypocrite?

Ohhh boy did I just open up a can of worms or what?I saw this arguement else where and thought it would be a great discuson!!!

First, I really like Rob's Halloween remake and I'm looking foward to the sequel.

Now that we've got my opinion out of the way . . .Back when they were remaking "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre" Zombie was asked to participate and this is an exact quote of what he said:

I feel it’s the worst thing any filmmaker can do. I actually got a call from my agent and they asked me if I wanted to be involved with the remake of Chain Saw. I said no fucking way! Those movies are perfect - you’re only going to make yourself look like an asshole by remaking them. Go remake something that’s a piece of shit and make it good. Like with my movie (House of 1000 Corpses) I have elements of Chain Saw in it because I love that movie so much, but I wouldn’t dare want to “remake” it. It’s like a band trying to be another band.

In all fairness, he didn’t say he would never do a remake, he said he wouldn’t remake a movie he thought was perfect. Maybe he thought the first Halloween wasn't good and he could make it better. Or somebody backed a dump truck full of money up to his house and he contridicts himself.

So the questions is: Is Rob Zombie a Hypocrite or did he just change his mind?

There is a difference between “changing your mind” and being a hypocrite. Saying, “I’ll go running today” and then instead you walk is changing your mind. However, bashing and condemning people for doing something, and then going ahead and doing that thing yourself for a big paycheck is being hypocritical.

Hey, if I were offered tons of cash to go back on something I randomly said . . .

hmmmm

(remember kids, play nice)
DaShape Wednesday 3/04/2009 at 11:24 PM | 38586
Hey, if I were offered tons of cash to go back on something I randomly said . . .

hmmmm

People change their minds, especially when there's loads of cash involved.Maybe he thought no one would have ever read that interview?

Maybe he was just creating a soundbyte and never expected it to surface after the truck full of money backed up to his door?

Maybe he's a bigger fan of Texas Chainsaw Massacre than Halloween?
Snoballz Wednesday 3/04/2009 at 11:58 PM | 38589
I remember reading and watching a few interviews with Zombie.

He said, when originally approached to remake Halloween, he turned it down.

Because yes, he believed the original was perfect and didn't need to be remade.

It wasn't until they negotiated that he could re-invent the character and story that he showed interest.

After making a phone call to John Carpenter, in which he gave Zombie his blesngs to go ahead with it.

That Zombie finally agreed.

I'm sure the money didn't hurt either.

Is he a hypocrite?

I guess it all depends on how you look at it.

To be honest, I thought you were going to ask if he's a hypocrite for making a sequel.

Which in this case, yes.

Zombie has gone on record saying that his Halloween is a stand alone film.

That he made it for exactly what it is and that's it.

Makes sense, condering he did kill off both Dr. Loomis and Michael.

But now a sequel is being made.

As if we didn't see that one coming.

And miraculously Michael and Dr. Loomis are alive and well.

I'm sure money had a lot to do with Zombie coming back.

But if someone has to do it.

Better Zombie rather than someone else in my opinion.

So although he may be hypocrite here.

I'm not complaining.
Insomniac Thursday 3/05/2009 at 12:35 AM | 38597
I remember reading and watching a few interviews with Zombie.

He said, when originally approached to remake Halloween, he turned it down.

Because yes, he believed the original was perfect and didn't need to be remade.

It wasn't until they negotiated that he could re-invent the character and story that he showed interest.

After making a phone call to John Carpenter, in which he gave Zombie his blesngs to go ahead with it.

That Zombie finally agreed.

I'm sure the money didn't hurt either.

Is he a hypocrite?

I guess it all depends on how you look at it.

To be honest, I thought you were going to ask if he's a hypocrite for making a sequel.

Which in this case, yes.

Zombie has gone on record saying that his Halloween is a stand alone film.

That he made it for exactly what it is and that's it.

Makes sense, condering he did kill off both Dr. Loomis and Michael.

But now a sequel is being made.

As if we didn't see that one coming.

And miraculously Michael and Dr. Loomis are alive and well.

I'm sure money had a lot to do with Zombie coming back.

But if someone has to do it.

Better Zombie rather than someone else in my opinion.

So although he may be hypocrite here.

I'm not complaining.

Very well stated.....Im in agreement with you brutha
ny ghoul Thursday 3/05/2009 at 01:16 AM | 38608
I just want to say that I thought house of a 1000 corpses was a piece of shit and does need to be remade. The devels rejects however I found a pretty good movie.
krueger4653 Thursday 3/05/2009 at 01:31 AM | 38609
Wow. Zombie getting love on a horror forum?

Who woulda thunk it?
Snoballz Thursday 3/05/2009 at 01:43 AM | 38613
zombie can eat the corn out of my sh#t
Johnny Bisco Thursday 3/05/2009 at 02:07 AM | 38617
zombie can eat the corn out of my sh#t

HAHAHAHAHAHh I was waiting for you Bisco
DaShape Thursday 3/05/2009 at 02:57 AM | 38625
I remember reading and watching a few interviews with Zombie.

He said, when originally approached to remake Halloween, he turned it down.

Because yes, he believed the original was perfect and didn't need to be remade.

It wasn't until they negotiated that he could re-invent the character and story that he showed interest.

After making a phone call to John Carpenter, in which he gave Zombie his blesngs to go ahead with it.

That Zombie finally agreed.

I'm sure the money didn't hurt either.

Is he a hypocrite?

I guess it all depends on how you look at it.

To be honest, I thought you were going to ask if he's a hypocrite for making a sequel.

Which in this case, yes.

Zombie has gone on record saying that his Halloween is a stand alone film.

That he made it for exactly what it is and that's it.

Makes sense, condering he did kill off both Dr. Loomis and Michael.

But now a sequel is being made.

As if we didn't see that one coming.

And miraculously Michael and Dr. Loomis are alive and well.

I'm sure money had a lot to do with Zombie coming back.

But if someone has to do it.

Better Zombie rather than someone else in my opinion.

So although he may be hypocrite here.

I'm not complaining. I agree with you, but I heard that he said all that because he was burnt out from making the first one, but after taking a break and doing other things he said it felt ok to go back.

Also he said that this would be better for him because he could do his own story and not have to worry about fans saying "Where's this or that scene !?"

I actually like that he is making a sequel to his Halloween and not remaking Halloween II.
Michael Aspinwall Thursday 3/05/2009 at 06:15 PM | 38672
HOUSE OF 1000 CORPSES and DEVILS REJECTS are 2 of the BEST mainstream horror releases nce the mid 90's. Especially DEVILS REJECTS.

The Firefly family characters are awesome and will stand the test of time. Spaulding is already a clasc horror character.

People hate on RZ....ok then enjoy TOURISTAS; THE RUINS; CRY WOLF; MIRRORS and every other piece of crap Hollywood offers up.
ny ghoul Thursday 3/05/2009 at 06:30 PM | 38674
I agree with you, but I heard that he said all that because he was burnt out from making the first one, but after taking a break and doing other things he said it felt ok to go back. Also he said that this would be better for him because he could do his own story and not have to worry about fans saying "Where's this or that scene

!?" I actually like that he is making a sequel to his Halloween and not remaking Halloween II.

He may have said that, but then again he said a lot of things.

From the interviews I watched he said that his Halloween is a stand alone film.

Even going as far to say that he had no intention of making a sequel and wanted to start focung more on his muc again.

Obviously that didn't happen.

Which leads me to believe the studio offered him quite a bit of money to put his muc career on hold and make H2.

Whatever the truth, I'm not complaining.ok then enjoy TOURISTAS; THE RUINS; CRY WOLF; MIRRORS and every other piece of crap Hollywood offers up.

Hey, I actually enjoyed The Ruins. I know, I know it was pretty much just trying to capatalize off the recent string of gorefests.

But it was fairly original, the gore was necessary, and the acting was top notch for a film like this.

But the rest I could agree on.

To bad for Mirrors.

I really enjoyed Aja's Hills Have Eyes and Haute Tenon.

Hopefully he can redeem himself.
Insomniac Thursday 3/05/2009 at 07:58 PM | 38682
you know what it is....i actually went to see a show only to find it sold out (TESTAMENT!) so i went to see THE RUINS....itwas ok and well done f/x wise it just was so "regular". theres too many movies like that. Over the past ten years as far as mainstream releases I liked THE HILLS HAVE EYES remake; TCM remake; INDE; HIGH TENON; MALEVOLENCE; RZ's first two; and maybe a few others.

Thats out of like several hundred crap-fests with the likes of Tony Todd or Ken Foree playing a vampire....you get the idea.
ny ghoul Thursday 3/05/2009 at 09:04 PM | 38690


So the questions is: Is Rob Zombie a Hypocrite or did he just change his mind?

There is a difference between “changing your mind” and being a hypocrite. Saying, “I’ll go running today” and then instead you walk is changing your mind. However, bashing and condemning people for doing something, and then going ahead and doing that thing yourself for a big paycheck is being hypocritical.

Hey, if I were offered tons of cash to go back on something I randomly said . . .

hmmmm

This debate went full circle several times a few years ago when RZ's Halloween came out. I'll say the same thing now that I said back then.

There were 4 years difference between RZ's comment about remakes and him remaking Halloween. Can anyone honestly say they've never changed their mind about anything over that length of time? Just looking at us on this forum, how often do we see someone get a new mask and say "I love this new score and I'll never get rid of it" only to see them selling it several months later.

On top of that, RZ is a filmmaker (some would use the term looser than others but that is the case) and filmmaking is a buness. Balancing the artistic aspect with the buness aspect is not unusual and it's not surpring that someone would compromise one aspect for gnificant gain on the other. If cashing in on the remake fad allowed him to secure funding for a future project, who can blame him.

It's very easy for those of us who have never been (and will never be) in that potion to pass judgment and call him a hypocrite. To be blunt I don't like remakes or even sequels but if I were in his potion, there's no way I would have turned down the opportunity.
lblambert Friday 3/06/2009 at 06:16 PM | 38795


So the questions is: Is Rob Zombie a Hypocrite or did he just change his mind?

There is a difference between “changing your mind” and being a hypocrite. Saying, “I’ll go running today” and then instead you walk is changing your mind. However, bashing and condemning people for doing something, and then going ahead and doing that thing yourself for a big paycheck is being hypocritical.

Hey, if I were offered tons of cash to go back on something I randomly said . . .

hmmmm

This debate went full circle several times a few years ago when RZ's Halloween came out. I'll say the same thing now that I said back then.

There were 4 years difference between RZ's comment about remakes and him remaking Halloween. Can anyone honestly say they've never changed their mind about anything over that length of time? Just looking at us on this forum, how often do we see someone get a new mask and say "I love this new score and I'll never get rid of it" only to see them selling it several months later.

On top of that, RZ is a filmmaker (some would use the term looser than others but that is the case) and filmmaking is a buness. Balancing the artistic aspect with the buness aspect is not unusual and it's not surpring that someone would compromise one aspect for gnificant gain on the other. If cashing in on the remake fad allowed him to secure funding for a future project, who can blame him.

It's very easy for those of us who have never been (and will never be) in that potion to pass judgment and call him a hypocrite. To be blunt I don't like remakes or even sequels but if I were in his potion, there's no way I would have turned down the opportunity.

Great points Lee but one thing I'll add (not that this changes your potion or point at all) but even though Zombie made those comments 4 years before the Halloween Remake was release . . . he was attached to the project just 2 years after the comments (pre-production).Again, that really doesn't change anything . . . just thought I'd throw that in there.
DaShape Saturday 3/07/2009 at 04:48 PM | 38866


Great points Lee but one thing I'll add (not that this changes your potion or point at all) but even though Zombie made those comments 4 years before the Halloween Remake was release . . . he was attached to the project just 2 years after the comments (pre-production).Again, that really doesn't change anything . . . just thought I'd throw that in there.

touche
lblambert Saturday 3/07/2009 at 06:57 PM | 38885


Great points Lee but one thing I'll add (not that this changes your potion or point at all) but even though Zombie made those comments 4 years before the Halloween Remake was release . . . he was attached to the project just 2 years after the comments (pre-production).Again, that really doesn't change anything . . . just thought I'd throw that in there.

touche nce it's only two years I can go with Changing his mind but if it was that 4 year span he'd absolutely be a hypocrite
DaShape Sunday 3/08/2009 at 02:14 AM | 38945
I will only say: money money money!

And sequal - H2 - because money, money, money!!!!
Klempo Sunday 3/08/2009 at 01:58 PM | 38998
He remade one of the best horror/slasher movies of all time...he's not a hypocrite, he's just an ass. Even though this whole remake thing really is getting old, there are still some decent remakes out there but what pisses me off about Halloween (2007) is how he made it into a typical story of some kid who is made fun of. Wow, woop de doo, cause we've never seen that before.
DrenTheLiar Sunday 3/08/2009 at 05:14 PM | 39015
No, he is retarded, stupid, ignorant and a fucking asshole!

You want to know why he really decided to remake Halloween?



Does it make sense?
LÜCKMANN Tuesday 3/10/2009 at 03:41 PM | 39233
If he wanted to complete T REX he had to...the Weinstein's forced his hand and thats the truth. Rob was happy doing his new project and the Weinstein's demanded that he return and do the next Halloween because it was a cash cow for the STUDIO. Is Rob a wealthy man?

Is he going to make some dough for H2 YES but lets be a little bit fair....he's not the whore that some make him out to be. The studios play hard ball and all THEY care about is money. Thats why TRICK R TREAT and the POUGHKEEPE TAPES are still in limbo.
ny ghoul Tuesday 3/10/2009 at 05:46 PM | 39239
He remade one of the best horror/slasher movies of all time...he's not a hypocrite, he's just an ass. Even though this whole remake thing really is getting old, there are still some decent remakes out there but what pisses me off about Halloween (2007) is how he made it into a typical story of some kid who is made fun of. Wow, woop de doo, cause we've never seen that before.

Agreed.

I have respect for Rob as an artist, and I don't HATE the new Halloween but rather I don't like some of the choices they made for the character.

I didn't want to see the same movie again, but I also didn't want to see Michael made into a regular kid who was ck in the head and oppressed.

It was still a decent flick, and I enjoyed parts of it... But I just think it could have been much more than what it was.
DarkArtist81 Wednesday 3/11/2009 at 08:12 PM | 39354
He remade one of the best horror/slasher movies of all time...he's not a hypocrite, he's just an ass. Even though this whole remake thing really is getting old, there are still some decent remakes out there but what pisses me off about Halloween (2007) is how he made it into a typical story of some kid who is made fun of. Wow, woop de doo, cause we've never seen that before.

Agreed.

I have respect for Rob as an artist, and I don't HATE the new Halloween but rather I don't like some of the choices they made for the character.

I didn't want to see the same movie again, but I also didn't want to see Michael made into a regular kid who was ck in the head and oppressed.

It was still a decent flick, and I enjoyed parts of it... But I just think it could have been much more than what it was.

Yeah, Josh is right. The way Myers were showed when young is totally bullshit! I believe the most of us rather never know what really happened to Myers before the 1978. At least me not. What pissed me off was the fact that RZ not remake Halloween only, he tried to reinvent the franchise, or am I wrong? Where in the hell someone here, after 30 years, heard Myers was a retarded depresve kid??? Don't take me wrong, I liked the remake while a slasher movie, but not as part of the serie Halloween. I can't see this way. Untill Rejecteds I thought RZ was just another stupid trying to get his pot of gold on Hollywood rainbows, but now with H2 I'm assuming he thought he did a good job, and will keep making untill take a shot on his back.
LÜCKMANN Thursday 3/12/2009 at 11:02 AM | 39424
The only thing that was right about Halloween 2007 was the muc, the lighting in the remake part, and the fact that Michael wore a white mask.
DrenTheLiar Thursday 3/12/2009 at 10:09 PM | 39478
Take away the young michael portion and the dopey scene later where he takes off his mask and pulls out the pic of him and his ster and overall its good. The kills were brutal which I liked.
ny ghoul Friday 3/13/2009 at 07:47 PM | 39592
I actually liked the 'young Michael Myers' scenes the best out of the 2007 remake.

To me it seems that's where the studios let Rob play with the story and the rest was just copy the original (which we've already seen in 78).

Honestly, the whole Michael is a messed up kid from a broken home worked for me.

It's more 'real' to say the least.

That fact that he is unstoppable evil (the original) is a great idea and I LOVE the original for that . . .but it's not as realistic.

My wife works at a psych ward with Booman (one of the largest children psychiatric wards in the country) and the stories they tell of these crazy kids from messed up homes . . .there's a few Michael Myers in there waiting to happen. Some of the stuff in there is TRULY scary and very real.

All the nut cases in there are because of bad parenting and that's where I'm coming from concerning Rob's remake . .. based in reality.

If Michael Myers were to happen in the real world . . .this is how it would most likely be.

Now, I totally see where people are coming from when comparing it to the original . . . but if you can't divorce the remake from the original than you are doomed to hate the remake (which I'm sure most of you don't mind anyways).

Honestly what makes a cooler idea?

Some kid from a broken home or the spawn of the devil?

Obviously pure evil is much COOLER and the little explanation of the original lets our imagination fill in the gaps.

But remember, if Zombie didn't change it up than it would be pointless to remake it.

Now some of you are saying . .. it was pointless to remake it and I agree to a point however if you read my remake blog on HorrorBid's home page http://www.horrorbid.com/blog/blog1.php/2009/03/16/remakes-aamp-horror-collecting you'll see where I credit remakes for introducing younger, new fans to these stories they would have never known otherwise.

Over time they may look upon these remakes the way we look upon the originals . . . you never know.

Again, it's completely cool to judge a film with a biased filter . . . but you should also try and practice looking at them without the original in mind . . .you may find you can find more enjoyment than you thought (or maybe not and if that's the case, no biggie . . . you've still got the original).

de Note (HUGE TANGENT HERE):

Here's another thought about Rob's Halloween Remake.

We've all been agreeing (me too) that they are primarily making these remake to cash in . . . .this is still true in most cases however look at the Halloween Series.

Resurrection was released just a couple years before Rob's Remake.

Seems to me that they were still going to make another Halloween film despite the fact if it was another sequel or remake.

The choice to remake it was just because the series was becoming dull (Honestly, who thought Resurrection was better than H20?) and bringing in Rob's unique way of making films would spice things up a bit.

So in 2007 there most likely was going to be another Halloween film . .. remake or not . . .. however all these other remakes like "Last House on the Left" and "My Bloody Valentine" and so on, these are made STRICTLY to rip off past ideas to make money.

Halloween 07 was not remade from an old story line that died out years ago and was only be revitalized to make cash . . . there was already a series in place and ongoing. (obviously almost all movies are created to make money but you know what I mean).I think that Rob's Halloween had more style and artistic filming than pretty much any other remake we've seen. (I'm not talking about if you liked it or not, just admitting there was obvious gns that this film had more attention to detail and artistic vibe than your typical remake).

The Halloween Remake debate will be ongoing for a long time me thinks.

I actually really love this controversy because it allows us (the fans) to poise different opinions and ideas.

I love reading other member's posts because sometime they make me think about the film from a different perspective.The one great thing about Halloween . .. it may appeal less to the general audience than other horror films and may have less fans but I think it's safe to say Halloween has some of the most pasonate fans out there.
DaShape Thursday 3/19/2009 at 01:02 AM | 40070
My wife works at a psych ward with Booman (one of the largest children psychiatric wards in the country) and the stories they tell of these crazy kids from messed up homes . . .there's a few Michael Myers in there waiting to happen. Some of the stuff in there is TRULY scary and very real.

All the nut cases in there are because of bad parenting and that's where I'm coming from concerning Rob's remake . .. based in reality.

If Michael Myers were to happen in the real world . . .this is how it would most likely be.

This is very true Joel. As you know, I work with these families on a daily bas as well and see the same things. The backstories of a lot of these kids are so horrific most people who don't deal with them would never believe them.
lblambert Thursday 3/19/2009 at 01:13 AM | 40073
My wife works at a psych ward with Booman (one of the largest children psychiatric wards in the country) and the stories they tell of these crazy kids from messed up homes . . .there's a few Michael Myers in there waiting to happen. Some of the stuff in there is TRULY scary and very real.

All the nut cases in there are because of bad parenting and that's where I'm coming from concerning Rob's remake . .. based in reality.

If Michael Myers were to happen in the real world . . .this is how it would most likely be.

This is very true Joel. As you know, I work with these families on a daily bas as well and see the same things. The backstories of a lot of these kids are so horrific most people who don't deal with them would never believe them.

AHHHHHHHHH I was hoping you'd respond Lee!

I know you see a lot "behind the scenes" of these environmentally unstable homes.

I still can't even relate to a certain degree, I only have the stories of my wife and Justin to go by.

Many of these stories make my skin crawl and I can't imagine starring it in the face day in and day out (you guys should appreciate the people like Justin and Lee in their jobs, they see some of the worst things that life can do to people).Again my application to Halloween.

I think Rob's take was just more realistic.

It's not as imaginative as the original (allowing our minds to fill in the blanks . . . and honestly our own imagination can come up with scarier crap than what a movie can show us any day of the week) but it's more real to life at how somebody could really become that monster.

Real life isn't appealing as what our imaginations can cook up . . . I think this is the main underlying reason why many people didn't take to the story changes in the remake.Also back when Halloween 78 came out, we weren't nearly as desentized as we are now . . . it takes a TON more to scare us and a TON more to keep our attention thanks to the upgrades in technology and instant gratification.Here's a bold statement for you guys to debate (just don't hate me).

If the original Halloween 78 came out today it would tank in theaters because the story is too slow paced, the pans and tracking shots are too slow, there's hardly any blood and guts and we've got the internet where we can all spread our opinions and word of mouth gets out MUCH faster.

We love Halloween because it's connected to our past and we've taken ownership of it . . . but if it came out today would we feel the same?
DaShape Thursday 3/19/2009 at 01:46 AM | 40076
Again my application to Halloween.

I think Rob's take was just more realistic.

It's not as imaginative as the original (allowing our minds to fill in the blanks . . . and honestly our own imagination can come up with scarier crap than what a movie can show us any day of the week) but it's more real to life at how somebody could really become that monster.

Real life isn't appealing as what our imaginations can cook up . . . I think this is the main underlying reason why many people didn't take to the story changes in the remake.

I would tend to agree with you here Joel. This is actually what I disliked the most about RZ's veron. The utter lack of motive in the original Halloween was a big part of what made the movie scary. By making the Myers character nothing more than another troubled child who snapped, that element was removed. The one thing that impressed me was Malcom's Loomis was very realistic in the institution scenes. Almost every line of dialogue he uttered in his conversations with young Michael & his mother were things I've heard from real child psychologists I work with.

Also back when Halloween 78 came out, we weren't nearly as desentized as we are now . . . it takes a TON more to scare us and a TON more to keep our attention thanks to the upgrades in technology and instant gratification.

Here's a bold statement for you guys to debate (just don't hate me).

If the original Halloween 78 came out today it would tank in theaters because the story is too slow paced, the pans and tracking shots are too slow, there's hardly any blood and guts and we've got the internet where we can all spread our opinions and word of mouth gets out MUCH faster.

We love Halloween because it's connected to our past and we've taken ownership of it . . . but if it came out today would we feel the same?

Justin and I were having this discuson just last week. I would agree with you 100% that Halloween would not be received by today's audiences as well as it was back in 1978. Half the scares in Halloween took place in your head, not on the screen. 30 years ago, Carpenter understood that if he provided the suspense the audience's imagination would fill in the blanks with images far scarier than anything he could put on the screen. It's a different time now...audiences have different expectations and filmmakers are responding to that.
lblambert Thursday 3/19/2009 at 02:57 AM | 40101
Again my application to Halloween.

I think Rob's take was just more realistic.

It's not as imaginative as the original (allowing our minds to fill in the blanks . . . and honestly our own imagination can come up with scarier crap than what a movie can show us any day of the week) but it's more real to life at how somebody could really become that monster.

Real life isn't appealing as what our imaginations can cook up . . . I think this is the main underlying reason why many people didn't take to the story changes in the remake.

I would tend to agree with you here Joel. This is actually what I disliked the most about RZ's veron. The utter lack of motive in the original Halloween was a big part of what made the movie scary. By making the Myers character nothing more than another troubled child who snapped, that element was removed. The one thing that impressed me was Malcom's Loomis was very realistic in the institution scenes. Almost every line of dialogue he uttered in his conversations with young Michael & his mother were things I've heard from real child psychologists I work with.

Also back when Halloween 78 came out, we weren't nearly as desentized as we are now . . . it takes a TON more to scare us and a TON more to keep our attention thanks to the upgrades in technology and instant gratification.

Here's a bold statement for you guys to debate (just don't hate me).

If the original Halloween 78 came out today it would tank in theaters because the story is too slow paced, the pans and tracking shots are too slow, there's hardly any blood and guts and we've got the internet where we can all spread our opinions and word of mouth gets out MUCH faster.

We love Halloween because it's connected to our past and we've taken ownership of it . . . but if it came out today would we feel the same?

Justin and I were having this discuson just last week. I would agree with you 100% that Halloween would not be received by today's audiences as well as it was back in 1978. Half the scares in Halloween took place in your head, not on the screen. 30 years ago, Carpenter understood that if he provided the suspense the audience's imagination would fill in the blanks with images far scarier than anything he could put on the screen. It's a different time now...audiences have different expectations and filmmakers are responding to that.

We were literally having that exact conversation weren't we Lee. The remakes are great for getting new fans involved. The 18 year old today is quite different then we were. The advent of the internet has just changed the playing ground and horror movies have evolved to become more graphic because of that. Something that scared us when we were 10 doesn't have the same effect on today's 10 year old. Good or bad that's the way it is.

I have stayed out of this discuson because I know how pasonate people are when it comes to HalloweeN. I personally like the remake. I know, I feel like I should be shot.Whether I should or not I will let you decide. I look at movies one way and one way only, it has always been the same nce watching Bambi when I was a kid. Did I enjoy the movie? That is what I ask myself. Rob's re-imagining of Halloween I enjoyed. I still can watch the original until I am blue in the face. Will it ever be the original? No. But is it a bad movie? No. Not to me at least. I enjoyed the younger scenes, I enjoy Rob's take on a bigger badder Myers. If you think H9 is bad go back and watch Resurrection, should we have continued Myers down that path?
Horror Domain - Cursed Evil Overlord Thursday 3/19/2009 at 06:28 AM | 40120
^^^^ brother I agree 100% and AMEN to the last line!
ny ghoul Thursday 3/19/2009 at 06:43 PM | 40174
Again my application to Halloween.

I think Rob's take was just more realistic.

It's not as imaginative as the original (allowing our minds to fill in the blanks . . . and honestly our own imagination can come up with scarier crap than what a movie can show us any day of the week) but it's more real to life at how somebody could really become that monster.

Real life isn't appealing as what our imaginations can cook up . . . I think this is the main underlying reason why many people didn't take to the story changes in the remake.

I would tend to agree with you here Joel. This is actually what I disliked the most about RZ's veron. The utter lack of motive in the original Halloween was a big part of what made the movie scary. By making the Myers character nothing more than another troubled child who snapped, that element was removed. The one thing that impressed me was Malcom's Loomis was very realistic in the institution scenes. Almost every line of dialogue he uttered in his conversations with young Michael & his mother were things I've heard from real child psychologists I work with.

Also back when Halloween 78 came out, we weren't nearly as desentized as we are now . . . it takes a TON more to scare us and a TON more to keep our attention thanks to the upgrades in technology and instant gratification.

Here's a bold statement for you guys to debate (just don't hate me).

If the original Halloween 78 came out today it would tank in theaters because the story is too slow paced, the pans and tracking shots are too slow, there's hardly any blood and guts and we've got the internet where we can all spread our opinions and word of mouth gets out MUCH faster.

We love Halloween because it's connected to our past and we've taken ownership of it . . . but if it came out today would we feel the same?

Justin and I were having this discuson just last week. I would agree with you 100% that Halloween would not be received by today's audiences as well as it was back in 1978. Half the scares in Halloween took place in your head, not on the screen. 30 years ago, Carpenter understood that if he provided the suspense the audience's imagination would fill in the blanks with images far scarier than anything he could put on the screen. It's a different time now...audiences have different expectations and filmmakers are responding to that.

We were literally having that exact conversation weren't we Lee. The remakes are great for getting new fans involved. The 18 year old today is quite different then we were. The advent of the internet has just changed the playing ground and horror movies have evolved to become more graphic because of that. Something that scared us when we were 10 doesn't have the same effect on today's 10 year old. Good or bad that's the way it is.

I have stayed out of this discuson because I know how pasonate people are when it comes to HalloweeN. I personally like the remake. I know, I feel like I should be shot.Whether I should or not I will let you decide. I look at movies one way and one way only, it has always been the same nce watching Bambi when I was a kid. Did I enjoy the movie? That is what I ask myself. Rob's re-imagining of Halloween I enjoyed. I still can watch the original until I am blue in the face. Will it ever be the original? No. But is it a bad movie? No. Not to me at least. I enjoyed the younger scenes, I enjoy Rob's take on a bigger badder Myers. If you think H9 is bad go back and watch Resurrection, should we have continued Myers down that path?they could have had Zombie make a sequel that was good!

why mess with something that isnt broke??????????????????? if you ate a great meal and you puked it up and ate it, it wouldnt taste as good as the first time in fact it would be awful, same goes for 99% of remakes and 75% of sequels

if the original was great dont fuck with it period!

if they want people to become fans of the original series re-release them in theatres

as far as todays kids most of them wouldnt know a good movie if it slapped them in the face. "ooooh some guy named Rob Zombie made a horror movie it must be good"

and from my experiences seeing a movie with a bunch of thoe said kids none of them know how to shut the hell up and let me either enjoy or hate the movie cuz they all just go to say they saw it openeing weekend even though all they are doing is talking about school and texting people and i cant stand it
Johnny Bisco Thursday 3/19/2009 at 06:56 PM | 40177
Again my application to Halloween.

I think Rob's take was just more realistic.

It's not as imaginative as the original (allowing our minds to fill in the blanks . . . and honestly our own imagination can come up with scarier crap than what a movie can show us any day of the week) but it's more real to life at how somebody could really become that monster.

Real life isn't appealing as what our imaginations can cook up . . . I think this is the main underlying reason why many people didn't take to the story changes in the remake.

I would tend to agree with you here Joel. This is actually what I disliked the most about RZ's veron. The utter lack of motive in the original Halloween was a big part of what made the movie scary. By making the Myers character nothing more than another troubled child who snapped, that element was removed. The one thing that impressed me was Malcom's Loomis was very realistic in the institution scenes. Almost every line of dialogue he uttered in his conversations with young Michael & his mother were things I've heard from real child psychologists I work with.

Also back when Halloween 78 came out, we weren't nearly as desentized as we are now . . . it takes a TON more to scare us and a TON more to keep our attention thanks to the upgrades in technology and instant gratification.

Here's a bold statement for you guys to debate (just don't hate me).

If the original Halloween 78 came out today it would tank in theaters because the story is too slow paced, the pans and tracking shots are too slow, there's hardly any blood and guts and we've got the internet where we can all spread our opinions and word of mouth gets out MUCH faster.

We love Halloween because it's connected to our past and we've taken ownership of it . . . but if it came out today would we feel the same?

Justin and I were having this discuson just last week. I would agree with you 100% that Halloween would not be received by today's audiences as well as it was back in 1978. Half the scares in Halloween took place in your head, not on the screen. 30 years ago, Carpenter understood that if he provided the suspense the audience's imagination would fill in the blanks with images far scarier than anything he could put on the screen. It's a different time now...audiences have different expectations and filmmakers are responding to that.

We were literally having that exact conversation weren't we Lee. The remakes are great for getting new fans involved. The 18 year old today is quite different then we were. The advent of the internet has just changed the playing ground and horror movies have evolved to become more graphic because of that. Something that scared us when we were 10 doesn't have the same effect on today's 10 year old. Good or bad that's the way it is.

I have stayed out of this discuson because I know how pasonate people are when it comes to HalloweeN. I personally like the remake. I know, I feel like I should be shot.Whether I should or not I will let you decide. I look at movies one way and one way only, it has always been the same nce watching Bambi when I was a kid. Did I enjoy the movie? That is what I ask myself. Rob's re-imagining of Halloween I enjoyed. I still can watch the original until I am blue in the face. Will it ever be the original? No. But is it a bad movie? No. Not to me at least. I enjoyed the younger scenes, I enjoy Rob's take on a bigger badder Myers. If you think H9 is bad go back and watch Resurrection, should we have continued Myers down that path?they could have had Zombie make a sequel that was good!

why mess with something that isnt broke??????????????????? if you ate a great meal and you puked it up and ate it, it wouldnt taste as good as the first time in fact it would be awful, same goes for 99% of remakes and 75% of sequels

if the original was great dont fuck with it period!

if they want people to become fans of the original series re-release them in theatres

as far as todays kids most of them wouldnt know a good movie if it slapped them in the face. "ooooh some guy named Rob Zombie made a horror movie it must be good"

and from my experiences seeing a movie with a bunch of thoe said kids none of them know how to shut the hell up and let me either enjoy or hate the movie cuz they all just go to say they saw it openeing weekend even though all they are doing is talking about school and texting people and i cant stand it

The average film goer's expectations today are just different than they were.

What we think is good they may think sucks and visa versa.

We're not wrong and they're not wrong, it's just a difference in opinions.

As far as remakes introducing older stories to younger audiences . . . If you showed the Original Halloween to new viewers today it would not go over well mply because there is a big difference in American culture and attention spans.

Things HAVE changes and so has the way society views it's entertainment (and there is nothing we can do to stop this).

The only way to stop this growing trend is to destroy the internet (and that aint happening).

Information is at everybody's fingertips and we can get whatever we want whenever we want it.

Slow paced movies and films today are only appreciated by rather old skool fans or the elite film snobs (like the academy - and I'll put myself partially in here too, it's only fair).

Unfortunately the majority of audiences are A.D.D. and films are made to appease them.You're right Bisco . . . a movie in a theater has to compete with texting and short attention spans.

If it fails then the movie gets horrible word of mouth and it dies after it's opening weekend. (and nce my job profeson is in marketing I know that word of mouth is the MOST important thing in adverting . . . and the internet has made this even more important).

The General audience is bigger than us fans so their opinions of films greatly outweigh ours . . .they control the word of mouth.

So from a buness stand point who would you cater to?

Of coarse you cater to the majority because they are the ones who will make or break you . . . and if you want to make any money (which that's almost what ALL movies are made for) then you'd be wise to follow the trend.

My best Example of this . . . . "WATCHMEN".

Made for the fans and it TANKED due to horrible word of mouth.

Thanks goodness for independent and foreign films eh?
DaShape Thursday 3/19/2009 at 07:42 PM | 40181
you just proved my point that the average kid wouldnt know a good movie it they got hit in the head with the film can

ive had conversations with kids that think the original halloween is a boring piece of shit, they dont want suspense and build up they want it now and thats a damn shame

hey everyone is out to make a buck, thats fine i get it

make a buck on a "slick hip" sequel and leave my originals alone i dont think thats asking for much
Johnny Bisco Thursday 3/19/2009 at 08:08 PM | 40186
If you think H9 is bad go back and watch Resurrection, should we have continued Myers down that path?

There's another option...don't make any more Myers movies and release something original like Trick or Treat instead. Unfortunately the majority of audiences are A.D.D. and films are made to appease them.

Running zombies anyone?

you just proved my point that the average kid wouldnt know a good movie it they got hit in the head with the film can

ive had conversations with kids that think the original halloween is a boring piece of shit, they dont want suspense and build up they want it now and thats a damn shame

Amen brother!
lblambert Friday 3/20/2009 at 01:06 AM | 40211
What can we do? times are different and the social climate of today is vastly different to that of the 70's and 80's. LHOTL is one of my true favourites. When I first saw the trailer to the remake I was very upset with how the characters looked specifically Junior. Why couldnt they retain the original look? My buddy put it in perspective for me and was like who the fuck looks like Krug; Junior and Weasel these days? Anyone under 30 would be like wtf. I think that a lot of us who are older lived through some truly special times when it comes to horror cinema. The movies were better for many reasons and I really think the social aspect is huge. Now that being said...while we do live in the ADD/gimme constant action/gimme high scores generation that doesnt mean we cant have fast zombies and slick production and STILL have a good flick! Some have achieved that....I think 28 Days was killer like that. Then theres a huge gaggle of modern films that just suck.

Some theatres play HALLOWEEN and DAWN OF THE DEAD just on Halloween night....limited runs like that are real cool. I'd love to see more short runs of old school films but the films are going to be too dated for most movie goers. It'll never happen.
ny ghoul Friday 3/20/2009 at 02:57 AM | 40223
What can we do? times are different and the social climate of today is vastly different to that of the 70's and 80's.

I think that a lot of us who are older lived through some truly special times when it comes to horror cinema.

Circle gets the square!
DaShape Friday 3/20/2009 at 04:36 AM | 40236
well said Ghoul!

Horror Domain - Cursed Evil Overlord Saturday 3/21/2009 at 05:38 AM | 40364
We can change that. I'll raise my kids on nothing but the clascs so they can appreciate the GOOD horror when they grow up.

DrenTheLiar Saturday 3/21/2009 at 12:30 PM | 40377
I dont think we can get our kids past viewing certain films as having a dated look; but you're right....we can for sure raise our kids to appreciate old school horror and provide them with a good education on the genre. Im eang my kids into it. They're still young so they get MONSTER SQUAD; CREEP SHOW ; CRITTERS etc. Im going to wait a few years before unleashing HALLOWEEN and TCM on them lol. And then wait another 10 for MANIAC and LHOTL lol!
ny ghoul Saturday 3/21/2009 at 04:11 PM | 40400
We can change that. I'll raise my kids on nothing but the clascs so they can appreciate the GOOD horror when they grow up.

thats what ive been doing with my son i started him out on clasc universal and godzilla movies and monster squad

he has worked his way up to some friday the 13ths (the cheeer ones) he loves halloween 3 but hasnt worked the courage up for other halloweens yet
Johnny Bisco Sunday 3/22/2009 at 02:59 PM | 40556
but I wouldn’t dare want to “remake” it. It’s like a band trying to be another band.



Been done, and wouldn't you know, they're like RZ!
Cock Diesel Wednesday 3/25/2009 at 06:45 AM | 40900
but I wouldn’t dare want to “remake” it. It’s like a band trying to be another band.



Been done, and wouldn't you know, they're like RZ!HAHAHAHAHAHA

DaShape Thursday 4/09/2009 at 05:51 AM | 42192