The Halloween Franchise

[thecolorsblend]

So, there's been an update about the proposed Halloween TV series. It says quite a bit but at the same time, it doesn't say much at all.

Halloween TV series: "A creative reset"

Miramax Television in October signed a deal with Trancas to develop and co-produce a Halloween TV series, which is envisioned to potentially launch a cinematic universe spanning film and television. (Miramax and Blumhouse collaborated with Trancas on the successful recent Halloween movie trilogy.)

"We're on a fast track, it's a big priority for us. We've had lots of exciting conversations in recent months with a number of really talented people, and I think we'll have a pretty good idea of what we're going to be doing very soon," Helwig said, adding, "We're hoping to lock down the creative team very soon."

While the search for a writer is still ongoing, the idea for the TV series already has been identified.

"It's a big world," Helwig said of the 13-movie franchise. The most recent trilogy culminating with Halloween Ends provided a fitting conclusion to the story, "so I don't think that is an opportunity to go off the back of that."

So the series is going back to the Halloween franchise's origins.

"The foundation of it is the original film, the John Carpenter movie, the characters of that film, and perhaps a group of characters that we haven't really focused on that much in recent film versions or even in a number of them," Helwig said. "It's a creative reset completely and going back to the original film, as opposed to spinning out of any of the more recent film adaptations."

https://deadline.com/2024/03/miramax-the-gentlemen-tv-season-2-halloween-series-1235848616

I have no idea what it is about media types that they'll use the word "reboot" in every gd possible context except the CORRECT one.

So, is this a reboot? Is it a continuation of something else? Good luck trying to figure it out based on all that verbal diarrhea. "It's a creative reset completely and going back to the original film". Wtf does that even mean??

3C Films is being a lot more charitable about all this than me.

It's early days yet. Maybe a little too early for me to get as annoyed as I am right now. But when these media dickwipes talk out of both sides of their mouths like that, it's frustrating. If they're going to issue a public statement, then the absolute LEAST they can do is make it coherent. "Yeah it's a reset which directly ties in with the original!" Whaaaa??

Hopefully, the rest of you aren't as cranky tonight as I apparently am.

[The Joker]

Hopefully, the rest of you aren't as cranky tonight as I apparently am.

LOL

It really does read like, "Ok. Let's issue a statement about the series, buuuuuuut let's keep this as absolutely and incredibly vague as humanly possible! Just to keep the chatter going, and arguments coming with the fans on who's right, and who's wrong!" *snicker snicker*

If I had to take a wild guess, it sorta sounds like yet another "Ignore everything outside the 1978 Halloween" timeline. With Jamie Lee Curtis/Laurie Strode being done, I just get the feeling that there was a offer made to Paul Rudd to return to the franchise, and to provide a mainstream/casual viewer hook to become interested in yet another Halloween continuity. Which is just me basing this guess on that, "Group of characters that we haven't really focused on that much in recent film versions or even in a number of them" statement.

Just sounds like we're likely to see familiar characters with (sorta) new faces pop back up. Rudd returning as Tommy Doyle might be a deal with he's not exactly the same Tommy from H6, where that film events and all the thorn stuff can be ignored, but effectively it's Paul Rudd back as Tommy. The same could be done with Danielle Harris where the powers that be could decide if this Jamie Lloyd is Laurie's daughter or not? Tom Atkins returning as a different, but similar Dr. Challis. ect

How pleasing that approach will ultimately be is anyone's guess, but it just doesn't sound like they're going absolutely go back to square 1, and choosing to take the same route as Blumhouse. Solidifying H1978, and having familiar faces return as similar characters...

I don't know which franchise has more timelines out of Halloween and Texas Chainsaw Massacre, but it's got to be a close race.

[The Joker]

1981 advertisement for the original "Halloween" premiere on NBC. Coinciding with the theatrical release of "Halloween II".

[The Joker]

Reviving this thread just in time for Halloween, but I thought these were pretty fun and well made.

[Silver Nemesis]

I watched Halloween Ends on Netflix last week. Tonight I'm planning to watch the other Halloween III, Season of the Witch, which is still my favourite entry in the series. It's the perfect film to begin Halloween week and get the viewer into the spirit of the season.

Other Halloween films I'm planning to watch over the next week or so include Ghostwatch (1992), Hocus Pocus (1993), Sleepy Hollow (1999), The Blair Witch Project (1999) and Trick 'r Treat (2007).

[The Joker]

I watched Halloween Ends on Netflix last week.

I am going to assume that you have seen the Halloween Blumhouse trilogy, Silver.

Care to share your thoughts?

[Silver Nemesis]

I watched Halloween Ends on Netflix last week.

I am going to assume that you have seen the Halloween Blumhouse trilogy, Silver.

Care to share your thoughts?

I don't have terribly strong feelings about it. I don't love it, but I don't hate it either. It's ok.

Halloween '18 is essentially another of those back-to-basics retreads of Carpenter's movie that we get every ten years or so. I liked it more than Zombie's 2007 film, but not as much as The Return of Michael Myers. I suppose I'd rank it roughly on a par with H20.

My only real issue with it, other than its lack of originality, is that I don't buy into the characterisation of Laurie as a survivalist nut who's dead certain Myers is going to return. If it was the Laurie who'd lived through the events of Halloween II and H20 then I'd have no trouble accepting that characterisation. But if this is meant to be the meek and vulnerable Laurie from the original film, without the events of the sequels to instil the expectation of Myers' inevitable return, then I don't get why she's so sure her one-time assailant is coming back after four decades. I understand that she's got PTSD, but I don't think that's a solid basis for her conviction that a sexagenarian Myers is coming back. Again, if she'd lived through H2 and H20 I'd buy it. But if she's only lived through the original film and has lived a relatively normal life since, then it doesn't quite work for me.

Halloween Kills has a strong opening sequence that effectively captures the look and feel of the early instalments in the series. The storyline about the town vigilantes elevates it above being just another retread, and I like the appearance by the Silver Shamrock masks. It's a solid continuation of the previous film and a decent sequel.

I didn't think Halloween Ends was as terrible as its reputation led me to expect, but maybe that's because I went into it with low expectations. I thought it was ok. I appreciate that they tried to do something different, a la Friday the 13th Part V. But I didn't buy into the central romance, or the way Allyson instantly falls in love with Corey. The bully characters were so stereotypical and one-dimensional they belonged in a Stephen King story. I thought the final showdown was formulaic and unintentionally comical in places. I don't understand why Laurie went through the charade of pretending to kill herself. To lure Corey out? Why? He was coming for her anyway. Did she really need to dial 911? Couldn't she have just faked the telephone conversation if she knew Corey was listening in? That all seemed a bit forced to me. So it definitely has issues and is the weakest entry in the trilogy, but I didn't hate it.

As a general point, I miss the subtlety of the 1978 film. The most haunting moments from Carpenter's movie were the quieter scenes, like when Laurie sees Michael standing by the washing line looking up at her window, or the final shots of the film playing to the sound of Myers' breathing. There's very little blood in the first movie. It didn't need gore, and that restraint set it apart from other horror franchises of that era. I don't think there need to be any more Michael Myers movies after the recent trilogy. The formula's played out (I just realised the Halloween franchise now has more instalments than the Friday the 13th series!). But if they must make more, then I'd like to see a return to the subtler approach of the 1978 movie.

I've said numerous times that my favourite movie in the Halloween franchise is Season of the Witch. I don't think it's the best entry in the series (that would be the original), but it's my favourite on a purely subjective level. However, if I were to pick a Michael Myers headcanon trilogy, it'd be Halloween '78, Halloween II and The Return of Michael Myers.

[The Joker]

I don't have terribly strong feelings about it. I don't love it, but I don't hate it either. It's ok.

Halloween '18 is essentially another of those back-to-basics retreads of Carpenter's movie that we get every ten years or so. I liked it more than Zombie's 2007 film, but not as much as The Return of Michael Myers. I suppose I'd rank it roughly on a par with H20.

My only real issue with it, other than its lack of originality, is that I don't buy into the characterisation of Laurie as a survivalist nut who's dead certain Myers is going to return. If it was the Laurie who'd lived through the events of Halloween II and H20 then I'd have no trouble accepting that characterisation. But if this is meant to be the meek and vulnerable Laurie from the original film, without the events of the sequels to instil the expectation of Myers' inevitable return, then I don't get why she's so sure her one-time assailant is coming back after four decades. I understand that she's got PTSD, but I don't think that's a solid basis for her conviction that a sexagenarian Myers is coming back. Again, if she'd lived through H2 and H20 I'd buy it. But if she's only lived through the original film and has lived a relatively normal life since, then it doesn't quite work for me.

Perfectly understandable, and I would even say it's indicative of Hollywood taking the "different than" route, and since we already had the PTSD-shrouded Laurie in H2O, PTSD-surivalist Laurie would be the next step even if it was a bit of a stretch.

Halloween Kills has a strong opening sequence that effectively captures the look and feel of the early instalments in the series. The storyline about the town vigilantes elevates it above being just another retread, and I like the appearance by the Silver Shamrock masks. It's a solid continuation of the previous film and a decent sequel.

I had some problems with HK, but overall felt it was a solid follow up to H2018. Some choices were a bit clunky, just as they were in H2018, but what the film had in spades was this continued momentum where Michael was arguably at his most vicious, and the town of Haddonfield was gradually succumbing to mania and chaos.

I didn't think Halloween Ends was as terrible as its reputation led me to expect, but maybe that's because I went into it with low expectations. I thought it was ok. I appreciate that they tried to do something different, a la Friday the 13th Part V. But I didn't buy into the central romance, or the way Allyson instantly falls in love with Corey. The bully characters were so stereotypical and one-dimensional they belonged in a Stephen King story. I thought the final showdown was formulaic and unintentionally comical in places. I don't understand why Laurie went through the charade of pretending to kill herself. To lure Corey out? Why? He was coming for her anyway. Did she really need to dial 911? Couldn't she have just faked the telephone conversation if she knew Corey was listening in? That all seemed a bit forced to me. So it definitely has issues and is the weakest entry in the trilogy, but I didn't hate it.

I watched this one again just the other night, and yeah, it's OK. Unfortunately, I can't help but think, every single time, that I just wish everyone involved would have stuck to landing with this trilogy rather than the road ultimately taken. As the crescendo that the previous installments were building up to (Hk's extended ending hammers this home), just winds up discarded and deflated in favor of trying something different. Which just comes across as Blumhouse becoming disinterested in the original direction/story ideas, and decided to try something else, but as a consequence, resulting in HE being incredibly disjointed from the overall cohesion of H2018/HK. Which isn't particularly satisfying.

As a general point, I miss the subtlety of the 1978 film. The most haunting moments from Carpenter's movie were the quieter scenes, like when Laurie sees Michael standing by the washing line looking up at her window, or the final shots of the film playing to the sound of Myers' breathing. There's very little blood in the first movie. It didn't need gore, and that restraint set it apart from other horror franchises of that era. I don't think there need to be any more Michael Myers movies after the recent trilogy. The formula's played out (I just realised the Halloween franchise now has more instalments than the Friday the 13th series!). But if they must make more, then I'd like to see a return to the subtler approach of the 1978 movie.

I've said numerous times that my favourite movie in the Halloween franchise is Season of the Witch. I don't think it's the best entry in the series (that would be the original), but it's my favourite on a purely subjective level. However, if I were to pick a Michael Myers headcanon trilogy, it'd be Halloween '78, Halloween II and The Return of Michael Myers.

I think H4 still has the reigns for the most shocking ending that has come out of the franchise. It's great!

[thecolorsblend]

Ages ago, I read somebody on reddit claim that Laurie's arc in the Blumhouse films would actually make more sense if it happened in reverse.

Ends shows Laurie determined to live a happy and comfortable life. But then, Michael Myers comes knocking.

Kills shows Laurie sacked out in the hospital recovering from her injuries but convinced she got Michael. She then discovers how mistaken she is.

2018 shows Laurie hiding out in her own isolated compound as she prepares for her final showdown. This time, she snares Myers in a trap and leaves him for dead.

I don't mind the Blumhouse films as they are. But I do think that redditor has a point when he suggests reversing her arc. In retrospect, that might've been the better way to go.

The most I ask of any Halloween sequel is to not make me wish I was watching the original film instead. Most Myers-oriented Halloween sequel have some kind of redeeming quality for me. Something that draws me in. The only real exceptions to that are Halloween 05, Zombie's H2 and, to a lesser degree, either cut of Halloween 06. The rest of the Myers films all have SOMEthing about them that I can enjoy.

For everything else, there's the original.