HNT
Grizzled HMaM Vet
Horror in General & Everything Else Moderator[/i]
Kiss my tuchis
Posts: 6,296
|
Post by HNT on Oct 28, 2010 11:31:26 GMT -5
I don't think you fully get what I mean. Sure, Bay of Blood, Texas Chainsaw Massacre, and Halloween are all slashers and only one of them could conceivably have been first. That is not a problem for me, because I think that they all are variations on the theme and are interesting, fresh, and worth watching. I don' think that there is anything in Halloween 5 that I needed or even wanted expanded upon from the films that preceeded it. It is so derivative that it isn't even fun to watch. That is the difference in my eyes.
|
|
|
Post by CT on Oct 29, 2010 0:53:53 GMT -5
I love how the commercial in HIII always just happens to be coming on whenever someone decides to turn on their set...
|
|
HNT
Grizzled HMaM Vet
Horror in General & Everything Else Moderator[/i]
Kiss my tuchis
Posts: 6,296
|
Post by HNT on Oct 29, 2010 8:53:38 GMT -5
I love how the commercial in HIII always just happens to be coming on whenever someone decides to turn on their set... That is the most realistic thing about the movie. "Head on. Apply directly to the forehead." Need I say more?
|
|
|
Post by GL on Oct 29, 2010 9:42:06 GMT -5
I don't think you fully get what I mean. Sure, Bay of Blood, Texas Chainsaw Massacre, and Halloween are all slashers and only one of them could conceivably have been first. That is not a problem for me, because I think that they all are variations on the theme and are interesting, fresh, and worth watching. I don' think that there is anything in Halloween 5 that I needed or even wanted expanded upon from the films that preceeded it. It is so derivative that it isn't even fun to watch. That is the difference in my eyes. Somewhat, I do, but if you really think about it, there's really no point at all in doing these kinds of films. It's far more likely to find films like these to be roundly trashed by critics or just ignore them altogether, they're never winning any awards at the events designed to celebrate the achievements in the field, and are considered to be somewhat of a black hole in terms of getting star talent to appear in them. When you add in what they, overall, are supposed to be about, they provide nothing of any value compared to what is instead celebrated and admired in the medium and focus instead on the outskirts or even beyond that in their appeal. Now, taking all those into the equation, its easy to see that these films are an unnecessary part of filmmaking as a whole, so answering the question "Why did they make this?" in regards to horror at least, will always come out negatively in that regard, so instead, you have to simply focus on what entertainment you derive from watching it only, with every other factor completely eliminated from your mind when watching them. Everything else just seems like a total waste and utterly unnecessary when watching these, so if you don't watch them, how do you know you're not going to generate any entertainment from them?
|
|
HNT
Grizzled HMaM Vet
Horror in General & Everything Else Moderator[/i]
Kiss my tuchis
Posts: 6,296
|
Post by HNT on Oct 29, 2010 10:59:19 GMT -5
Right, these movies are fun if and when they have the possibility to surprise you. What sticks out in my mind from the genre? The raft scene from "The Burning"; the opening sequence to the original Halloween; the first time I saw Freddy in the original NOES; the meathook and sledge hammer scenes from TCM. Why do these things stick out in my mind? Because I did not see them coming. Because they shocked me. Because they scared me. Do any of the unecessary sequels have the capability of doing that? Hell no!!!
|
|
|
Post by CT on Oct 29, 2010 11:52:12 GMT -5
Right, these movies are fun if and when they have the possibility to surprise you. What sticks out in my mind from the genre? The raft scene from "The Burning"; the opening sequence to the original Halloween; the first time I saw Freddy in the original NOES; the meathook and sledge hammer scenes from TCM. Why do these things stick out in my mind? Because I did not see them coming. Because they shocked me. Because they scared me. Do any of the unecessary sequels have the capability of doing that? Hell no!!!
|
|
|
Post by Jen on Oct 29, 2010 13:23:12 GMT -5
Right, these movies are fun if and when they have the possibility to surprise you. What sticks out in my mind from the genre? The raft scene from "The Burning"; the opening sequence to the original Halloween; the first time I saw Freddy in the original NOES; the meathook and sledge hammer scenes from TCM. Why do these things stick out in my mind? Because I did not see them coming. Because they shocked me. Because they scared me. Do any of the unecessary sequels have the capability of doing that? Hell no!!! I agree with this, but admit that I have fun with a lot of the sequels. I think it is mostly nostalgia with me though. I grew up with these movies or these characters or this style of film. And it's fun for me to revisit that time. It's rarely about the quality of film, as I USUALLY have to admit they aren't all that great....lol.....and don't measure up to the original films (there are exceptions. I genuinely love New Nightmare and ANOES part 3, for instance).
|
|
|
Post by The Walking Dude on Oct 29, 2010 15:56:31 GMT -5
Does anybody else see the irony, that the thread for the only part of the series that didn't go the generic sequel route has evloved into a discussion of generic sequels. Anyhoo. 1 more day to Halloween, Halloween, Halloween ...
|
|
|
Post by CT on Oct 29, 2010 18:06:31 GMT -5
Same for me Jen.
I'm watching Halloween III right now and it's actually a more sinister plot line than the Myers ones if you think about. I mean Michael went after teens and adults and this dude was cooking little kids faces inside their Halloween masks nationwide lol.
|
|
|
Post by abraxas on Oct 30, 2010 17:08:31 GMT -5
Im watching it right at this very moment
|
|
|
Post by HiderInTheHouse on May 31, 2011 14:22:57 GMT -5
Gave it a 5 just cuz it was different. Oh and because of the awesomenesss of Tom Atkins.
|
|
|
Post by GL on Jun 1, 2011 9:46:15 GMT -5
YES! Thank you for that. No Michael, BFD. It's still a good film.
|
|
|
Post by HiderInTheHouse on Jun 1, 2011 13:38:44 GMT -5
I will admit that I didn't appreciate that fact until I was older. As a kid I was always saying to myself, "This is fucking garbage! Where the fuck is Michael Myers!"
|
|
|
Post by GL on Jun 2, 2011 10:12:38 GMT -5
Well, I saw the films completely out of order so this was my fifth film in the series so I was already used to going out of context from film to film.
|
|
|
Post by HiderInTheHouse on Jun 27, 2011 11:23:32 GMT -5
You still weren't surprised the first time you saw it and there was no Michael Myers?
|
|