Halloween Ii Puns

Both films had Michael Myers set on fire but which ending do you prefer?

H18

or

HII '81

Yes I know people have different opinions than I but one of the issues aside the sibling twist people have with II is the added body count and showing more gore.

But that's literally what's happening in Kills, hell Kills has an entire massacre of fire men.

If Loomis was working with Michael since 1963, and Laurie wasn't adopted by the Strodes until 1966, I can't seem to make sense of how he would not know that the two were siblings. Laurie was even shown to have visited Michael at one point. It seemingly only makes sense if Loomis started treating Michael AFTER Laurie's adoption and the subsequent sealing of her records.

For one thing, the sister plot point could have easily been explained away as just a mix up of information and rumors that were tossed around during the chaos of Halloween night back in 1978. It could still explain why Laurie is such a focus for Michael and so central to the story, but do away with the sister aspect.

Secondly, this entire town is still traumatized and hung up on the murder of three teenagers 40 years ago? Wouldn't it make more sense for ALL of the killings that took place between I & II to have a more lasting impact on Haddonfield?

Not to mention how Haddonfield Memorial Hospital plays a such a significant role in both II and Kills. There would have a been much more distinct and definite continuation as to why that hospital is so important to the residents of Haddonfield, and why they feel so strongly about safeguarding it.

They continue to show Michael Myers as indestructible in Halloween 2018 and Halloween Kills, so for him to have survived the events of II would also make sense.

And the only reason Michael Myers is who he is in the new timeline is specifically because of how the old timeline built him up. There's no way MM would be the villain he is in the new timeline, if it weren't for the old timeline making him who he is. You can say there was too much story in II that would have to be accounted for in the new timeline. But that's just lazy writing if that's their reasoning. The creators of the new timeline basically hijacked the character and everything that built him up by not lending any credit whatsoever to the old timeline. Which they could have done by simply keeping II as canon.

You could also say the exact same thing about Laurie Strode. The only reason we care about her so much in the new timeline, again, is because of the way she was built up in the old timeline. Without the old timeline to consider, Laurie would just be a character who happened to survive the attack that night, who would be on a personal vendetta for revenge against MM, and who could offer some insight as to what happened. That's not to take away from her experience and the trauma she suffered. But if you take away all of the installments of the franchise, and leave it only to just Halloween 1978 and Halloween 2018/Kills, then she's just another character. Had they included II in the canon, then I could see why she would be such an integral character in the new timeline and the story overall.

With all that said, I am genuinely enjoying t

View Poll

I'm a big defender of the Rob Zombie Halloween films I love both the remake and it's sequel and I always have a blast watching these films but of the Rob Zombie Halloweens I think the sequel to his remake is the most interesting the series has been since the first film.

It didn't stick to the predictable formula like the last two Halloween films have been doing. I know Rob Zombie didn't exactly like II cause he was forced by the studio but I'm glad he still made it.

What i love about RZHII is that it isn't cookie cutter, and it's also the only Halloween film to not include the famous theme song (except on the menu screen on the blu ray/dvd release)

I'm not a fan of the White Horse garbage and the kid who they chose to play Little Kid Michael in 2 was an awful actor wish they were able to bring back the kid who played him in 1.

This is a genuine question. I never understood why people love this movie.

McBride and Green have tip toed around specifically Halloween II 81’ questions and still stated in interviews that their film picks up right after ‘78! What would be the point of showing footage from it already? In one interview DGG said, there has only been one good Halloween sequel being Halloween II ‘81. “It would be really neat if all the ideas came together, but it never happened because then we got Season of the Witch and all the others films kinda got lost along the way.”

Mr. Sandman” will probably be playing on the radio when Laurie wakes up, or a Silver Shamrocks commercial. Would not be surprised to see the Man In Black in Halloween Ends just as a fake out Red Herring.

Title is somewhat self explanatory, but I recently watched the entire franchise for the first time in October. Despite being a major cinephile and horror aficionado, I had never watched even a minute of any of the films. First, I absolutely loved it and there’s a craft (mainly 1 - 6) and watchability factor that really sets it apart in genre.

By a quirk, I ended up saving Halloween II for last and was absolutely shocked by how good it was — not only within the context of the franchise itself, but objectively as a piece of filmmaking, especially that first 40 minutes (and also the ending with Mr. Sandman and cutting from Laurie’s hallowed, deadened expression to the burning Myers mask — wowza).

After watching the first 40 minutes three separate times already, I really do think it’s the best stretch of filmmaking in any of the Halloween films (including the original), and at the top of the list for any franchise horror picture — I think it’s that good.

Dean Cundey is at the top of his game, it’s got a beautifully executed edit that makes it fly by with a real sense of immediacy and anxiety, has a narrative that really pulls you in with its sense of urgency and reality, has a number of frightening and chilling sequences, and it’s got a core of fantastic performances that transcend the genre.

While the film does drag in the middle section, the first 40 minutes along with the last 20 might make this my favorite Halloween film — and certainly the best in terms of its craft.

Just wanted to see what others thought and if anyone feels similar!

As a small tangent, Halloween II feels like the type of film that Gordon Green et al. are trying to make, and in fact are taking many ideas and cues from.

I heard Carpenter doesn’t like Halloween II, and I really can’t imagine why. Knowing that many directors (especially ‘auteurs’) are quite prideful and competitive, it feels like it might be because much of it is so well executed — but this me just thinking out loud with no knowledge on the subject.

I wasn't fond of Rob Zombie's remake of Halloween but I loved his sequel to it, I thought it got everything right. Michael Myers is a brutal beast who doesn't hold back, there's plenty of gore, I thought Laurie Strode finally had a great arc and Scout Taylor Compton was terrific at playing someone struggling to maintain her sanity. I loved the extended reference to the original sequel.

Which is why I was shocked so many people hated Halloween II because it gave us everything we wished on the first one: gore, a fresh direction, genuine scares, Laurie was more fleshed out and we even get to see Laurie in a more complex, even disturbing way (which the OG movies never did, we got that with Jamie Lloyd but even that didn't last). But critics kept focusing on Michael's dreams which is barely in the film. It's not a perfect film but to focus on those scenes where there was so much more, it was weird.

I genuinely prefer Halloween II over most of the Halloween franchise sequels and the other movies themselves in general. I know that this is a really unpopular opinion among movie critics and Halloween franchise fans that this is a great movie almost as good as the original (or to me, better.) but let me explain; I think it's a really neat idea and concept that it takes place on the same night as the first movie, picking up moments after. A lot of sequels to movies don't actually do this that I'm aware of and I think it's executed quite nicely here! It actually makes it super fun to watch Halloween (1978) and then this right after.

Halloween II also sees Laurie in the hospital which is actually interesting to see as it actually acknowledges what she went through that night and we see the immediate aftermath of what happened to her on that infamous night, not to mention the part near the end which has Michael chasing her throughout the hospital is very very tense and creative it actually has the viewer on edge and not completely sure of what's going to happen since Laurie is still injured quite badly and can not escape as easily as she could had she not been still injured.

The acting is actually still quite spot-on, especially from Jamie Lee Curtis who reprises her role as Laurie Strode from the first film, and Donald Pleasance who once again plays Dr. Loomis and they fit their roles perfectly just like in the first movie. And Jamie does a great job at playing an injured Laurie which actually feels like it gives complications and obstacles to her survival in this film. Kind of feeling like she has a higher chance of being killed off here.

The movie leaves almost no continuity errors or any changes from the previous film (excluding the twist where Laurie is revealed as Michael's long lost sister although in this movie it feels more like an addition than a change, an unneeded one of course)

Not to mention the AMAZING setting and the production and cinematography in this film. It's really quite impressive that they're able to make the story feel exactly like it is taking place on the same night and year as the first movie even despite the filming being done in 1981!

We get a few new characters that are pretty cool and interesting to get to know such as the male paramedic named Jimmy who is shown to have feelings for Laurie and they actually have a chemistry with each other throughout this film. Although scenes with them can sometimes drag out a little bit

I can't believe I'm saying this, but Rob Zombie's Halloween II made my cry. The scene when Sheriff Brackett finds Annie's body is so heartbreaking, so well performed, and so beautifully appreciated that I cried. Imagine that. Imagine the unexplainable pain. The flashback to Danielle Harris as a child was the cherry on top. What a powerful scene.

This is a bizarre, over the top, and stylistically abstract piece of cinema, and maybe I'm crazy, but I actually really liked it upon this viewing. It's intense, it's violent, and it's just plain scary. There are so many emotions at play. Rage, trauma, fear, chaos... Zombie infuses every scene with so much intensity.

I'm left feeling so heart broken for all these characters. Every one of them has been destroyed, either literally or figuratively. Michael was destroyed by the trauma he endured, and he has destroyed so many others the same way.

That's really what these Rob Zombie Halloween films are about. The cycle of trauma. Violence is a disease that spreads and spreads until it destroys everything. I don't think I really saw that until now.

I hope you're all having a good October so far and enjoyed HALLOWEEN KILLS! I'm just posting here because I'd love for you all to stop by and come check my Fan Cut of ROB ZOMBIE'S HALLOWEEN II this October 31st! (Set Reminder on the link now)

It's been a good year or so in development and I'm very excited to perhaps give somebody who never enjoyed RZH2 a chance at finally having a better experience with it. There's more details in the YouTube video description about what this Cut offers! Thank you! Have a great Halloween!!

DETAILS

After a long year of development, ROB ZOMBIE'S HALLOWEEN PART II FAN CUT is finally available! More information below...

SYNOPSIS: One year on following the devastating events of the previous October, Laurie Strode, now living with the Brackett family, struggles to cope with the trauma imprinted on her by psychopathic serial killer Michael Myers. After his body went missing, the whole town of Haddonfield continues to ask: "Is Michael Myers alive? And will he come back?"

This Cut of the movie continues where my Fan Cut of the first movie left off, with Laurie in a state of mental downpour. Many changes have taken place to give the movie a new, fresher look, sound and feel. Some of the changes will include:

• Alternate story and character arcs. For a long time, the reason I never produced a sequel to my original Fan Cut of the first movie was because I didn't feel there was enough wiggle-room or alternate footage to create a custom narrative or fix some of the gaping issues I have with this movie, however, after plenty of tweaks and Research and Development tests, I was able to get a new, custom and cohesive narrative out of the footage available to me, from Deleted Scenes to pre-existing ones, with all new context applied to them.
• Cinematic aspect ratio. No longer will the film look as though it was filmed with a Super-8 camera. Thanks to AI algorithms and resolution tweaks, this was able to be pulled off.
• Minimal film grain. Using AI technology I have been able to reduce the amount of visible film grain. Especially in night-time scenes.
• A new color grade. The colorful saturated colors from the predecessor have returned, updated and overhauled from the ground up to be a lot more natural-feeling. Thanks to new techniques, the film will look a lot more pleasing on the eyes.
• Bombastic, atmospheric sound design with a visceral musical score, all mixed in glorious 5.1. Hildur Guðnadóttir's phenomenal Joker soundtrack

I just rewatched Halloween II last night for the first time in a few years, and to repeat the post title, I really did forget how many unintentionally hilarious moments there were in it. Like, right from the beginning, when it's starting right from where the first movie ended, where Dr. Loomis is in the back yard looking at the spot where Michael had fallen after tumbling off the balcony, and the neighbor comes out and says something like "I've been trick or treated to death tonight!", to which Dr. Loomis cries "You don't know what death is!" and goes stumbling away, looking around wildly. I don't what Donald Pleasance was going for in that scene, but his performance there reminded me of Leslie Nielsen's characters in Airplane! and The Naked Gun, where he's being serious but goofy at the same time.

The best part of the whole movie though is the scene where a trick or treater gets hit by a cop car. It's just the suddeness of the dude getting nailed by a fast moving car, ramming into the van, and the explosion that gets me. Not just that, everyone just stands there staring instead of trying to help and put out the fire. Not to mention how that dude's death is a sort of subplot in the movie, and when they find out that he wasn't Michael, they act more annoyed and inconvienced than anything. You'd think they'd be pretty mortified about accidentally killing an innocent teenager. And on top of that, it's hilarious to me that there was a trick or treater dressed in the same mask and boiler suit as Michael. Like, what the hell are the chances of that?

I also love the scene in the hydrotherapy room when Michael sneaks up behind the nurse and gently squeezes her shoulder. It's just funny to me that he's super gentle that one time, whereas with everyone else he'll immediately stab or strangle his victim the second he gets his hands on them. That, and I laughed at how when he shoves the nurse's head into the hot tub, it's somehow hot enough to scald her face off, but it does absolutely nothing to Michael's hands. He's pretty much immortal, but he still feels some pain and obviously can be injured seeing as he bleeds when he was shot and stabbed throughout the first and second movie.

I think Halloween II is a decent sequel, but man, does it have some goofy moments that don't fit the otherwise serious tone of the movie.

I don't get why this film doesn't get more love. Even Carpenter dumps on it. Just don't get. No, it is not as good as the first one but really how many horror films are. Still by itself it's a fine film. Spooky, atmospheric, has some great shots and a Brutal ending. And unlike, almost all the sequels, this film really builds off the first one. Micheal is hurt, he is even more vicious. Loomis is cracking up, the town is getting more and more hysterical. And Laurie is still banged up. She's not some warrior woman, armed to the teeth. Just a wounded, tired kid. And yes I know people don't like the sibling thing but think about it. In the first film, Michael kills are clearly sexual in nature. In the second film, they needed a reason beyond that to explain why he would so relentlessly follow her. And the Sandman song is used very effectively.

Let me know if you're interested in seeing this

https://reddit.com/link/quox7u/video/mzv5loebetz71/player

https://w2g.tv/0pzfegjq6jr56p04yz

You may need to press play in video window if not playing automatically.

Check it out here and let me know what you think: https://imgur.com/gallery/U7vsMIs

I painted it using acrylic paint on paper. I love the original sequel!

Thank you for looking.

Psycho II is way better than it has any right to be BTW.

title

But the main reason is that it continues straight from H1, like one extended movie.

I find it more scary, more bloody, hospital at night is creepy, Loomis is great, but I understand it kind of "ends" MM

Such a shame, it is my favourite Halloween movie.

What do others think about H2?

Personally, I prefer the Theatrical Cut. It's a tighter film, Michael (adult) doesn't speak, and Laurie finishes him off.

View Poll

Hi All,

Halloween sales are almost over at DLGamer!
Bandai Namco deals are ending 2021-11-04 at 00:00 CET

Up to 83% off.

More deals can be found at the following addresses : DLgamer US DLgamer EU DLgamer UK

No region locking unless specified.

View Poll

View Poll

View Poll

I genuinely prefer Halloween II over most of the Halloween franchise sequels and the other movies themselves in general. I know that this is a really unpopular opinion among movie critics and Halloween franchise fans that this is a great movie almost as good as the original (or to me, better.) but let me explain; I think it's a really neat idea and concept that it takes place on the same night as the first movie, picking up moments after. A lot of sequels to movies don't actually do this that I'm aware of and I think it's executed quite nicely here! It actually makes it super fun to watch Halloween (1978) and then this right after.

Halloween II also sees Laurie in the hospital which is actually interesting to see as it actually acknowledges what she went through that night and we see the immediate aftermath of what happened to her on that infamous night, not to mention the part near the end which has Michael chasing her throughout the hospital is very very tense and creative it actually has the viewer on edge and not completely sure of what's going to happen since Laurie is still injured quite badly and can not escape as easily as she could had she not been still injured.

The acting is actually still quite spot-on, especially from Jamie Lee Curtis who reprises her role as Laurie Strode from the first film, and Donald Pleasance who once again plays Dr. Loomis and they fit their roles perfectly just like in the first movie. And Jamie does a great job at playing an injured Laurie which actually feels like it gives complications and obstacles to her survival in this film. Kind of feeling like she has a higher chance of being killed off here.

The movie leaves almost no continuity errors or any changes from the previous film (excluding the twist where Laurie is revealed as Michael's long lost sister although in this movie it feels more like an addition than a change, an unneeded one of course)

Not to mention the AMAZING setting and the production and cinematography in this film. It's really quite impressive that they're able to make the story feel exactly like it is taking place on the same night and year as the first movie even despite the filming being done in 1981!

We get a few new characters that are pretty cool and interesting to get to know such as the male paramedic named Jimmy who is shown to have feelings for Laurie and they actually have a chemistry with each other throughout this film. Although scenes with them can sometimes drag out a little bit

Both are sequels that take place the entire night of the previous film, but which felt like a more natural continuation?

The original "Halloween II"

or

Halloween Kills

For me it's Halloween Kills it also helps that iirc that Halloween Kills and the 2018 film were both filmed back to back