Rating: R, Time: 1hr 46min, Director: David Gordon Green
So how does this one compare to the original in 1978?
I think the concept of bringing in the original Laurie Strode as a grandmother now, with her daughter and grand daughter at risk was a fun concept. I think the original really lays the ground work of the killer behind the mask. At first he is just a stalker and then waits for the perfect time to kill his victims. In this version, there is a bit of that kind of mindless killing. I think the part they really are missing is the teenage sex that drives Michael Meyer to kill in the original. In my mind they should have had him stalking the grand daughter after he stalks her maybe and sees her start making out. There is none of the original teen sex involved, which kind of kills the rhythm of it. Of course, now the killer is maybe 70-80, which is preposterous to still be very strong and able to kill, but who knows maybe he was doing push ups with Signorney Weaver in the next cell over waiting for the Terminator.
How believable is Laurie Strode as a grandmother?
So I missed part of the beginning, so maybe there was more to the story. She comes off as a paranoid mother that raised her daughter so crazily in combat and shooting that she lost custody to CPS. I think that back story works well, but I think if they had showed a younger version actually training the daughter, the build up would have been better to going after Michael Meyer.
What did you make of the mother Karen?
So the back story was that she was trained in Jiu Jitsu or karate and range shooting. They show a tiny bit of the shooting, but little of this training. I think they could have made this an entire act to drive the final scene better with the final confrontation to the killer and the Strode family. I think the paranoia reaction of the grand mother makes sense, but the mother really plays kind of the victim when she had been trained her whole life. I think that could have been better portrayed I think, but it kind of makes sense. The husband is more realistic in this sense of no trauma and thinking the mother-in-law is completely crazy.
How scary in Michael?
The really interesting part about the villain is over time and multiple versions, he became this anti-villain everyone is secretly rooting for to kill as many as possible. Here, I think they show the monster a bit too much in the film. The reason he's so scary in the original is he keeps showing up after seeing to disappear again and again. He's like a ghost in the confusion of Halloween. So people are seeing him walk around with a bloody knife no problem. Really?
The thing I don't like is they don't dive deeper in the back story of Michael to show some character arc. There is only the mindless killing with almost no sense pain and no remorse.
I think the part that is interesting is they show the victims becoming more similar to Michael as they get exposed to his killing spree. In essence, they are saying anyone can become Michael with the right triggers possibly.
How bad ass in Laurie's house?
In this film, since the main character Laurie has had decades to prepare, she has barricaded her house to be able to trap Michael, built secret rooms and flood lights to be able to spot the killer coming. So in this sense the house is a character in its own sense.
Does the house act as foreseen?
Well here's the rub, you can always do lots of preparation, but on the other end the killer is relentless in his drive. Who should win? We have Michael being very challenged in this environment, which in reality, he would just say screw it, let's go kill some other teens. For some reason, he keeps going after Laurie, maybe flash backs to the past, who knows. The house does a good job of making his mission near impossible. In the end, they leave it a bit open ended that maybe Michael escapes. Maybe he will be killing at the nursing home next?
Please share via Facebook or Twitter!