-
[QUOTE=Timothy Hunter;5787991]I want to love Halloween but Laurie Strode is such a lackluster protagonist that I can never get too invested in the movie.
Of course it's a slasher flick so you shouldn't expect amazing characterization, but most exceptional horror films give a few flourishes to their leads that make them the least bit captivating.
Halloween tries to do this by contrasting the mild mannered Laurie with her pot smoking, crass friends, but Jamie Lee Curtis is so bad in the role that her performance sucks the air out of the movie. They should've centered the movie around Donald Pleasence.
The 70s were John Carpenter's weakest decade in my opinion. Even his 90s movies are as bad as Dark Star and parts of Halloween.[/QUOTE]
I never thought about Larurie as a kid. As an adult I kinda dig her, as she really was average. Sans Michael she would’ve lived a nondescript life (like most of us). She’s a great example imo of how once that darkness touches you things are never the same.
It’s why I’m hoping the new movie ends things. As much as some ppl enjoy the endless sequels I’d like Laurie to get closure.
-
Psycho. I have seen it multiple times. I have only seen Halloween about 2 times.
-
I prefer Psycho as a movie but will admit Halloween is scarier. I watch Psycho every time I see it listed. I hardly ever watch Halloween.
-
[QUOTE=Riv86672;5788256]I never thought about Larurie as a kid. As an adult I kinda dig her, as she really was average. Sans Michael she would’ve lived a nondescript life (like most of us). She’s a great example imo of how once that darkness touches you things are never the same.
It’s why I’m hoping the new movie ends things. As much as some ppl enjoy the endless sequels I’d like Laurie to get closure.[/QUOTE]
If adult Laurie had been smart, she would’ve cruised the local black market, bought herself an M-16 along with a few spare clips, then gone full auto on Michael. :p
-
-
Halloween was the first horror movie I ever enjoyed. I bought it blind (the really neat 2 vhs tape collector's edition they put out in the 90's), watched it for the first time on a Saturday morning (wasn't going to watch it at night) and loved it. Loved it so much that years later, I'd spend close to $200 on the Halloween boxed set from Scream Factory during a time I really couldn't afford it, and never regretted the purchase.
Psycho is a good movie, but I only recently watched it for the first time, despite owning it for years. Halloween is one I go back to time and again.
-
[QUOTE=AnakinFlair;5789534]Halloween was the first horror movie I ever enjoyed. I bought it blind (the really neat 2 vhs tape collector's edition they put out in the 90's), watched it for the first time on a Saturday morning (wasn't going to watch it at night) and loved it. Loved it so much that years later, I'd spend close to $200 on the Halloween boxed set from Scream Factory during a time I really couldn't afford it, and never regretted the purchase.
Psycho is a good movie, but I only recently watched it for the first time, despite owning it for years. Halloween is one I go back to time and again.[/QUOTE]
I’m the polar opposite. I’ve watched Psycho at least half a dozen times because it intrigued me and kept on my seat while I’ve only seen Halloween (and Halloween II) once.
-
Love both, but Psycho. Though I'm probably pretty biased as I'm a huge Hitchcock fan, even moreso than Carpenter (who I also love).
-
Psycho is better crafted, better plotted and is a complete story. Halloween is the ultimate mindless slasher film with not much plot, and it ends on a cliffhanger.
That said, Michael Myers is scarier than Norman Bates
-
[QUOTE=Timothy Hunter;5787991]I want to love Halloween but Laurie Strode is such a lackluster protagonist that I can never get too invested in the movie.
Of course it's a slasher flick so you shouldn't expect amazing characterization, but most exceptional horror films give a few flourishes to their leads that make them the least bit captivating.
Halloween tries to do this by contrasting the mild mannered Laurie with her pot smoking, crass friends, but Jamie Lee Curtis is so bad in the role that her performance sucks the air out of the movie. They should've centered the movie around Donald Pleasence.
The 70s were John Carpenter's weakest decade in my opinion. [B][COLOR="#0000FF"]Even his 90s movies aren't as bad as Dark Star and parts of Halloween.[/COLOR][/B][/QUOTE]
[B][I]Escape From L.A.[/I][/B] is easily worse than either of them.
(And, I love that film in spite of itself...)
-
[QUOTE=numberthirty;5790027][B][I]Escape From L.A.[/I][/B] is easily worse than either of them.
(And, I love that film in spite of itself...)[/QUOTE]
Escape From LA is nowhere as bad as Dark Star. Most of the movie is just John Carpenter chasing an alien beach ball around a space ship.
But yes, Halloween is probably better than Escape From LA :p
-
[QUOTE=WestPhillyPunisher;5787698]Psycho. This was the sort of film that didn’t need blood or gore to shock and terrify.[/QUOTE]
Always felt that Psycho played more like a William Castle exploitation movie. My thought is that back then they could not be so blatant/ham-fisted with the hyper violence as they are now.
-
[QUOTE=WestPhillyPunisher;5787698]Psycho. This was the sort of film that didn’t need blood or gore to shock and terrify.[/QUOTE]
There is just as much blood in Psycho as there is in Halloween.
-
Halloween is my favorite, but Psycho is up there for me. Easily in the top five slasher movies.
