PDA

View Full Version : The bad news: they're remaking "Halloween"...



General_Grievous
03-18-2007, 04:37 PM
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0373883/

The good news? It's being directed by Rob Zombie. Now, judging from "The Devil's Rejects", I'd say that the remake is in good hands. In fact, I'm actually looking forward to it. Here's hoping it's the latest in a recent trend of good remakes like King Kong and The Hills Have Eyes.

I just found a pic of what Michael Myers will look like in the remake. I've got a good feeling about this movie. It may not be bad news after all.

JON9000
03-18-2007, 05:24 PM
They've remade Halloween about a zillion times already in the form of its own sequels. I expect Rob Zombie will make it like his other films, and therefore completely antithetical to what the original Halloween was all about- atmosphere over gore. I think he should just make a "new" Halloween sequel, or just come up with a new story of teens being stalked by a weirdo.

maatu
03-18-2007, 06:26 PM
you can see a preview of it at horrorhound.com
i don't know if this is going to be good or not. i need to see more. i was not impressed with devils rejects or the earlier one. i like gore. But when a movie does not make sense.that's when it goes all wrong. do horror movies ever make sense. probably never. But his earlier works started out interesting and then they went off in a weird direction.

JetsAndHeels
03-18-2007, 08:51 PM
I can live with Rob Zombie doing this....it could be in worse hands after all.

That Michael Myers pic looks identical to the original one doesn't it? Or am I not seeing some changes that were made?

General_Grievous
03-18-2007, 09:15 PM
That Michael Myers pic looks identical to the original one doesn't it? Or am I not seeing some changes that were made?

It's pretty close. The only difference that I can see is that he looks a lot bigger in the new one.

And maatu, about the preview...all I saw on that site was an article that stated the trailer would be attached to "Grindhouse". Did I miss something? Can you provide a link?

2-1B
03-18-2007, 10:11 PM
That's Tyler Mane as The Shape and another difference is that the Bill Shatner mask is marked up and weathered.

I am a big fan of Mr. Zombie's previous films but I am skeptical on this one...from what I read of the storyline and how it is broken into 3 acts, I can't say I have high hopes for it. :(

UKWildcat
03-18-2007, 11:23 PM
I didn't think that Zombie was going to do a straight up "remake". I thought he was just going to use the Michael Myers character and do his own thing. I read an article a while back and that's what it seemed. I guess things might have changed since then. It'll be interesting either way, and I'll definitely check it out.

OC47150
03-21-2007, 10:27 AM
I'm a big fan of the original Halloween. It's not bloody scary, but psychological scary, and that's what makes it cool.

Like Batman and Bond, I understand Zombie's version is a reboot/revision of the original, with more examination into young Michael and why he turned bad.

Will I see it? Probably so. The casting choices are interesting.

Droid
03-21-2007, 03:12 PM
Like Batman and Bond, I understand Zombie's version is a reboot/revision of the original, with more examination into young Michael and why he turned bad.

Unexplained evil is much scarier and interesting than psychoanalyzed evil. You shine a bright enough light on the dark and it ceases to be dark.

JON9000
03-21-2007, 05:40 PM
Unexplained evil is much scarier and interesting than psychoanalyzed evil. You shine a bright enough light on the dark and it ceases to be dark.

That's exactly right, and it's integral to the character. In fact, that's the whole dang point, which is why he was known as "shape' in the first. He's evil personified. Once we learn the "why", we can make all sorts of rationalizations for why he kills people.

Why can't they just get a life and leave well enough alone?

2-1B
03-21-2007, 07:12 PM
Yeah, rationalization like Thorn and all that garbage (no offense to Paul Rudd, of course).

I didn't mind the stuff in 2 with Samhain and the Sister connection, plus 4 was a really fun sequel but starting with the Man in Black in part 5, that series was shot. :(

scruffziller
03-26-2007, 04:11 PM
From what I understand from what was said like you guys were saying, that this is not a remake but a fresh new start. Zombie wants to take us back to what made the original felt so scary. So kind of like what they did with Batman Begins. Not a remake or a prequel but a new start with a fresh perspective.

UKWildcat
03-26-2007, 04:23 PM
Right on scruffziller. That's what I was thinking/ trying to say with my post. :D I hope this is what Zombie is doing (pretty sure anyways), as I'd hate to see anyone do a straight up remake of Halloween. Speaking of which, I can't imagine anyone remaking the original Halloween, Friday the 13th or Nightmare On Elm Street, although I'm sure it will be done at some point. :( I still find discomfort in that the Texas Chainsaw Massacre was remade.

OC47150
03-26-2007, 04:37 PM
Right on scruffziller. That's what I was thinking/ trying to say with my post. :D I hope this is what Zombie is doing (pretty sure anyways), as I'd hate to see anyone do a straight up remake of Halloween. Speaking of which, I can't imagine anyone remaking the original Halloween, Friday the 13th or Nightmare On Elm Street, although I'm sure it will be done at some point. :( I still find discomfort in that the Texas Chainsaw Massacre was remade.


Oh, you spoke too soon, UK.

http://www.darkhorizons.com/news07/070326j.php

General_Grievous
04-06-2007, 08:40 PM
Well, a trailer's up now. It's the one that was attached to Grindhouse.

http://movies.yahoo.com/movie/1809784517/trailer

I'm sensing a Batman Begins/Casino Royale type of reboot. I saw some familiar stuff, like Michael wearing the sheet with the boyfriend's glasses. And how creepy was that last shot of the trailer? Man, I'm looking forward to this even more.

UKWildcat
04-06-2007, 09:05 PM
WOW! I'm very optimistic after seeing that trailer. It could turn out to be a pretty kicka** movie! I'm really looking forward to it now. :thumbsup:

2-1B
04-06-2007, 10:46 PM
The idea of a Freddy vs. Michael Myers movie does not work well with me.

I can't get that Yahoo trailer to load. Is it on YouTube ?
All I can find is this one. :D http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gI1zM-IgKe8

General_Grievous
04-06-2007, 11:18 PM
I checked YouTube. The trailer isn't on there yet. I don't know what the hell you found, Cae. :p

JetsAndHeels
04-06-2007, 11:22 PM
Thanks for the link GG. I didn't get this one with Grindhouse so this is new to me.

"If you are thinking of seeing this movie, don't." :)

2-1B
04-06-2007, 11:32 PM
I checked YouTube. The trailer isn't on there yet. I don't know what the hell you found, Cae. :p

It was for a fan made sequel to 6

Okay, I got it fired up through Yahoo now, just going to finish watching The Office (again) from last night and then I'll watch this Zombie trailer. Assuming I have time before Jenna Fischer is on The Tonight Show ?

UKWildcat
04-07-2007, 02:26 AM
All I can find is this one. :D http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gI1zM-IgKe8

I don't know what the hell you found, Cae. :p

No kidding!!! WTF!?!?!?!? :mad: ;) lol



So what'd you think of the real trailer C? Like I said, I think it looks to be pretty good. I'm really excited now! :yes: :thumbsup:

2-1B
04-07-2007, 02:33 AM
No kidding!!! WTF!?!?!?!? :mad: ;) lol

The best thing is the commentary by the YouTube posters praising that POS for looking good. lol


So what'd you think of the real trailer C? Like I said, I think it looks to be pretty good. I'm really excited now! :yes: :thumbsup:

Yeah, I gotta say...that looked pretty damn cool. I noticed they were pretty heavy on Shape footage in that trailer so some might be disappointed that he is only in the last third of the picture. On the other hand, maybe it won't be a complete slasher pic then and some others will be pleased? Who knows...but I'll definitely be seeing that. By default it has to already be the 4th best in the series at least. ;)

plasticfetish
04-07-2007, 03:46 AM
I'd been looking at pics over at the Halloween MySpace page (http://www.myspace.com/101946169) and honestly, as much as I wasn't caring one way or the other about this, I'm pretty excited now....

Malcolm McDowell as Dr. Loomis is brilliant.

2-1B
04-07-2007, 09:06 AM
Malcolm McDowell as Dr. Loomis is brilliant.

Again I gotta say...looks pretty damn cool in that regard. A fine actor, no doubt, but I wasn't really fired up at the mention of his name being attached. Look at the pics of him and see some footage and bam, I have to praise the casting there! The idea of recasting Donald Pleasance is not very...pleasant...but I think this could work.

OC47150
04-09-2007, 08:23 AM
The Halloween trailer wasn't attached to my showing of Grindhouse. :upset:

DarkArtist
07-28-2007, 09:51 PM
the teaser trailer is up on YouTube.com. saw it last night and not sure about it. I am a huge Halloween fan and was looking foward to a new version of the classic but it looks like Zombie has created more of a backstory to it.

might have to see this on the big screen to be sure.

2-1B
07-29-2007, 03:13 PM
The backstory thing is a dicey situation, they treaded into that territory with Halloween 2 and did alright with it...but they totally effed it up with parts 5 and 6.

JON9000
07-29-2007, 11:17 PM
Can we merge this and Halloween: Rob Zombie?

Please do a search before starting a new topic.

UKWildcat
07-30-2007, 01:39 AM
I'll definitely scope this one out when it is released in the theater. Speaking of which, I think they should be releasing this the last week in October; not August. :crazed:

plasticfetish
07-30-2007, 03:13 AM
Can we merge this and Halloween: Rob Zombie?You mean, can we merge "Halloween: Rob Zombie" with this thread? Yes we can. ;)

2-1B
07-30-2007, 07:12 PM
Speaking of which, I think they should be releasing this the last week in October; not August. :crazed:

That's what I said 9 years ago when they released H20 in August...sad, really. :(

OC47150
07-30-2007, 08:08 PM
Rob Zombie was interviewed by G4 at Comic Con and a couple of clips were shown.

The jury's still out for me. I love the original and consider it sacred. But I will probably see it.

And UK is right: what's up with the August release? August is the movie dumping month.

General_Grievous
07-30-2007, 08:28 PM
Well, Saw IV was already booked for the week of Oct. 31st. Zombie probably didn't want to pit his movie against it (even though it probably would have beat out Saw IV).

2-1B
07-30-2007, 08:38 PM
I don't know if I agree, Saw is a cash cow franchise with a very attractive gimmick...it doesn't matter to me though, since I'll be seeing both of these films for sure. :)

General_Grievous
07-31-2007, 01:54 AM
I don't know if I agree, Saw is a cash cow franchise with a very attractive gimmick...it doesn't matter to me though, since I'll be seeing both of these films for sure. :)

Well, yeah, but wouldn't more people want to see Michael Myers back on his A game? I mean, I'm sure there are people who are getting tired of the Saw franchise.

2-1B
07-31-2007, 08:10 AM
Possibly, not sure if this will make A game status though. :D

I was thinking more of the younger movie going crowd...they'll likely gravitate more to a sequel than a remake. Then again, Rob Zombie still attracts a younger fanbase so who knows ?

Either way, I hope both films are fun and have "Great Success." :)

2-1B
08-30-2007, 10:15 PM
Here we go, it opens tomorrow !!! I'm gonna try to see it this weekend...I'm keeping an open mind.

I don't know if I'll like the mask Mike wears earlier on in the movie. But we'll see.

plasticfetish
08-30-2007, 10:33 PM
I'm hoping to get a chance to see it some time next week... and I'm actually kind of excited.

General_Grievous
08-31-2007, 09:43 AM
I'm going to see it tomorrow.

Jedi_Master_Guyute
08-31-2007, 03:02 PM
MAYBE SPOILERS SPOILER SPOILERS

I just got back from seeing it and i'm not sure what i think about it. It's best to seperate this from the original as they're two seperate films on every level. I know many fanboys won't be able to do this and I encourage anybody who loves the original to avoid this movie as you'll only get ****y. :crazed:
This one gave michael a backstory and somewhat of a reason for his murderous tendencies. While this might make him more sympathetic, i think it raises more discussion as the child is obviously disturbed and his poor environment (white trash family, etc) just add to his troubles. However, and maybe I'm off in left field, but it's almost as though michael is just tracking down the one pure innocent element in his life. He never actually goes after or harms Laurie until she stabs him and he gets rightfully angry. He kneels before her in an offering almost of acceptance and anybody he knocks off aren't exactly characters of the highest caliber and aren't positive for her. I dunno, i loved his angle of it where he's going after that one good point in his life because that's what wants. Very brutal, very ballsy remake. *** out of **** :thumbsup:

OC47150
08-31-2007, 07:54 PM
A friend and I are planning on seeing it Monday.

2-1B
08-31-2007, 11:11 PM
I saw it tonight and I will give it 2 out of 4 stars, it was alright.

Spoilers, natch:

*

*

*

I sometimes felt like I was watching Halloween meets Devil's Rejects meets The Phantom Menace.

In some scenes it captured the feel of the original and in other scenes it felt like I was watching lil Ani in Episode I with the "backstory." It didn't help that Rob put just about every f***ing person from Rejects in there: Moon, Trejo, Foree, Mane, Temple, Easterbrook, Towles, Roebuck, Forsythe, Haig, did I miss anyone? lol

The girls playing Laurie, Annie, and Linda all get 0 out of 4 stars, okay they get 1 star since Danielle Harris got naked. :thumbsup:

I was excited by the casting of Caligula as Loomis and I thought he was great for the first 2/3 of his scenes but by the end of the movie I thought his character was weak and ineffectual. The performance was soft, I thought.

Douriff was great, I liked him as Sheriff Bracket. ET's mom as Mrs. Strode was a nice touch too, it made it feel like I was in an 80s era horror movie so I loved that throwback.

I don't know what else to say right now, I can see how the diehards will shred this movie but while I am a huge fan of the original I can still say this was fun and overall I thought it was alright.

Rob's gotta lay off the soundtrack stuff though, the musical saturation was groovy in a flick like Rejects but it was not workin' for me on Halloween. Good tunes though, like God of Thunder, Don't Fear the Reaper, and Only Women Bleed...but it wasn't needed and was certainly overkill.

General_Grievous
09-01-2007, 07:23 PM
SPOILERS

I just got back from seeing it. Overall, I thought it was a good movie. It wasn't better than the original, but it was a good re-imagining of the original story. Michael's backstory was interesting, seeing all the negative influences on his life like his abusive stepfather and bullies at school. Finally he just snapped and got tired of being pushed around. Makes sense that Michael would have an origin like that. But I don't understand why he killed some of the people he came across, namely the guard (played by Danny Trejo) in the mental hospital. He was friendly to Michael. I don't understand why Michael would kill him. The second half of the movie (with Laurie) was a little too rushed. We barely got any character buildup from Laurie, Annie or Linda. At least, not as much as in the original. But I guess Rob Zombie intended for this to be a Michael-centric story, and not a Laurie-centric one. That was the only other big change that was made to the story. The others were sort of surprising, having Annie survive and Loomis die. Speaking of which, Malcolm McDowell was a good Dr. Loomis. He was a bit livelier than Donald Pleasance. Scout Taylor Compton was a good Laurie. Maybe not as good as Jamie Lee Curtis was, but definitely cuter. And Rob Zombie seems to have this amazing talent to coax actresses out of their clothes. So there was the excessive nudity part of the standard horror movie. :thumbsup: But he didn't add an extreme amount of gore. At least not on a "Saw" or "Hostel" level. So I don't think it upset the original purists who say that "the less gore, the scarier". The only negative thing I have to say about the movie is that towards the end, a lot of the scenes were too dark. I had to strain my eyes in order to fully see everything (and no, I'm not just talking about Annie's sex scene, ya pervs :p). Anyway, I thought it was a good remake, and I'll definitely pick up the DVD.


Anybody he knocks off aren't exactly characters of the highest caliber and aren't positive for her.
What about the Strodes? Not only were they a positive influence on Laurie, but Michael had no reason to kill them.

Jedi_Master_Guyute
09-01-2007, 11:02 PM
SPOILERS



What about the Strodes? Not only were they a positive influence on Laurie, but Michael had no reason to kill them.

In his eyes, they were keeping Laurie away from him and thus, had to go. See, my belief is that michaels purpose for killing is all about finding and reuniting with his sister and he does this the only way he knows how: through violence. Thus, even the Strodes had to go as they were another element that would keep them apart. If that makes sense.......:thumbsup:

Beast
09-01-2007, 11:20 PM
I thought it was ok, but yeah... there's some serious weaknesses in the script. I thought trying to explain away Michael's psychosis was the worst thing about the movie. The original just had Michael as a normal kid who just snapped and killed his sister. Now we get a family and a life that is clearly responsible for what Michael becomes. Big mistake in my opinion. Like someone said elsewhere, Rob Zombie needs to get off his 'White Trash' fetish. And especially putting his wife in all of his films.

I also didn't like that they changed two major parts of the film, but left in the build-up that led to them. So it seems like they just forgot about the build-up and the characters simply to change things for change sake. The scenes are in the workprint cut that leaked online, but were changed in the reshoots for the final film. Note that my facts may be a bit off, I'm going by what I read... I haven't actually seen the workprint for myself. Maybe they'll put the scenes on the DVD.

***SPOILERS HERE***


The first major one is Michael's escape from the Asylum. What causes him to snap in the workprint is the new Matinence Worker, the one who's a complete prick to Michael and touches one of his masks, that is replacing Michael's "Friend". He tries to rape a new female inmate of the asylum in the same wing that Michael's in.

The second one is the ending. Michael has Laurie, and the police show up... led by Sherrif Bracket who's angry as hell about his daughter. The police pull guns on Michael. That's when Loomis arrives, and actually talks Michael into giving him Laurie and giving up. Michael, showing that he does care about Laurie... actually shows the first spark of humanity in the whole film and turns Laurie over to Loomis and gives up. But Sherrif Bracket orders his men to open fire and kills Michael anyway.

Also, the nurse that Young Michael kills with the fork in the Asylum cafeteria. In the theatrical cut, it's just a random act of insane violence, done for no reason. In the workprint, she actually makes a crude insulting comment about him that sets him off. So again, we loose a moment of possible sympathy for Michael.

Beast
09-01-2007, 11:46 PM
Found a complete list of the differences between the workprint and theatrical. Enjoy.

SCENES IN WORKPRINT NOT IN THEATRICAL VERSION:

1. During the breakfast scene, there’s additional dialogue between Judith and Deborah concerning eggs. Judith alludes to Deborah having an abortion.

2. The workprint has an opening credits sequence. It plays over the scene of Michael running from the school, Loomis’ introduction, and the bully walking through the woods. These scenes are all longer as a result, most significantly more dialogue between Loomis and Deborah, presented in voice over as Michael runs.

3. There’s an additional shot when Deborah confronts Michael outside the house after the murders.

4. The montage of Loomis and Michael getting to know each other has more dialogue/scene snippets

5. In the workprint, there is an additional scene of young Michael with Deborah at the institution, where he expresses his need to “get out of here”. When he learns he cannot leave, he says “Then I have nothing left to say.”

6. When the nurse looks at the photo of Michael and “Boo”, there is an additional line where she alludes to Michael being ugly. This provides more of a motive for her killing than is present in the theatrical version.

7. The “Fifteen Years Later” scene begins with a newscast about Michael’s possible transfer.

8. Following this newscast begins one of the biggest changes: Udo Kier’s character. In the theatrical he is only in ONE scene, but here he has quite a few as the head of Smith’s Grove. He is joined by Clint Howard and Tom Towles as other hospital higherups. They disagree with Loomis’ instructions for Michael’s care. This is followed by the scene where Loomis tells Michael he can no longer be his doctor.

9. The scene of Ishmael Cruz and the new orderly in Michael’s room is a bit longer.

10. An additional shot of Loomis leaving Smith’s Grove, looking back with a look on his face showing that he is clearly conflicted about his decision to quit on Michael.

11. Additional shots of Michael watching Joe Grizzly.

12. The scene where we meet Laurie and the Strodes is lengthened, there is more talk about the “pervert” hardware store owner.

13. After Loomis speaks at the lecture, there is a scene of him walking with a colleague, asking how he thought he did in the speech.

14. When Laurie and Lynda leave the school, Lynda harasses another female student for some reason, pouring a drink on her head (this is one of the few changes that were for the better, as it makes Lynda even more annoying than she already is)

15. Additional sex talk between the three girls as they walk home

16. When they see Michael, there are additional shots of him standing across the street (in the theatrical we only see his blurry shape)

17. A scene of Laurie walking to her house where her mother is putting up decorations outside. Michael is seen following her in the background.

18. A scene showing Michael in the graveyard, finding the tombstone and then removing it.

19. After Laurie leaves to baby-sit, we hear Michael breathing as her parents chat. When the mother goes inside, Michael approaches. The father sees him and assumes he is a trick or treater.

20. A scene showing Laurie watching horror movies with the kids. Laurie tells Lindsay it’s time for her to go.

21. The chase from the Wallace’s to the Doyle’s is a bit longer

22. The pool scene is a bit longer

23. A scene of Loomis and Laurie walking to the car is longer, and it really resonates that Loomis is feeling guilty, a moment that is truncated in the theatrical.

SCENES IN THE THEATRICAL THAT ARE NOT IN THE WORKPRINT:

1. A scene of Loomis explaining the color spectrum to Michael

2. The death of Ishmael Cruz.

3. A scene of Brackett pulling up alongside the girls as they walk home. Brackett offers a ride, which only Annie accepts.

4. The graveyard scene with Sid Haig.

5. A scene where Lynda calls Laurie right before Bob’s death.

6. A quick bit where the Strodes express confusion over what Annie means by saying her dad is “same as always”

7. Loomis buys a gun

8. A shot of Bob backing his van into the driveway at the Myers house. Also, this scene occurs much earlier in the theatrical version than it does in the workprint.

9. A scene where Brackett explains how he knows who Laurie Strode’s real family is (a much needed addition as it is never explained in the workprint how she came to be with that family or how Loomis would know where to find her).

10. Loomis running up to the house and finding the kids is not in the workprint.

SCENES THAT ARE DIFFERENT ENTIRELY:

1. Michael listens to Monster Mash in the first scene instead of classic rock (note – a lot of the music is different, more usages of the original music, but that is to be expected from a workprint – this was the only one I will point out)

2. The biggest one that almost everyone knows about, when Michael escapes. In the workprint, an orderly and his friend harass and then rape a female inmate in Michael’s room. Michael ignores them until they begin playing with his masks (this pays off the line about him not liking it when people touch his things). He kills them both, gets their keys, and escapes. In the theatrical, he is being moved for some reason and suddenly kills the four guards, including Tom Towles (who plays a different character in the workprint), as well as Bill Moseley, and Leslie Easterbrook, neither of whom appear in the workprint).

3. The scene where Loomis is told that Michael escapes is entirely different, and features more Udo Kier.

4. The scene where Loomis leaves for Haddonfield after arguing with Udo Kier and Clint Howard is completely different.

5. The scene where Loomis meets Brackett takes place in a different location (a diner in the theatrical, and what appears to be the graveyard in the workprint), and the dialogue is different.

6. Mrs. Strode is brutally killed; in the workprint it is just sort of suggested.

7. Bob’s death is completely different. In the workprint, he is killed in his van when he goes out to get beer. In the theatrical, he is killed in the exact same way he was killed in the 1978 film.

8. The ending is completely different from the moment Michael pulls Laurie out of the car. In the workprint, Loomis talks to Michael for a while longer than he does in the theatrical version. Then the cops show up, guns drawn. Loomis convinces them all to stand down while he continues to try to calm Michael. He succeeds, and Michael lets Laurie go. As she runs to Loomis, the cops (including Brackett) open fire, shooting him dozens of times. Loomis screams for them to stop but it’s too late. Michael appears dead. The film ends on a very nice shot of Loomis standing over Michael’s body, clearly realizing how he failed his patient, as we hear the audio recording of their very first meeting at Smith’s Grove. In the theatrical, Michael kills Loomis, then spends about 10 minutes smashing his house trying to find Laurie. He finally does, and then rushes her. They go out the window, then Laurie shoots him, screams, and the film ends.

2-1B
09-02-2007, 04:07 AM
Having thought about this movie for another day...it's not holding up well with me. I think I was too generous in my 2 star review.

OC47150
09-03-2007, 09:00 PM
Saw it today.

There were two acts to the movie: the beginning and after the escape/Halloween night attacks.

Michael was a troubled kid, but was it necessary to really play up the white trash aspect as much as it was? It was interesting to watch (intense at some parts, too) but my friend and I agreed that it was more interesting not knowing what made Michael evil.

And the pre-commitment/break-out sequence could've been trimmed down a bit.

Loomis as a 70s hippie doc was kinda funny.

The second half of the movie, Halloween day in Haddonfield, seemed too rushed to my friend and me. Because of the rushedness, character development was lacking, and it showed. Laurie wasn't made out to be the smart girl, like Jamie Lee in the original. The audience had no reason to like Annie or Lynda; they were just there.

I made time to watch the original Halloween before seeing the new version. I will give credit to Zombie for having the same old 50s-style sci-fi movies which were featured in the original again in the remake, as well as some of the dialogue being the same.

I still prefer the original, but the remake was enjoyable. I did like the second act better than the first.

I will be interested to see what extra scenes are added on the DVD.

I also see where a sequel could be done. A remake of Halloween 2?