I liked it. I really did. I enjoyed it as a film. As an individual film, separate from the rest. Sure, it wasn't perfect. It felt a little uneven in the middle. In other words, it seemed like each half of the film were really just shortened individual films that were put together to make a whole new one. Because of that, the remake phase was a tiny bit fast-paced for me. However, overall, I enjoyed it a great deal. There is a reason why, however, that is deeper than the film itself.
What Rob presented was a great film, that had a story that wasn't perfect. Therein lies the genius of it. It felt real. It didn't feel like a movie. While many will find that to make it a cluttered mess, it didn't for me. An example would be the way he presented Michael's victims. We didn't get to know them that well before he killed them. But when some serial killer kills a group of people, and it is announced on the news, what do you think the chances are that you know those people? You don't. And yet, it is still horrifying. In other words, you don't have to know the victims to understand how terrifying the crime is.
In a movie, you follow these people around, the camera being your eye as you stalk them invisibly. You really get to know the people. Here, by not following them, it presents that realism quite well. You don't know who these people are, but whether you know them or not, Michael Myers is still presented as a terrifying being. Speaking of ol' Mikey...
I thought Tyler and Daeg's performances were amazing. I loved how even though you could sympathize with him in his early life, it didn't change how bizarre, and truly evil he was. Right in the opening scenes, we see him petting a rat, and then we see moments later cleaning a bloody scalpel or something. Then, he tells his mother that his rat died. You know what he did. It's not that hard to figure out. What's great about this is that it shows that even though he had this terrible life, he didn't just snap over night. He's been going crazy for some time. The scene with the bully in the woods was powerful, at least for me. His eventual escape was equally amazing. How he took out those guards truly showed his power, and menace. I especially liked when he killed Ismael Cruz, because that was the indicator that the young boy that went into Smiths Grove was not the monster that walked out. To quote the original Doctor Loomis, "That part of him died years ago." Michael Myers in this film, as a character, was just as scary as he was in the original. The best Myers since Castle IMO.
Which brings me to another point that I really liked. I think that of all the actors who could have played Loomis, Rob really picked the right one, which was surely a difficult task. Sure, many suggested Anthony Hopkins, but (and I hate to say this) having played similar characters several times, he may have had a spirited performance, but he would have taken you out of the real world, and remind you that it was only a movie. Rob could have cast an actor that wasn't that well known, but then the performance would have been lacking, and have the same effect. With someone like McDowell, he has that face that is just obscure enough that you can buy him as a real person, yet he is also a great enough actor that he can still pull an amazing performance.
The rest of the cast was great as well. I really liked Harris as Annie, and Laurie was cast pretty well in my opinion. She acted like a real teenage girl. I would know, there's one next door, and then there's my younger sister. As for greeting each other with "Hey, Bitches" I think that was actually rather spot on. Real girls aren't like cartoon girls, or 7th Heaven characters, who go wide-eyed the moment someone uses a curse word.
Like I said, the film isn't perfect, but it was definitely better than most, if not all of the sequels. As for how it measures up against the original, well, in terms of sheer quality, no, it wasn't better. But better isn't what they set out to do in the first place. I think this is the problem with most remakes. Many people who bash them believe that the initial concept is to make a better version. What Rob set out to do was make a Halloween that was just as good as the original, to make Michael Myers scary again, and at that he passed in flying colors. Sure, the original had good things that this film didn't have, but this film had good things that the original didn't have. They're different films, so you can't really judge them together. It's not a shot-for-shot remake, and it isn't a rehash either, so there's not much room to really compare everything. The only area where you can compare them is in the level of quality, and at that, they're at about the same level for me.
What Rob presented was a great film, that had a story that wasn't perfect. Therein lies the genius of it. It felt real. It didn't feel like a movie. While many will find that to make it a cluttered mess, it didn't for me. An example would be the way he presented Michael's victims. We didn't get to know them that well before he killed them. But when some serial killer kills a group of people, and it is announced on the news, what do you think the chances are that you know those people? You don't. And yet, it is still horrifying. In other words, you don't have to know the victims to understand how terrifying the crime is.
In a movie, you follow these people around, the camera being your eye as you stalk them invisibly. You really get to know the people. Here, by not following them, it presents that realism quite well. You don't know who these people are, but whether you know them or not, Michael Myers is still presented as a terrifying being. Speaking of ol' Mikey...
I thought Tyler and Daeg's performances were amazing. I loved how even though you could sympathize with him in his early life, it didn't change how bizarre, and truly evil he was. Right in the opening scenes, we see him petting a rat, and then we see moments later cleaning a bloody scalpel or something. Then, he tells his mother that his rat died. You know what he did. It's not that hard to figure out. What's great about this is that it shows that even though he had this terrible life, he didn't just snap over night. He's been going crazy for some time. The scene with the bully in the woods was powerful, at least for me. His eventual escape was equally amazing. How he took out those guards truly showed his power, and menace. I especially liked when he killed Ismael Cruz, because that was the indicator that the young boy that went into Smiths Grove was not the monster that walked out. To quote the original Doctor Loomis, "That part of him died years ago." Michael Myers in this film, as a character, was just as scary as he was in the original. The best Myers since Castle IMO.
Which brings me to another point that I really liked. I think that of all the actors who could have played Loomis, Rob really picked the right one, which was surely a difficult task. Sure, many suggested Anthony Hopkins, but (and I hate to say this) having played similar characters several times, he may have had a spirited performance, but he would have taken you out of the real world, and remind you that it was only a movie. Rob could have cast an actor that wasn't that well known, but then the performance would have been lacking, and have the same effect. With someone like McDowell, he has that face that is just obscure enough that you can buy him as a real person, yet he is also a great enough actor that he can still pull an amazing performance.
The rest of the cast was great as well. I really liked Harris as Annie, and Laurie was cast pretty well in my opinion. She acted like a real teenage girl. I would know, there's one next door, and then there's my younger sister. As for greeting each other with "Hey, Bitches" I think that was actually rather spot on. Real girls aren't like cartoon girls, or 7th Heaven characters, who go wide-eyed the moment someone uses a curse word.
Like I said, the film isn't perfect, but it was definitely better than most, if not all of the sequels. As for how it measures up against the original, well, in terms of sheer quality, no, it wasn't better. But better isn't what they set out to do in the first place. I think this is the problem with most remakes. Many people who bash them believe that the initial concept is to make a better version. What Rob set out to do was make a Halloween that was just as good as the original, to make Michael Myers scary again, and at that he passed in flying colors. Sure, the original had good things that this film didn't have, but this film had good things that the original didn't have. They're different films, so you can't really judge them together. It's not a shot-for-shot remake, and it isn't a rehash either, so there's not much room to really compare everything. The only area where you can compare them is in the level of quality, and at that, they're at about the same level for me.
