Rob Zombie

[Minerva_Zombi]

So I just watched the Unrated Directors cut of Halloween 2. And I was one of the few that defended it when it came out in theaters. But wow... The directors cut really makes me question my respect for Rob Zombie as a film maker. The ending is COMPLETE SHIT. Seriously, I was pissed. I loved the theatrical ending. With the slow descent into some original halloween music. It really really put the whole thing into perspective. But wow...

The only thing better about it is the fact that it takes more time to delve into the life and mind of Laurie and her slow descent into insanity. Made the ending work better for me. But, otherwise I prefer the theatrical version.

I'm starting to believe that Rob may be a better Bonnie and Clyde or Wild Bunch type of director. Where the story contains plenty of blood shed. But its not a horror film. Rob isn't very good at directing horror. Good horror directors are good at building tension and actually being SCARY. Not just loud and gorey.

The Devil's Rejects worked because it wasn't simply a horror flick. If one at all... Maybe Rob should step away from Horror and go for a Tarantino Type of style. Hes good at creating characters and has a good mind and eye for character development. Its almost as if he feels he has to throw in the hrror stuff cuz hes obligated to. Imagine if the Halloween remake was just a full feature on the childhood of Michael Myers. It would've been great. The second half of that film is what kinda dragged the movie down for me. I dunno, maybe Horror isn't Rob's strength. Who would've thought?

Maybe his love of the genre is holding him back from doing what he's actually good at...

Thoughts?

[Will.E.B.Dead]

Great post and I feel Rob Zombie can make another great horror flick just leave the remakes alone.

[LouCipherr]

The directors cut really makes me question my respect for Rob Zombie as a film maker.

I started questioning this with every movie after TDR.


Hes good at creating characters and has a good mind and eye for character development.

As long as they're white trash, sure, but other than that? Not at all.

I don't know. I was all for him doing the remake of the original Halloween - that is, until I saw it. :rolleyes:

I honestly believe he's a one trick pony, and his 'one trick' being TDR. That film was great, but the rest of his output has been shaky at best.

[fulci fan]

Since video stores are going out of business, I got a copy of this for free. It is one of the worst movies I have ever seen in my life. I usually enjoy Rob Zombie's films, but this was awful. The big problems I had with it were the teenager dialogue and how every character seemed to change completely. Loomis totally broke character and became some Hollywood, asshole type and Laurie was some annoying bitch that kept saying "Fuck". Another big problem was how human Rob Zombie made the character of Michael Myers. In the original, he was sort of a mysterious monster. In this one, he is just some crazy guy that makes noises and has dreams of his mother. Maybe ol' Zombie should have a go at children films for Disney....

[JDFP]

Since video stores are going out of business, I got a copy of this for free. It is one of the worst movies I have ever seen in my life. I usually enjoy Rob Zombie's films, but this was awful. The big problems I had with it were the teenager dialogue and how every character seemed to change completely. Loomis totally broke character and became some Hollywood, asshole type and Laurie was some annoying bitch that kept saying "Fuck". Another big problem was how human Rob Zombie made the character of Michael Myers. In the original, he was sort of a mysterious monster. In this one, he is just some crazy guy that makes noises and has dreams of his mother. Maybe ol' Zombie should have a go at children films for Disney....

For a guy who praises Fulci as the "God of film-making" I wouldn't recommend casting stones at any other directors out there (except maybe Uwe Boll, we can all make an exception for his 'work', and oh how I use the term 'work' loosely). But, that's just me...

I don't see R.Z. as a horror director but more of a young Sam Peckinpah who hasn't found his calling yet. Yes, he's been delving only in the horror category of exploitation (Eli Roth, the "Saw" shit) films with a horror undertone. I think he could branch out and really do something masterful if he applied himself to it. The question would be if someone would be willing to give him the budget/ability to do so in telling a more unique less-exploitation-like film (it's the age old argument of Romero attempting to branch out from horror as well). Is R.Z. stuck in his mold because of who he is or because of what media/society expects from him, or both?

I agree with the OP here that I think R.Z. should branch out into other categories. Whereas Carpenter aimed for the "bogeyman" approach with Myers, R.Z. went for the psychopath approach -- and I give him kudos for his remake of "Halloween" in going with this other side-of-the-road approach. Myers is just some crazy as hell psychopath -- it's good to realize that society is full of these types and they are often worse than any "Nightmare bogeyman" we could imagine. While I agree "Halloween 2" (remake) was a weak film for R.Z., compared to the majority of mass-produced Hollywood slasher-killer of the week shit it was a decent (mind you, decent, not very good like his re-telling of the original source material) work.

Of course people will hate R.Z. for his approach in H1 and H2 because so much is dramatically changed from the originals. I give him kudos for not being afraid of turning Loomis into an asshole or attempting to make the character of Laurie into a more realistic female who has undergone some majorly screwed up last few years. Anyone expecting for her to remain the innocent sweet girl after being brutalized and her friends/family being slaughtered are apparently not attempting to base any realistic expectations on this character. Of course she would be majorly screwed up and I find it almost laughable that someone would attack this character for now using the "f" word and turning into who she has become in large part due to the events that have transpired in her life. H2 had many issues as a film, but this characterization of her in the film is one area I think R.Z. really hit the proverbial nail on the head.

I'm 29 and I, for one, would have to argue that there really aren't that many directors in this generation with the ability to make a horror film anymore. People being slaughtered (here's looking at you, Eli Roth) in creative ways isn't horror. Blood and guts and "supernatural" forces aren't really horror. Sure, all of these have something to do with the horror genre, but horror is making people think and putting people into situations where they are completed ripped from the comfort of life as they have always known it. I think "Schindler's List" is a good example of what I believe to be one of the finest horror films of all time for the ability to point a camera at us as humans and saying: "Hey, guess what? We don't need supernatural elements, aliens, slashers, and all that jazz -- all we have to do is hold up a mirror to ourselves." Truly great horror films are about the human condition first and foremost, the story and the characters. This is why Romero's original trilogy is so damn good -- it's a story about the characters first and foremost.

Our generation (I'm looking at the other X'er's and you poor, poor Y Geners out there and the Millennials too damn busy on their cell-phones) is sorely missing people in our generation who can present the human condition. I give Shyamalan credit for trying --- sometimes he misses ("The Happening") but when it gets it right, damn, he gets it right. I also give credit to Frank Darabont, I think his work is masterful. But, to quote the great George Jones, who's gonna fill their shoes? The shoes of men like Romero, Argento, Carpenter, and even Fulci in some ways for his atmosphere which I'll give him that much in saying I respect, the great film-makers of horror with our generation?

I guess the real "horror" of contemporary horror films is that it's been destroyed in lieu of exploitation and the plot devices (blood, guts, tits and ass) instead of the story and characters.

j.p.

[Danny]

rob zombie needs to get out of horror and try making something else. I think because of his music career he thinks people only expact films from it that have the same vibe as his album covers. But when you see him talk about films its eerily similar to kevin smith or quentin tarantino, he genuinely seems to love making films. But like i said its like he's pidgeon holing himself as the exploitation guy.
Honestly in this day and age the exploitation ting is kind of gone in the internet age. nowadays you have cheap indie flicks, big budget blockbusters, pieces of shit and porn. You will have a cheap indie horror or a big budget deal, hell probably some pr0n horror...thing but the exploitation genre is dead and trying it now is like intentionally trying to make your film look like it was made in the 70's because you want it too.
I would bet very good money that if he sat down and wrote a movie, not a gore flick, not a 70's nostalgia trip or a bloody vehicle for his not-at-all-an-actress wife then the man could make something genuinely good.
The devils rejects was just as much a 70's western as a horror and whilst it was obviously inspired by the likes of texas chainsaw there was something undeniably modern about it that i think he really needs to touch upon.

Otherwise he will release 2 or 3 more crappy films that rehash ideas almost half a century old and get to the point where nobody cares anymore. and honestly i reckon he can do better.

[SRP76]

pr0n horror

I must ask. What the hell is that?

[Danny]

I must ask. What the hell is that?

given what we know about japan on the whole i must assume they have bridged horror and porn.

[SRP76]

Ah, okay.

I can't judge Zombie too harshly. I've only seen Halloween and Devil's Rejects, so I'm not qualified. I can say that from the little I've seen of his work, I'm not impressed.

I could tolerate Halloween, but The Devil's Retards just didn't do it for me. It was 2 hours of pointlessness as far as I'm concerned. Felt like watching people run in a circle; they're not getting anywhere. And don't get me started on the utter whatthefuckness of "oh, here's some giant/evilGooniestard just materializing out of nowhere" routine at the end.

[Danny]

Ah, okay.

I can't judge Zombie too harshly. I've only seen Halloween and Devil's Rejects, so I'm not qualified. I can say that from the little I've seen of his work, I'm not impressed.

I could tolerate Halloween, but The Devil's Retards just didn't do it for me. It was 2 hours of pointlessness as far as I'm concerned. Felt like watching people run in a circle; they're not getting anywhere. And don't get me started on the utter whatthefuckness of "oh, here's some giant/evilGooniestard just materializing out of nowhere" routine at the end.

then for your own mental well being dont watch the house of a 1000 corpses.

its, its not great. i'll be honest with you.

[fulci fan]

For a guy who praises Fulci as the "God of film-making" I wouldn't recommend casting stones at any other directors out there (except maybe Uwe Boll, we can all make an exception for his 'work', and oh how I use the term 'work' loosely). But, that's just me...

I don't see R.Z. as a horror director but more of a young Sam Peckinpah who hasn't found his calling yet. Yes, he's been delving only in the horror category of exploitation (Eli Roth, the "Saw" shit) films with a horror undertone. I think he could branch out and really do something masterful if he applied himself to it. The question would be if someone would be willing to give him the budget/ability to do so in telling a more unique less-exploitation-like film (it's the age old argument of Romero attempting to branch out from horror as well). Is R.Z. stuck in his mold because of who he is or because of what media/society expects from him, or both?

I agree with the OP here that I think R.Z. should branch out into other categories. Whereas Carpenter aimed for the "bogeyman" approach with Myers, R.Z. went for the psychopath approach -- and I give him kudos for his remake of "Halloween" in going with this other side-of-the-road approach. Myers is just some crazy as hell psychopath -- it's good to realize that society is full of these types and they are often worse than any "Nightmare bogeyman" we could imagine. While I agree "Halloween 2" (remake) was a weak film for R.Z., compared to the majority of mass-produced Hollywood slasher-killer of the week shit it was a decent (mind you, decent, not very good like his re-telling of the original source material) work.

Of course people will hate R.Z. for his approach in H1 and H2 because so much is dramatically changed from the originals. I give him kudos for not being afraid of turning Loomis into an asshole or attempting to make the character of Laurie into a more realistic female who has undergone some majorly screwed up last few years. Anyone expecting for her to remain the innocent sweet girl after being brutalized and her friends/family being slaughtered are apparently not attempting to base any realistic expectations on this character. Of course she would be majorly screwed up and I find it almost laughable that someone would attack this character for now using the "f" word and turning into who she has become in large part due to the events that have transpired in her life. H2 had many issues as a film, but this characterization of her in the film is one area I think R.Z. really hit the proverbial nail on the head.

I'm 29 and I, for one, would have to argue that there really aren't that many directors in this generation with the ability to make a horror film anymore. People being slaughtered (here's looking at you, Eli Roth) in creative ways isn't horror. Blood and guts and "supernatural" forces aren't really horror. Sure, all of these have something to do with the horror genre, but horror is making people think and putting people into situations where they are completed ripped from the comfort of life as they have always known it. I think "Schindler's List" is a good example of what I believe to be one of the finest horror films of all time for the ability to point a camera at us as humans and saying: "Hey, guess what? We don't need supernatural elements, aliens, slashers, and all that jazz -- all we have to do is hold up a mirror to ourselves." Truly great horror films are about the human condition first and foremost, the story and the characters. This is why Romero's original trilogy is so damn good -- it's a story about the characters first and foremost.

Our generation (I'm looking at the other X'er's and you poor, poor Y Geners out there and the Millennials too damn busy on their cell-phones) is sorely missing people in our generation who can present the human condition. I give Shyamalan credit for trying --- sometimes he misses ("The Happening") but when it gets it right, damn, he gets it right. I also give credit to Frank Darabont, I think his work is masterful. But, to quote the great George Jones, who's gonna fill their shoes? The shoes of men like Romero, Argento, Carpenter, and even Fulci in some ways for his atmosphere which I'll give him that much in saying I respect, the great film-makers of horror with our generation?

I guess the real "horror" of contemporary horror films is that it's been destroyed in lieu of exploitation and the plot devices (blood, guts, tits and ass) instead of the story and characters.

j.p.

I won't argue about Fulci. The character of Laurie changed from a normal gal to a teeny bopper diva. To me, she acted like a teenage girl that forgot to study for a big test. Not someone suffering from post traumatic stress disorder. When I think about it, she wasn't that bad until she decided to "party". I like Rob Zombie, I wouldn't cast any stones. I just think he went too crazy with H2. I seriously think that the Werewolf women of the SS would have been good as a full movie.

[Minerva_Zombi]

I started questioning this with every movie after TDR.



As long as they're white trash, sure, but other than that? Not at all.

I don't know. I was all for him doing the remake of the original Halloween - that is, until I saw it. :rolleyes:

I honestly believe he's a one trick pony, and his 'one trick' being TDR. That film was great, but the rest of his output has been shaky at best.


i think hes good at character development. halloween 2 took place two years later. ofr course people/characters are gonna change. thats life, he understands that. i'm def not the same person i was two years ago. just look at the great sequels, all characters drastically change over the years. (sarah connor in terminator is not the sarah connor of terminator 2.)

its just people dont expect that kind of character development from a horror flick.

imo, mcdowell's loomis is much more interesting than pleasence. his character completely changes throughout the two films. from young hippie to tired old man to johnny come lately celeb.

[LouCipherr]

MZ2 (have to use that, or MinionZombie will ask me wtf I'm talking about.. :lol:)

What I was referring to was not necessicarily the change of characters from H1 to H2 - it was more a comment on his overall films characters. Rob certainly has a knack for character development, but like I said, only when the characters are white trash. None of his films have featured anything but white trash characters.



imo, mcdowell's loomis is much more interesting than pleasence.

BLASPHEMY! :lol:

[shootemindehead]

Mmmm...

I sat through 'Halloween' and 'Halloween II' last night and I can't say I was too impressed. I'm no fan of the original (heresy to some), which I think is waaaay over-rated, but Zombie's effort (change your name son, you sound like a dick)...is just insipid. Which is one of the worse crimes of a film maker.

Rob's attempt to "humanise" Myers in the overlong opening sequence was a bad move. He spends way too much time on it and it doesn't "explain" Myers, as I'm sure the director hoped it would.

I did like the fact that Myers was presented as a human being and not some phantom "shape" like he was in the original. I think the unkillable Michael / Jason angle in the 'Halloween' and 'Friday the 13th' is bloody awful, to say the least.

But, while the first effort was watchable, the sequel was terrible although it started well enough. Those halucinatory sequences were rubbish and I suspect that they were included just to give Mrs Zombie some padding on her film career CV. Ridiculous idea.

Also, the charcter changes were too sharp and took me right out of the film. Th ereduction of Myers down to some 7ft tall tramp wearing a parka was a turn that really shouldn't have been taken.

Really...the only decent flick he's made was, as everyone says, 'The Devils Reject' and even that isn't that good. But sterling performances by Sid Haig and Bill Moseley make it watchable.

It certainly is some form of redemption after the utterly incompetent 'The House of 1000 Corpses'. Frankly, after that, I was amazed Rob Zombie ( :rolleyes: ) ever had a directors job again.