 Originally Posted by 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....
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.
|
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
)
Bookmarks