I like that they are making it a sequel to the movie, not just the book…
Was somewhat surprised by this, I must say. I was actually kind of surprised when they didn’t take the opportunity this film provided them to go ahead and remake The Shining, given the pervasiveness that reboots/sequels/etc have in our culture these days.
Give them time…
Mike Flanagan is an expert director. I loved his take on “The Haunting on Hill House” and his version of “Gerard´s Game”. And to have this film being bumped up to this year’s November (instead of the previously planned January ´20 release) is a sign of confidence in it.
If Flanagan had chosen to stick to the novel and not incorporate elements of Kubrick´s film he would have missed an opportunity, IMO. Glad to see that there will be a connection. This is definitely one of the rare must-see movies for me this year.
Here’s a cool thing about Doctor Sleep - aside from 1 shot, they didn’t use footage from The Shining at all…
4 Likes
Oh, I don’t disagree at all. My surprise was simply that, given King’s hatred of Kubrick’s film, that he would have allowed the rights to go to filmmakers that would be looking to use that as a jumping point for a Doctor Sleep adaptation.
It will be curious to see how they handle the Overlook in the film, whether those scenes will be dreams or hallucinations on Danny’s part or whether they’ll reconfigure the finale of the film to take place inside, with Danny having to not only confront the True Knot but also the demons from his past from within the Overlook.
Flanagan definitely gets the benefit of the doubt, though. After making a near masterpiece out of the previously thought to be unfilmable Gerald’s Game, I’m definitely interested to see what he can do with this. It looks terrific thus far, I must say. I still think it’ll all come down to the casting, though. I think he’s knocked it out of the park with McGregor (not sure there’s a better choice for that part), but Abra is where any reasonably faithful adaptation of the novel hinges.
2 Likes
Oddly enough, when reading Doctor Sleep some years ago, I imagined Danny quite a bit like McGregor. The type seems to fit perfectly.
I seem to recall a similar-looking character in my mind as well. That scene in the trailer where he and Abra are talking on the bench looks almost exactly like how I imagined it when reading the novel.
2 Likes
But… why? Yeah, money. But still, that reboot film was so great, it took the trauma of Laurie seriously, it dealt with the repercussions for her family so well, and it gave us a fitting ending for Michael.
Now… he has to come back and everybody has to go through the whole spiel again?
I really hope they have a wonderful original idea how to tell a true story, not the usual rehash. But I fear that’s exactly what this will be.
1 Like
Danny McBride did say that he and Green originally planned to pitch their plan to Carpenter and Blum as a two-film idea, so perhaps they do have something further to say on this one. Also, given how long it took them to announce a follow-up after the buckets of money the film made, maybe there was some behind the scenes discussions that needed to take place before everyone, Curtis especially, was comfortable with signing up for another go.
1 Like
I liked Blumhouse’s Halloween sequel a whole lot (particularly Carpenter’s score).
But I found the home alone finale out of kilter with the excellent back to basics approach in the rest of the film preceding it. It wasn’t a bad finale, just a bit run of the mill compared to the marvellous work throughout. It was without doubt a hugely worthy continuation of Carpenters masterpiece.
Hoping in the next one they resist the temptation of creating a high concept setting/scenario to up the stakes for the finale. Have faith in the characters and tone and keep it a simple; avoid including other characters in the finale in an attempt to bring extra jeopardy; what you get in jeopardy you lose in the all important focus upon this mysterious, inciting connection between the siblings Strode and Myers.
Not to nitpick, but in Halloween (2018), Myers and Strode are not related.
I didn’t find the finale of the film to be too over-the-top in terms of it adhering to a style similar to that of Home Alone, something that we’ve seen crop up in more and more films these days it seems as those who were the target audience of that film begin to go on and reach the age where they’re making their own films. I thought it was a nice touch to have the symbol of decades of Strode pain, the hidden room below the kitchen counter, turn out to be their salvation.
2 Likes
It’s the one part of the movie that didn’t feel right to me but I also understand it character wise so I let it go.
Fun fact about that scene - Laurie goes into a bedroom with a bunch of mannequins in it. That was a replica of the room from the end of the first film when she’s trapped in the closet. They were originally going to film a flashback scene so they needed the set, but when they cut the scene they used it for this instead…
1 Like
Wow, i missed that completely! Was there a reason visible for that decision; A positive angle on the story that resulted from the ‘genetic divorce’? Or was it simply arbitrary, deemed surplus, or too tricky for them to write?
It’s a shame, because that was one of the more interesting aspects of the original movie and the canon (as poor as it is). Myers had always been drawn to Strode as though in need to finish something…
…Perhaps a distorted benevolent mission to end his genetic line and thus end it’s curse (imagined by Myers, or not).
The genetics they share also made it a little more plausible that Strode somehow survives him when also else are slashed and pulped asunder; perhaps she latently represents the only real threat to Myers, giving him the less benevolent and far more likely motive for always homing in on her.
None of this may have ever entered Carpenter’s mind, but making them siblings allowed fans like me to read such things into it and enjoy it that much more. So, does the retro-redacting of the familial aspect diminish the legend? for me, yes!
The great thing about Carpenter´s original film was that Myers indeed was The Shape. No explanation, no insight into his character, just pure evil which (obviously) could not be killed.
The obsession with backstory and character explanation which dominated the last 20 years in pop culture actually robs the mystery and almost always ends up disappointing.
3 Likes
The sibling angle was only "revealed " in the first sequel as I recall, so 2018 ignoring all sequels meant the sibling connection couldn’t be used.
Enjoyed the recent one immensely can’t see a way forward for the sequel that won’t diminish the character, but then I’m not a writer…
Primarily, since it was something that originated in a sequel and therefore wasn’t a part of Carpenter’s original vision for the characters. I would also think that, given that they explored that arc in H4, H5, H6,p H20, HR, RZH, and RZH2, there most likely wasn’t anything new that could be done with it. Also given how poorly it was generally executed in the sequels, dropping it wan’t a huge deal, IMO.
Technically it wasn’t the sequel that revealed the brother/sister angle, it was part of the additional material Carpenter wrote for the TV version of the first film. Laurie was just finding out about it in Halloween 2.
One interesting tidbit on that - in Halloween '18 we see the name Michael Aubrey Myers on a sheet. David Gordon Green said that was because we see that name in a similar way in that additional material for the first film…
1 Like