HorrorMovieFans.com

Loving cuckoo Laurie.

I think it looks fuck'n great, and nice nods to previous now non-canon sequels (I mainly spotted 4 and7).

That looks awesome! I can not wait to see this. October feels like a decade away.

A decently solid trailer, and interesting choice disregarding the second film onward. Hopefully it'll be as good as it looks.

Is this a sequel to the original or a sequel to part II?

All I gather from the trailer is they say he's shot by his psychiatrist and taken into custody that night. P. vague.

Jason wrote:Is this a sequel to the original or a sequel to part II?

All I gather from the trailer is they say he's shot by his psychiatrist and taken into custody that night. P. vague.

Not at all vague if you paid attention. It bluntly states that the brother sister thing is a rumor right in that trailer, meaning II isn't even canon anymore.

Which is technically a good thing even though I really like II. Carpenter's long admitted that plot twist was a drunken mistake and removes the mystique from the character.

DancesWithWerewolves wrote:

Jason wrote:Is this a sequel to the original or a sequel to part II?

All I gather from the trailer is they say he's shot by his psychiatrist and taken into custody that night. P. vague.

Not at all vague if you paid attention. It bluntly states that the brother sister thing is a rumor right in that trailer, meaning II isn't even canon anymore.

Which is technically a good thing even though I really like II. Carpenter's long admitted that plot twist was a drunken mistake and removes the mystique from the character.

Yeah, but when they say the sister thing is a myth in that trailer, they're literally addressing part II. So why bring up the sister thing at all if part II is not considered canon?

Jason wrote:

DancesWithWerewolves wrote:

Jason wrote:Is this a sequel to the original or a sequel to part II?

All I gather from the trailer is they say he's shot by his psychiatrist and taken into custody that night. P. vague.

Not at all vague if you paid attention. It bluntly states that the brother sister thing is a rumor right in that trailer, meaning II isn't even canon anymore.

Which is technically a good thing even though I really like II. Carpenter's long admitted that plot twist was a drunken mistake and removes the mystique from the character.

Yeah, but when they say the sister thing is a myth in that trailer, they're literally addressing part II. So why bring up the sister thing at all if part II is not considered canon?

Just to squash that bug right off the bat.

Monster wrote:

Jason wrote:

DancesWithWerewolves wrote:

Jason wrote:Is this a sequel to the original or a sequel to part II?

All I gather from the trailer is they say he's shot by his psychiatrist and taken into custody that night. P. vague.

Not at all vague if you paid attention. It bluntly states that the brother sister thing is a rumor right in that trailer, meaning II isn't even canon anymore.

Which is technically a good thing even though I really like II. Carpenter's long admitted that plot twist was a drunken mistake and removes the mystique from the character.

Yeah, but when they say the sister thing is a myth in that trailer, they're literally addressing part II. So why bring up the sister thing at all if part II is not considered canon?

Just to squash that bug right off the bat.

Exactly. It wasn't a rumor in II, it was official files and memories.

Monster wrote:

Jason wrote:

DancesWithWerewolves wrote:

Jason wrote:Is this a sequel to the original or a sequel to part II?

All I gather from the trailer is they say he's shot by his psychiatrist and taken into custody that night. P. vague.

Not at all vague if you paid attention. It bluntly states that the brother sister thing is a rumor right in that trailer, meaning II isn't even canon anymore.

Which is technically a good thing even though I really like II. Carpenter's long admitted that plot twist was a drunken mistake and removes the mystique from the character.

Yeah, but when they say the sister thing is a myth in that trailer, they're literally addressing part II. So why bring up the sister thing at all if part II is not considered canon?

Just to squash that bug right off the bat.

Why address it if it's supposed to be ignored, anyway? :p

Jesus christ dude. Because the public has grown up with the knowledge gained from two, as well as that whole path been beaten to death in all the sequels (sans III) since. They're making it clear to the audience (obviously not to your thick skull) that the revelation (and by proxy, II) is tossed out. No more siblings. Done. Chase your tail all you want, it's blunt and clear they wiped II away with that one damn comment.

Why are you acting so butthurt? They're ignoring the part II timeline, but acknowledging the sister twist (lol) from the exact movie. Any half ass Halloween fan can decipher that if this is a direct sequel to the original, then the sister thing is out the window. No need to be counter-productive and acknowledge what you're trying to ignore because the audience might be too dumb to follow. Lol. Maybe address it more subtly instead of bluntly saying "They're not related! Part II didn't happen!". Lol

But I'm cool with the explanation if they really feel like they had to. Not shitting on it at all. Totally stoked for this movie. Just wanted clarity if the events of part II are ignored or not. Which they are. So this is Halloween II, not Halloween III.
Rodger.

I'm butthurt because I'm utterly perplexed you could find that "vague" when it was pretty clear. They're having nods to other sequels (there are nods to 3, 4, and 7 in the trailer too), this was their fun way of nodding to II, without being a sequel to II, and erasing II's actual events and revelations. How that could be confusing it mindboggling. Yes, the die hard Halloween fans will know, but no one else will. Just like the general public STILL doesn't know Mrs. Voorhees was the killer in the first Friday the 13th (I literally just saw this, this morning, in a Lee Vervoort post on FB, in one of his friends comments), the public needs to be hit over the head (bluntly).

Plus, production has been very open for a long time all sequels were no longer canon. But the general public doesn't read production interviews/statements either. Trailer's the best way to get that information out there beforehand.

I also suspected you might be trolling us, so I was prepared for a reply with

They also probably learned from H20, that there should probably be something addressed to actually erase a section, because there's a chunk of people out there that actually believe Laurie abandoned Jamie in Haddonfield during 4-6, taking her preferred child (John) with her to California, making her a terrible mother. It's inevitable if they didn't say something to counter II, there's going to be those idiots in the seats going "durrr...but what about...?"

I could understand a nod to previous movies like they do in remakes. You just don't often see a franchise giving a nod to a movie in the same series that you're blatantly trying to ignore. So I just wanted clarification.

The Mrs. Voorhees thing makes it pretty obvious to me that the general public still doesn't realize she was the killer. I'd wager Scream is responsible for half the generation of 90s kids actually knowing that Mrs. Voorhees was the killer. So many shit ass "horror fans" learned it because of that movie and it's disgusting. I just see no reason to cater to those idiots. If the modern day horror fan is too dumb or out of touch with the horror genre to realize Mrs. Voorhees was the first killer in the Friday series, they're certainly not even going to realize Laurie was Michael's sister in part II. I wouldn't put it past today's modern day moviegoers to binge watch all 8 movies from the Halloween franchise and immediately forget Laurie is his sister. lol.

That's why I'm like "why even explain it, especially so bluntly?". Most people going to the theater probably won't know they were related anyway, and the ones who do know are certainly smart enough to decipher that this storyline isn't family-based, anymore. Which a lot of people had a problem with. I'm cool with them ignoring part II, or making an actual part III. It's just good to finally see horror coming back, albeit in remakes/rehashings of popular franchises.

It's pretty cultural osmosis by now, due to how heavy the sequels were with it. It was like the "No, I am your father" for horror. Except fueled by 6 pack of beer and trying to complete a court order instead of being creative

I am kinda with Jason on the sister line. I think it is too meta. I get the point of it, it just seems ham fisted.

And the notion that she is the sister is as good as any other reason why he is especially compelled to kill her.

Isn't the real problem that they keep shoe-horning JLC into the series when her arc ended multiple times? It is starting to feel like some sci fi shit with versions of Laurie in some kind of multi-verse. What would happen if all the Laurie's touched each other? Would the world end?

BTW, the trailer looks great except for the JLC stuff. The new guy hunting Myers seems cool. I like the tone and overall aesthetic. the mask looks great. Looks suspenseful. Laurie being Linda Hamilton in T2 and possibly the closet jump scare are my only possible gripes.

Something that's even more telling about how the second movie won't be canon is where it mentions Michael killed three teenagers (Annie, Bob, and Lynda) before being shot by Loomis. If the second movie was canon also, that body count would be much higher.