Nice article. Although, you said Donald was last seen in Halloween 5. He was in fact in Halloween 6.

Halloween 3 is unjustly maligned. It is a terrific little 80's b-movie thriller./This film is also ripe for a remake, just take the "Halloween" moniker of of it. People hate it because it does not have Myers in it. I think those people are wrong.

But that was the idea back when Carpenter produced it. Every year they were going to have a new Halloween themed film, using the name "Halloween" as the title. I think this would have been much better then the dreck we got instead over the last 25 years. But fan backlash towards the movie forced them back into the same ol', same ol' storylines. How interesting has Myers story become in the lame duck sequels that followed? I would rather have something new to see.

I am eagerly awaiting the dvd of "Trick r Treat" as to see something new and infinitely more interesting than another entry into the over wrought myers saga, that is Halloween themed.

Hallospaceboy: I personally both agree and disagree with you on Halloween III. I wouldn't call it "terrific," but I do think the sheer vitriol with which it was greeted was out of line with its modest virtues.

The trouble is that Halloween II set up the expectation that Halloween movies would be about Michael Myers, not horror movies whose stories somehow involve the holiday. When people feel someone has pulled a bait-and-switch on them, they get mighty mad, and poor little Halloween III took the heat.

That said, it deserves its place at the bottom of the list, not for being an unspeakably bad movie, but for being unspeakably bad within the context of the Halloween movie series.

Interestingly Friday the 13th producer/director Sean S. Cunningham also thought that building a franchise around an unstoppable serial killer was a bad idea, especially given that the original film's killer was an older lady and she's dead by the end. He argued strenuously that trying to make Jason Voorhees, glimpsed only as a deformed child in a dream sequence was stupid, and that "Friday the 13th" should be used as a brand name for a series of otherwise unconnected horror movies. He was overruled, and Jason lives on.

mkrjr247: You're right; I messed up and it's now as it should be. I blame... druids! Yeah, druids -- they're behind everything. Thanks for having my back!

I remember renting Halloween III when I was a kid and being totally confused. I spent the whole movie wondering where Michael was!

As bad as it was, I would put Halloween: Resurrection as the worst simply for the first 20 minutes or so. We rooted for Laurie Strode for nearly 25 years and I for one was thrilled when she came back in H20 and defeated Michael. Then in Resurrection they had him COME AND KILL HER?!?!?! I mean, I know they had to bring him back to life, but HOW could they kill Laurie? THIS was how they decided to end her story? I was so pissed off I could barely even watch the rest of the movie.

Haha, no problem McD! I'm just thrilled to see a Halloween article on here! It's been so many years, it's hard to keep track.

And yes, those damn druids do have their way of messing things up. Parking ticket? blame Druids. Late for work? Druids.
Nobody can mess with that reasoning!

Well Carpenter and company probably did not do enough leg work to explain to people what this Halloween III would be. I suppose I knew what it would be since I was reading the magazines of the time in regards to it.

(Ah the pre internet days. I remember them well. )

But still I suppose I have some confusion towards the audience who wants the same old thing time after time. I love the Myers storyline as much as anyone, but looking back at where it went, I can't help but champion this little B-movie that was kind of original at the time. I really appreciate that about it. I think any of the Halloween movies after #3, have been kind of ridiculous to say the least. And to have had a glimmer of something new with a Halloween name, really makes me wish things went differently.

Rob Zombie's remake is a mess all on it's own. Sometimes, when I look at these remakes, like Texas Chainsaw or F13th, I ask myself: is this any better than if it was called part #4 or #5 rather than a reboot? And I think in TCM & F13th , that yes, it was better than the schlocky sequels. And even Zombie's as bad as it was, was still better than Halloween parts 4-8. At some point you just have to blow it up and start over. I mean Jason went into space, how much more could they do?

To me Freddy, Jason and Myers have become the McDonald's of horror: Tho sometimes it can be comforting , overall it's bland, dull and bereft of creativity. You know what you are going to get each time you take a bite. And maybe you just shouldn't be there in the first place.

They all need a restart/reboot/remake. Halloween III was much like this at the time. They just didn't have the access to the public to get the word out the way we do now with the internet.

P.S.
I'm new to the AMC blogs, but have really enjoyed what I have been reading here.

Oh and the Druids were the baddies in #3 as well. The toymaker Conal Cochran was a druid witch. :-)

See, it's always those frakkin' druids.

I think the fast-food analogy is apt: People like brand names -- for clothing, restaurants, furniture, watches and, yes, movies -- because they want to be reassured that they're buying something they're going to like.

That said, I think Rob Zombie's Halloween remake was worlds better that the Friday the 13th and Texas Chainsaw do-overs. To my eyes, Zombie's Halloween is clearly the work of someone who loves, respects and knows horror movies, while the others smack of rank commercial exploitation.

Not that the original TCM and Friday the 13th -- especially Friday the 13th -- weren't themselves first and foremost movies driven by financial concerns -- Hooper was looking to break into the business and Cunningham wanted to make some fast cash. And Halloween was a work for hire. But all three had a spark of originality, a spark that I think is conspicuously lacking from the Friday and TCM remakes.

I hope you'll keep visiting the Hacker boards -- I love talking to real horror fans.

A good friend and horror aficionado says to me about the remakes to all these classic movies:

"These movies are from a different time, different place."

Never can you imitate the sheer audacity of a movie like TCM or Halloween. They were of their time, and still timeless. And yes all of them were and are about making money. No doubt about that. Horror is always an easy sell, it seems for film. A way to make a quick buck.
But the spark, indeed all great things need that one spark. It's starts with an idea and some passionate people to get it together. Films like TCM were so amazing because we were so easily shocked back then. Add to the fact that the movie really has no blood, yet people insist it is a bloody film. And that they saw it.
Again, it was a different time , different place. You can't recoup that magic.
Anyone who tries to remake them is already working from a loss. It is very rare we get remakes better than originals, tho a couple have done it:

Cronenberg's The Fly
Carpenter's The Thing

Both of those succeeded due to making it completely new and not trying to copy so much other than the framework of the story.

As for the TCM and Friday remakes, I enjoyed them for the most part. They were slicked up versions and for me, they were ok. Again, I compared to some of their sequels and thought, Ok this new Jason, well they added some new story to him and made him a little bit more than a mentally deficient and deformed maniac. He was a smart and cunning maniac with an underground lair, and quite possibly a farmer of illegal substances. Plus it had the requisite kills along with a nice amount of T&A. I don't think you could ask for more than that in a F13th movie. These are not deep character studies, just movies about kids getting killed by a homicidal maniac.

Zombie's Halloween fails for me because it does exactly what it should not do:
EXPLAIN TOO MUCH ABOUT MM.

Just look to Star Wars prequels and see where this fails: Did we need to know Vader was a whiny little kid at one time? No. I like the mystery instead.

Showing a killer as a kid takes all the mystery out of the monster. Myers was scary when it was unknown as to why he killed his sister. The evil was there. Once I see that he had a stripper for a mother and a drug addict abusive step father, its no wonder he killed people. I would have too.
Zombie missed the boat on making a play about suburban angst among American families. The idea would have played better if Michael had the all American family, and then we get to see the cracks that all families have and perhaps within that we can understand something about his nature. If it was a "normal" family with secrets. Instead we got white trash on parade. Ho-hum.
Then the second half for me works a slight bit better. Zombie at least made Michael a really scary force again. Tearing thru that neighborhood and destroying everything. I did sense his power. Michael felt scary in a way he has not in a long, long time. So I appreciate that.
All this being said, I will see RZ's H2. I sincerely hope it's something new and fun to see with the characters. I look forward to seeing Rob be more original with it. I think he has the talent for it.

And thanks, I will keep visiting. It's a good site.