HALLOWEEN - Slashing Through History

[James Bond]

As funny an idea it is... I doubt it!!! I've never seen or heard him refer to the series, or Halloween 6 hahahaha.

Maybe Denise Richards. Bet she still remembers the script from her audition. To be honest, I wish she would've been Beth.

 

[Horrorfan_1986]

I wouldn't blame Rudd for trying to forget it. It's a laughable entry in a horror series from before Rudd was an A B+ list star. He probably hopes everyone thinks he's some random guy who started his career with Anchorman, with the exception of randomly doing a movie in the 90's with Clueless. Then again, I imagine his bank account will help him wipe away any tears from the Halloween 6 experience.

 

[James Bond]

A Halloween 6 hater, huh? You probably oughta stay away from my review of it, then, hahaha. I rated it low where it deserved it, but its strong points shine through. But that's the way it goes. Halloween 6 is relatively unpopular, and I can accept that. Either way, I think most will agree that it's not even CLOSE to as laughable as Halloween: Resurrection.

 

[Horrorfan_1986]

Eh, I don't mind Halloween 6. The Producer's Cut is a pretty decent movie.

 

[Smart Marx]

Eh, I don't mind Halloween 6. The Producer's Cut is a pretty decent movie.

:this:

Halloween 6 is one of my favorites in the series when it's the Producer's Cut...

or even one of Farrands' eleven scripts (Dimension butchered his scripts).

I don't hate the Theatrical version but it doesn't even understand what logic it's following. Whether it follows Thorn or it's test tube babies.

 

[Horrorfan_1986]

Dimension didn't do anything to mess up Halloween 6 (Other than refusing to pay Danielle Harris the money she deserved). It was the nutcase director, Joe Chappelle, who made life such a living hell for everyone involved.

My stance on the Producer's Cut is if you're going to have a terrible story about Michael Myers being a pawn of some ancient druid group, go with it. Fully embrace it. Have a well rounded script where you fully go into the topic. The theatrical cut half assed it and couldn't decide if it was a cult movie or a standard slasher flick. The Producer's Cut did the right thing and was much more of a cult flick.

 

[Smart Marx]

Dimension didn't do anything to mess up Halloween 6 (Other than refusing to pay Danielle Harris the money she deserved). It was the nutcase director, Joe Chappelle, who made life such a living hell for everyone involved.

It was a combination of both Dimension and Chappelle's involvement. To begin with when Dimension first picked up the Rights to Halloween (Miramax at the time) they wanted to start fresh and Farrands had to fight with them to involve the Jamie Lloyd character. He had to comprise with them that he'd kill her off, although in his original outline she made until the near end and sacrificed herself so she could stop Michael. If Jamie had to die, this was the right way to do it, even this though was not good enough for Dimension so he drafted his first screenplay where she's stabbed a third of the way through and makes it long enough to add closure to her character near the two-thirds mark.

The treatment of the Jamie Lloyd is the crack in the foundation that leads to all the other problems that spring up during production of this film. Had they just let Farrands do what he wanted I am confident we'd have a much more esteemed entry in the series. To top if off though Dimension wouldn't even pay Danielle Harris the salary increase she asked for considering it was her third appearance and she was no longer a child. It's bad enough you kill off a favorited character but you bring in an actress that looks nothing like her in the process.

Once Dimension approved of his general outline it took Farrands eleven drafts before he found one Dimension would approve of (I've read several of these and they're all excellent - I'll find you a copy if you don't have one). However despite churning out a script Dimension was happy with Chappelle and a writing partner still made several uncredited edits to the shooting script that made even what we see as the "Producer's Cut", nothing like the original script.

For one Chappelle was the genius who had Michael impregnate his niece, that was NOT in the script (Wynn rapes Jamie). The entire third act is also rewritten by chappelle and crew to add added hocus pocus that more or less fell flat, like the runes that Tommy uses to trap Michael. Farrands chuckles at that too. The funny thing is the test screening came back negative but I'm fairly certain it was because of the BS Chappelle threw in there and he's rewarded by being allowed to once again make uncredited rewrites with his partner to make the Theatrical Cut.

My stance on the Producer's Cut is if you're going to have a terrible story about Michael Myers being a pawn of some ancient druid group, go with it. Fully embrace it. Have a well rounded script where you fully go into the topic. The theatrical cut half assed it and couldn't decide if it was a cult movie or a standard slasher flick. The Producer's Cut did the right thing and was much more of a cult flick.

I full on agree with you on that Theartical Cut. Farrands originally had an a whole mythology ready to explore using the Thorn Cult and Druid history but Dimension and Chappelle kept interfering and adding their own nonsense to it.

When Chappelle finally got approval to do whatever he wanted to change the film after that poor screening, Chappelle completely hatched that film apart. He attempted to eliminate Thorn from the film by adding Science Fiction and DNA cloning at the end of the film and to imply they were never Druids or in a cult that worshiped a demon but the problem was it was already too ingrained into the beginning of the film and there was no way to edit it all out so what we're left with is a film that can't decide if it's a film about a cult or about scientists trying to clone a serial killer.

When you really dissect the final cut of the film it really doesn't make any sense because no matter how hard they try to make Wynn a mad scientist, he still whispers in Danny's ear throughout the film. Granted they cut out that one cool scene where he tells Danny to kill for him and he sees Michael between the sheets but still they left several of the other scenes intact. It's just a mess of a film and neither cut are really the way Farrands originally intended. But if we had to choose, the Producer's Cut is a vastly superior version of the film.

 

[Count Orlok]

Hey guys, I'm new here and in regards to Halloween 6, I have recently came to a conclusion regarding all of the confusing plot points of the movie I have been trying to come to a conclusion to for a long time now. The three biggest confusing plot points are these:

1. Did Michael rape Jamie (like in the P-Cut) or was she artificially inseminated? If an experiment then why the heck was the Thorn symbol marked on Steven's chest at the beginning of the movie?

2. It seems Wynn was interested in the baby becoming evil, so why was he taunting Danny?

3. The group of scientist at the end was working on a genetic experiment involving Michael's DNA (in the Unrated Director's Cut, we learn that it's for a cure). What did this have to do with Wynn trying to control evil?

Take a read of my comment here at IMDb where I answered these three questions on the H6 forum and comment on what you have to say about it:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0113253/board/nest/208896248

 

[Horrorfan_1986]

Kinda a long read. Personally, I just see the two versions as being two different movies, in a lot of ways.

1. P-cut Michael rapes Jamie. In the t-cut, it's basically a test tube baby. In either case, Stephen was created to be killed.

2. Both cuts seem to imply that Danny is just there to continue the bloodlust. Even if Wynn wanted Stephen to become the new Michael, Danny was there for a second version.

3. Can't say I was aware there was an unrated Director's cut. That's just what we need, a more in-depth look at the madness that was Chappelle. Maybe in my younger days when I was obsessed with the series, I would have been all over this, but now? Eh, how many different versions do I want to see of one of the weaker Halloween movies? It's a gigantic mess that never felt like a normal Halloween film.

 

[Count Orlok]

Kinda a long read. Personally, I just see the two versions as being two different movies, in a lot of ways.

How much did you read? I know it's long but it's worth it if you want to understand this movie better. In the end it was really simple. We just over thought things here.

1. P-cut Michael rapes Jamie. In the t-cut, it's basically a test tube baby. In either case, Stephen was created to be killed.

Not entirely true. In the T-Cut, Steven was never meant to be killed. The cult wanted him to be the final sacrifice but Wynn took this advantage of this by impregnating Jamie with a cloned fetus. He would keep this secret from the majority of he cult and fool them into thinking the baby was the final sacrifice even after it's born. While Danny would still be inflicted with the curse since that's what the cult wants, a new child to carry out blood sacrifices, Wynn had to tell the rest of the cult members why Michael is still around and evil and why he haven't killed the baby. They likely wouldn't approve of his motive, but since the T-Cut omitted Tommy's dialogue that Michael has to be released from the curse in order for it to be passed on, they could still inflict Danny with the curse. So both Wynn and the true cult members get what they want.

2. Both cuts seem to imply that Danny is just there to continue the bloodlust. Even if Wynn wanted Stephen to become the new Michael, Danny was there for a second version.

Wynn just wanted to control evil, so I'm guessing by replicating an evil being from birth he could get a better advantage of doing so during it's lifetime.

3. Can't say I was aware there was an unrated Director's cut. That's just what we need, a more in-depth look at the madness that was Chappelle. Maybe in my younger days when I was obsessed with the series, I would have been all over this, but now? Eh, how many different versions do I want to see of one of the weaker Halloween movies? It's a gigantic mess that never felt like a normal Halloween film.

It's basically an extended version of the T-Cut, but certain sequences that were meant to be in the final cut were omitted. The part about it to me is the extended office scene between Wynn and Loomis where Wynn has more dialogue, making the conversation more flowing and understandable. I uploaded that on Youtube a week ago and here's the link to it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oPKq0fzMPZA.

But please take a read through my comment. It will be worth the read and I go into detail on a lot of things that make everything about the movie easier to understand in the end.

 

[Horrorfan_1986]

How much did you read? I know it's long but it's worth it if you want to understand this movie better. In the end it was really simple.

I glanced over each part of it to get a general idea of your thoughts. At the end of the day, I feel like I already have enough of a grasp on Halloween 6. You get to a point where you realize you're spending all this time examining the movie and it's just like shifting through a person's bowel movement to try and figure out what they had for lunch.

Part of the problem with the movie is that they strayed so far from the occult in the t-cut. It ended up causing an already bad story to become a mess of plots that aren't fully explored.

 

[Count Orlok]

I'm sorry you seemed overloaded with detail. There was a lot of analyze to make myself clear on these things. Perhaps you could read the summary since you could still get a grasp of what I explain above but just shorter. I just want to do a justice to the movie and those confused by it's story like myself was.

 

[James Bond]

First off, I just want to say I was alerted back here due to the thread being overrun by Halloween 6 explanation theories, and ultimately, a request to get the H6 review up. I suppose I can get it posted soon. I've completely forgotten about this thread until now.

Now, I won't dig too deep into the H6 theories simply because I don't want to step on anyone's toes. The thing is, I understand it perfectly. It's just not LOGICAL. So I'll explain the way I look at it. You have a whole film building up the transference of the thorn curse, being watched over by the Cult of Thorn. That works perfectly fine until the cult is revealed to be a cover up operation.

As I reach this point, I wouldn't say Wynn was trying to "control evil", as it appears (to me, at least) that he was trying to create an army of "super soldiers" by cloning Michael's child, which would surely be in possession of Michael's invincible genes, right? So that also tosses out "Stephen just being there to be killed." In the producer's cut, definitely. In the theatrical cut, he's there to be cloned. It's simple enough, it's just a complete Moron convention. I can understand trying to tie the gap together and I have no problem with H6 theories personally, the problem in doing it is that you're trying to tie together ropes that just don't reach, if they're even there at all. It doesn't work. If you want it to make sense, anyway. It never will.

 

[Count Orlok]

Well I think it does make sense if you look more into it. The cult aspect was not entirely thrown out. Joe Chappelle could only take it far as to make some of them into science like Wynn especially and convince other members of the cult to follow him. If you took the time to read my tie-in, you could see that. The Danny subplot is still in effect here and could not be overridden. Michael's back story is still in there by Mrs. Blankenship, and we still have her still associated with Wynn. The ropes wasn't so hard to reach. A lot of the things we simply overlooked. The majority of the cult (not involved in the scientific fiasco and even know it for the time being) wanted to inflict a new child with the curse while Wynn wanted to clone Michael to hold and control evil with a just a handful members helping him out in these experiments. Then he was going out exploiting the evil for medical purposes with people of the cult and not of the cult which is why Wynn tells that one guy to take off his robe and jokes about it since he was in the presence of non-cult members. It's like the little things such as Jamie giving birth in the dungeons and the medical doctors at the end regarding who was part of the cult and Wynn's science group or neither that we were pretty much left in the dark on. I took the time to get around those things too. In the end, it all came to a circle and I now feel satisfied.

 

[James Bond]

Besides your awful grammar destroying that paragraph... I could care less how it's tied together. It doesn't make a single shred of coherent sense. I'm not taking the time to read through anything becausr honestly I really don't care.

Enough running a REVIEW thread into the groumd with H6 theories. Perhaps you can make your own thread for that.