ROTTEN TOMATOES: Rob Zombie's "Halloween" Gets a New Poster and Website

Rob Zombie's "Halloween" Gets a New Poster and Website

by Scott Weinberg | June 06, 2007

Discuss Article | Blog Article | Email To A Friend

The official site for Rob Zombie's "Halloween" remake is up and running, and that's where you can check out the trailer and just a few other gizmos.

Watch the trailer all the way through and you'll get a peek at a rather cool new "Halloween" poster. Plus there's a new take on John Carpenter's classic horror theme that's pretty slick. (Not as good as the original, but not bad either.)

The third film from Zombie after "House of 1000 Corpses" and "The Devil's Rejects," "Halloween" is scheduled to hit theaters on August 31st. Don't ask why. The rather colorful cast includes names like Malcolm McDowell, Brad Dourif, Udo Kier, Danny Trejo, and Danielle Harris.

Source: Official Site

Related Items

Movie:	Halloween
	The Devil's Rejects
	House of 1000 Corpses
Celeb:	Rob Zombie
	John Carpenter
	Danny Trejo
	Malcolm McDowell
	Udo Kier
	Danielle Harris
	Brad Dourif

(1-20 of 66 posts) | Reply

Jugger writes:
on Jun 06 2007 06:05 AM

[b]Wow[/b]
The poster is amazing!!!

but Michaels always have long hair??? is been a long time since i saw the movies

(Reply to this)

Metafact writes:
on Jun 06 2007 06:13 AM

I honestly have no faith in this needless remake. Rob Zombie does not have the talent (yet) to tackle a project like this, and early script reviews have indicated that this will be a "sympathetic" take on Michael Myers, which is just pathetic. That's the exact same thing Marcus Nispel did with Leatherface in the remake of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, and it nearly ruined the character. It seems as though Rob Zombie is doomed to repeat history.

I will agree that the poster is well done, but I would rather see this project either scrapped or put in the hands of someone more capable.

(Reply to this)

Ash84 writes:
on Jun 06 2007 07:26 AM

Brad Dourif. Hmm. When are going to remake Cuckoo's Nest?

(Reply to this)

FILMCZY writes:
on Jun 06 2007 07:35 AM

I'm going to play the devil's advocate here but exactly how does one "ruin" a character in a horror film when all they do is stalk and slash? I mean, Jason, Michael Myers and Leatherface don't exactly hold intelligent conversations with the people they kill in their respective movies. So they stalk and they slash. Big deal. It's like a skipping record (or compact disc for you young ones). They do the same thing over and over and over. If someone chooses to create a backstory, hear them out first before passing judgement by saying they've "ruin" something that doesn't have a whole lot of substance to begin with. I would almost have to say these characters are more of an icon for how they LOOK then for what they actually DO. So one character uses a knife and the other a chainsaw. There's only so many ways you can kill someone with each before it gets redundant. Again, why is "filling in the blanks" so bad? Now class, discuss!!!

(Reply to this)

The Lord Slash writes:
on Jun 06 2007 08:20 AM

In reply to this comment (#868127)
I liked the TCM remake. I even thought it was as good as the original. But then again TCM is so much better than Halloween. Plus it came first. But yeah they could've used someone else to direct this movie.

(Reply to this)

Ashron writes:
on Jun 06 2007 08:27 AM

In reply to this comment (#868129)
I would agree with these sentiments. I see no problem with making the character a more fleshed out villian, with actual motivation above and beyond "he's just a psycho." That worked in the 80's, when it was fresh, but now I think people want a little more. And I happen to think Zombie has both the talent and the passion to pull it off.

But I'm going to make a prediction now. Even if Zombie makes the best, most Academy worthy film ever, there will still be people who hate it because it's "not the original."

And just for the record, I thought the TCM remake was miles above the original. (Now donning fireproof suit)

(Reply to this)

Gimy writes:
on Jun 06 2007 08:42 AM

why don't they wait till halloween to release it? what kind of 2ss does their marketing?? if the Saw trilogy can make a boatload of money(and they're really below average flicks) then this thing would make 10-20 mill more simply by going around halloween. not sure if its going to be any good. the chainsaw remake...was good. black christmas...was sh3t. amityville horror...good. the hitcher...good. you CAN have good remakes but...its iffy.

by the way, "ruin the character"?? there's been like 40 Halloween movies...the character is already ruined in most eyes. at least they're giving it a fresh new appeal and not the same ol' thing. only thing they need are: t3tties...young and perky. UNIQUE deaths...and some shock value. thats REALLY it. you don't need shakespeare. i think thats why the remakes are better than average horrors in my opinion. instead of wasting time on story, they copy off a previous one and put their minds on ways to make the scenes/deaths more unique.

(Reply to this)

BrokebackYoda writes:
on Jun 06 2007 08:50 AM

Well...let's say they didn't make Halloween 20, and there was only the first one. If they were to remake it, they CAN'T give him more depth because then, it would be like...he's human. And you can't have your killer in a movie be human, because then in the back of your mind, you know he can be killed and you know what he's capable of. In the first Halloween you had NO IDEA what he was capable of because you knew nothing about him, and he seemed like a murderous ghost or something. That's what made him so scary. And that's why Friday the 13th sucked...kinda. They just HAD to bring the family in. I am still on the fence about this. I loved The Devil's Rejects...but I don't know...

(Reply to this)

Ash84 writes:
on Jun 06 2007 09:04 AM

In reply to this comment (#868134)
I talked about this in another thread. Michael worked in the first one because they tried to make him very elemental. That's why there's so much talk about "The Boogeyman" in it. Michael is supposed to be our childhood fears in human form, more idea than reality. I think that's why he's gone at the end after they shoot him. He can't die because Michael is the representation of an age-old and universal idea: "The Boogeyman" aka Fear.

By giving him backstory they take Michael from being a mythical villain to a real threat which can work either way, but I feel it will ultimately take away from the original's pathos. But, what's Zombie gonna do? Reshoot the movie frame for frame and line for line?

Really this is what's wrong with remakes. Half the time there's no reason to do it. Wanna remake Friday the 13th into a great horror film? Go ahead because the originals arguably didn't do it. But why remake something that accomplished the job already? I honestly don't know why New Line hasn't remade F13 yet.

(Reply to this)

Exode writes:
on Jun 06 2007 09:14 AM

In reply to this comment (#868135)
Well said.

(Reply to this)

Metafact writes:
on Jun 06 2007 10:24 AM

FILMCZY and Ashron: You both make some good points (except for the whole "TCM remake was better than the original"), and I guess I should explain myself.

Ash84 and BrokebackYoda basically have the right idea when they say that Michael Myers (and for that matter Leatherface) need to be mysterious on some level because that's what made them so terrifying in the first place. I remember in an interview with Malcolm McDowell (who will be playing Dr. Loomis in this film) where he says his character will be very prominent in the new Halloween. It would have been cool to have Myers fly in the face of everything that Loomis had been taught as a therapist; that everyone has a reason for who they are and what they do. Myers' lack of motive would provide quite a dilemma for the doctor. Instead, he's going to find out that Michael was abused as a child, that he has deep-seated emotional problems, and so on. BORING.

The decision to portray the homocidal maniac as a "sympathetic" figure goes against everything that the series stands for. By attaching reasons, explanations, and purposes to the killings, Rob Zombie is stripping away that heartless and mysterious quality that gave the horror so much of its weight to begin with. I suspect that it�s yet another example of our society's obsession with Freudian rationalization (no offense to the man himself, of course), at least in cinema. Pure terror works best when it cannot be understood or explained. Michael Myers was once evil incarnate; now he will be reduced to a mere frightened child.

I hope that makes more sense. You can put away your fire-proof suit now, Ashron.

(Reply to this)

Ashron writes:
on Jun 06 2007 10:28 AM

In reply to this comment (#868135)
I can agree with most of this, but even in the original they showed he was human, because they did show him as a kid, and you know he was in a mental institution. I get the feelling Rob is just going to delve into this a little further than the original. It wouldn't surprise if he came up with some reason Michael can't be killed or is at least very difficult to kill.

(Reply to this)

Merlin235 writes:
on Jun 06 2007 10:30 AM

In reply to this comment (#868135)
I'm not a fan of today's horror movies, because of everything you just said about the original Halloween. There really isn't too much behind mindless brutality in today's films. And F13 could really use a remake. It scared me when I was 12, but I couldn't tell how freakin' ridiculous it is.

(Reply to this)

Ash84 writes:
on Jun 06 2007 11:11 AM

In reply to this comment (#868137)
I like your angle of having Loomis baffled by Michael. I think you could tell the story, focused on Loomis and not Michael and the girls. That would turn this movie into a "Silence of the Lambs"/"Se7en" kind of story. Might work, might not.

But if you're gonna remake something that worked to begin with, you could at least approach the story from another angle. Tell it a different way.

But who knows, Zombie's hasn't come out yet. Maybe he already knows some of this (shrug).

(Reply to this)

IMAmoose24 writes:
on Jun 06 2007 11:29 AM

I have my doubts, but I hope it's good.

(Reply to this)

narcissusbleh writes:
on Jun 06 2007 12:27 PM

I love the new poster.

And I agree with those of you who say that giving Michael a backstory makes the character less scary, but c'mon. the character's been ruined enough by the horrible sequels (although I liked a couple of them).

Michael needs a fresh start, and I'm happy they picked someone as unsafe as Zombie to write and direct. At the very least, I know that he'll take this movie up a couple notches. I can't wait.

(Reply to this)

Ash84 writes:
on Jun 06 2007 12:48 PM

In reply to this comment (#868142)
That's right, his character has been ruined enough already.

(Reply to this)

Mr. Kong writes:
on Jun 06 2007 12:59 PM

In a summer that I firmly believe will be full of surprises, Halloween will be the final of them all. It has two things going against it; Rob Zombie (House of 1000 corpses, well, it just wasn't good) and the fact that it's not only a remake of a horror movie, but it's another entry in a series that should've ended a while ago. Then again, Rob Zombie also appears to be one of the reasons it could be a real surpriser, because The Devil's Rejects was a vast improvement over the vastly improvable House of 1000 corpses. The casting of Tyler Mane is pretty solid; he may be another "wrestler in a movie", but at least he's been in some pretty solid movies before.

(Reply to this)

bat-fink writes:
on Jun 06 2007 01:17 PM

[b]Looks about the same as the original, and i though[/b]
Just watched the trailer, and it did nothing for me, i dont know wether i like horror movies or not, because i am mostly disapointed.

Halloween to me was the weekest one, a guy in a mask that just stabs people with no real explanation as to why.

Devils rejects had a lot more substance, as did house of 1000 corpses, texas chainsaw was still my fave, followed by the remake of Hills have eyes.

But halloween original and remake seem like a no brainer to me. Halloween just seems monotonous. run scream kill, run scream kill... yawn!

Id rather see a Freddy v Rambo movie anyday!

(Reply to this)

DanSmith writes:
on Jun 06 2007 01:57 PM

A yellow band trailer? has that ever been done before?

(Reply to this)