Augusta Posted October 11, 2021 Report Share Posted October 11, 2021 On 10/10/2021 at 4:41 AM, jpaul1 said: i have one question about this if you agree. are there ridiculous moments like Brosnan jumping off the iceberg, or Craig trying to stop cars by crashing a plane into trees. these things ruin it all for me. even if i know Bonds are more kids aimed, i love to watch one from time to time. it reminds me of my childhood. especially the Moore era. which is one of the best IMO. But i hate when it breaks the line with reality I do agree. I don't think they'd be anything wrong with curbing down the special effect stunts (no more wreck the vehicle to barricade two villain's vehicle---flip the boat immelmann style to avoid the incoming RPG...come on, pleease). And in its place, add more intensity to "solving the riddle", or "tracking the mystery-X person". We are a generation of viewers who RESPECT puzzles and wrong-turn mysteries in police investigations much more that we used to in the 1980's and 90's. I remember Connery spending a lot of extra attempts before he could get close enough to figure out Lago's evil plan. I remember Bond escaping and getting re-caught TWICE in Goldfinger before putting the math together. Seeing Bond try and fail, or have to do more honest leg-work instead of triple-looping two more Alfa Romeo's WOULD NOT be frowned on by today's audiences... just so long as you FILM Bond beautifully in those wardrobes, riding expensive trains and excursion experiences that only the wealthy (and evil) among us can afford. I think we as the audience got a thrill out of Bond's exotic locales of the rich, just as much as we were thrilled by one of Q's gadgets wiping out five soviet tanks. Some of the coolest scenes from Craig's Casino Royale were this 15-second scene of that train snaking through the countryside at night, and the slow close-up of the villian's girfriend climbing out of the ocean on his golden-lit yacht. Film it WELL, and it inundates us in Bond's fascinating world, without having to throw in five more unrealistic stunts. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ViceFanMan Posted October 11, 2021 Report Share Posted October 11, 2021 9 minutes ago, Augusta said: LOL! Hang in there, ViceFanMan. As long as we're in a forum, it can be more fun getting facts wrong than right, like when you're in your favorite pub, and someone's singing your favorite song with ALL THE WRONG words cuz he should have shopped drinking three hours ago and he didn't. I've got to wonder, what certifies the actress as a Bond-Girl in the movie anyway. Is it that Bond gets to bed her that makes her a Bond Girl? Or is it that she's the "most beautiful" actress in that installment that makes her the Bond Girl (and the 2nd most beautiful in that movie does not get to be called a Bond Girl)? Didn't Miss Moneypenny actress pose in a Playboy magazine feature---but she didn't get to score with Bond... so she's not a Bond Girl? There was a brunette casino-playing woman (Eunice somebody.... I don't feel like googling it) who "played some golf" with Bond in Dr No, who returned in From Russia With Love--- to "picnic" with Bond---SHE is the first "playtime" character to be in the series twice, so does she count as a Bond Girl? Thunderball is the top favorite of mine, and has three actresses I flip over (can't decide which gal wins most with me)---all three get studded by Bond, but does that make all three of them Bond Girls? It’s never fun getting facts wrong. But, usually beauty, popularity, and even talent can be qualifications to be a Bond-girl. It’s decided beforehand which girl in a 007 movie (there sometimes is more than one female in a 007 flick) will end up being the “main” one, and the one Bond ends up with. Most of the Bond girls I really enjoy...however, in my opinion it should have been Maud Adams in “Man With Golden Gun”, too, as she was much prettier, more intelligent, and a better actress than Britt Ekland. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Augusta Posted October 11, 2021 Report Share Posted October 11, 2021 1 minute ago, ViceFanMan said: It’s never fun getting facts wrong. But, usually beauty, popularity, and even talent can be qualifications to be a Bond-girl. It’s decided beforehand which girl in a 007 movie (there sometimes is more than one female in a 007 flick) will end up being the “main” one, and the one Bond ends up with. Most of the Bond girls I really enjoy...however, in my opinion it should have been Maud Adams in “Man With Golden Gun”, too, as she was much prettier, more intelligent, and a better actress than Britt Ekland. Haha!! You're cracking me up with Maud Adams and Britt. Agreed.... I always felt sorry for Britt (and the few other actresses who had to play "dim-wit" in a Bond movie) cuz it just doesn't seem to be forgivable trait in a Bond movie (Dean Martin's Matt Helm movies handle dim-wit sexy character well, but not Bond films). Transplant Maud and Britt OUT of Roger Moore's version and into one of Connery's bond films, and I suspect they'd feel obligated to "smarten" up Britt's character,... but interestingly they'd treat Maud as the Certified Bond Girl. That's my prediction. I think being in Roger Moore's Bond world, they felt they had to have a comedic fumbling girl or guy assistant for some reason. Sign of the times, or something. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ViceFanMan Posted October 11, 2021 Report Share Posted October 11, 2021 6 minutes ago, Augusta said: Haha!! You're cracking me up with Maud Adams and Britt. Agreed.... I always felt sorry for Britt (and the few other actresses who had to play "dim-wit" in a Bond movie) cuz it just doesn't seem to be forgivable trait in a Bond movie (Dean Martin's Matt Helm movies handle dim-wit sexy character well, but not Bond films). Transplant Maud and Britt OUT of Roger Moore's version and into one of Connery's bond films, and I suspect they'd feel obligated to "smarten" up Britt's character,... but interestingly they'd treat Maud as the Certified Bond Girl. That's my prediction. I think being in Roger Moore's Bond world, they felt they had to have a comedic fumbling girl or guy assistant for some reason. Sign of the times, or something. It could’ve been a sign of the times, although Roger Moore had his serious films and/or moments, too. I can’t really stand ditzy, airheads, or dimwits, lol! They definitely don’t belong as a “main Bond girl” in a 007 movie! A quick bit-part as a little bit of comedy on the side, maybe...but not as one of the main characters. However, an “intelligent” Bond-girl I don’t really care for is Jill St. John, in Diamonds Are Forever (although I love the movie itself!). She & Britt are probably my least favorites for the main female lead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Augusta Posted October 11, 2021 Report Share Posted October 11, 2021 53 minutes ago, ViceFanMan said: However, an “intelligent” Bond-girl I don’t really care for is Jill St. John, in Diamonds Are Forever (although I love the movie itself!). She & Britt are probably my least favorites for the main female lead. LOL!!! You couldn't take Jill?! Maybe I was swayed by her swimsuit (which I consider the finest female swim outfit in all the Bond flicks, accompanied only by Domino's suit in Thunderball when she gets a sea-egg thorn in her foot), but I accept her personality as "American Nevada Casino Hustler smarts", not short of wits, just in over her head once she's given the full dose of Bond's kind of playground. You GOTTA like Eva Green, or Luciana Paluzzi, Vice. You just GOTTA. I view them the most intelligent of the bunch, with solid facial acting to go with their figures. Contempt, anger, competition, jealousy, dread, all in a flash of the eyes, with not much time to show it to the audience before it's time for Bond to say something snide or blow something up---those are tough emotions to perform as just a "Bond Girl", but these are two actresses that did it, in my opinion. Rare. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ViceFanMan Posted October 11, 2021 Report Share Posted October 11, 2021 26 minutes ago, Augusta said: LOL!!! You couldn't take Jill?! Maybe I was swayed by her swimsuit (which I consider the finest female swim outfit in all the Bond flicks, accompanied only by Domino's suit in Thunderball when she gets a sea-egg thorn in her foot), but I accept her personality as "American Nevada Casino Hustler smarts", not short of wits, just in over her head once she's given the full dose of Bond's kind of playground. You GOTTA like Eva Green, or Luciana Paluzzi, Vice. You just GOTTA. I view them the most intelligent of the bunch, with solid facial acting to go with their figures. Contempt, anger, competition, jealousy, dread, all in a flash of the eyes, with not much time to show it to the audience before it's time for Bond to say something snide or blow something up---those are tough emotions to perform as just a "Bond Girl", but these are two actresses that did it, in my opinion. Rare. Lol...no, I didn’t “dig” Jill, nor her in the swim suit! Now...put Luciana or Eva in that swim suit (or any of the other Bond-girls) and then we’re talkin’! ‘Domino’ in Thunderball was beautiful & intelligent...she and the movie itself are favorites of mine in the franchise! Luciana as assassin Fiona is gorgeous and deadly-intelligent, too...but I like the character of Domino better! In all honesty, most of the Bond girls are beautiful & intelligent...which makes it fun watching them work or interact with Bond. But, there were a couple exceptions that I think were “weaker” choices for the main Bond girl...Britt being too ditzy/airheady, and Jill too “brash” & not that attractive. Nothing against her personally, just didn’t think she was Bond-girl material. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vicefan7777 Posted October 12, 2021 Report Share Posted October 12, 2021 Watched another classic horror film. From 1973 the British film The Legend of Hell House. This for me is a very creepy haunted house story. The settling is a beautiful gothic house. One of my favorite actors, Roddy McDowall, gives a wonderful performance. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ViceFanMan Posted October 12, 2021 Report Share Posted October 12, 2021 2 minutes ago, Vicefan7777 said: Watched another classic horror film. From 1973 the British film The Legend of Hell House. This for me is a very creepy haunted house story. The settling is a beautiful gothic house. One of my favorite actors, Roddy McDowall, gives a wonderful performance. I’ll have to check this one out! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpaul1 Posted October 12, 2021 Report Share Posted October 12, 2021 18 hours ago, Augusta said: LOL!!! You couldn't take Jill?! Maybe I was swayed by her swimsuit (which I consider the finest female swim outfit in all the Bond flicks, accompanied only by Domino's suit in Thunderball when she gets a sea-egg thorn in her foot), but I accept her personality as "American Nevada Casino Hustler smarts", not short of wits, just in over her head once she's given the full dose of Bond's kind of playground. You GOTTA like Eva Green, or Luciana Paluzzi, Vice. You just GOTTA. I view them the most intelligent of the bunch, with solid facial acting to go with their figures. Contempt, anger, competition, jealousy, dread, all in a flash of the eyes, with not much time to show it to the audience before it's time for Bond to say something snide or blow something up---those are tough emotions to perform as just a "Bond Girl", but these are two actresses that did it, in my opinion. Rare. Eva Green death was one of these typical excesses of latest Bonds. first why the heck should she had to die. she wants to save her ex-BF fine, but commiting suicide so fast is unrealistic. and cruel. because Bond, the man who endured countless stresses, finally found serenity. and ruining it so fast, was an excess for me. people being able to travel much more easily than before, Bond doesn't attract much by the travel anymore. so they try to find extreme plots. (gorgeous) Eva green death. Bond who survive (twice) building collapse. Bond trying to stop a kidnapping by crashing a plane. putting his life and the hostage life in great danger. Bond doing looping in helo just to grab a ring, above a super crowded area full of innocents. this is not Bond anymore, this is Marvel. and i forgot Q death. like if the n°1 of brit secret services coudn't be protected appropriatetly. frankly they should not release a Bond without having a solid (realistic) plot anymore. because right now they're making kids stuff, and they're slowly but surely ruining the series. which i think has still great areas to explore 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Augusta Posted October 12, 2021 Report Share Posted October 12, 2021 8 hours ago, Vicefan7777 said: Watched another classic horror film. From 1973 the British film The Legend of Hell House. This for me is a very creepy haunted house story. The settling is a beautiful gothic house. One of my favorite actors, Roddy McDowall, gives a wonderful performance. Wow, that's ANOTHER recommended movie I have seen. Hands Down the BEST haunted house movie I've ever watched. It's premise is mind-blowing (that society advocates that ghosts DO exist, that ghosts are a serious problem to real estate brokers of wealthy houses, and brokers will pay large rewards for expert teams to "Ghostbust" a house and make the property marketable again). OK, that's not exactly how the movie explains it, but that's how you understand the meaning behind what the folks in the movie are saying. A creepy (I'd say a seriously SICK and PERVERTED) mystery to be solved, it gets the audience angry that some of the heroes in the movie got suckered and victimized by the trickery behind the mystery. Has a seriously ingenious explanation for what was going on in Hell House that made the house such a Hell. Good pick, ViceFan7777 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Augusta Posted October 12, 2021 Report Share Posted October 12, 2021 46 minutes ago, jpaul1 said: Eva Green death was one of these typical excesses of latest Bonds. first why the heck should she had to die. she wants to save her ex-BF fine, but commiting suicide so fast is unrealistic. and cruel. because Bond, the man who endured countless stresses, finally found serenity. and ruining it so fast, was an excess for me. people being able to travel much more easily than before, Bond doesn't attract much by the travel anymore. so they try to find extreme plots. (gorgeous) Eva green death. Bond who survive (twice) building collapse. Bond trying to stop a kidnapping by crashing a plane. putting his life and the hostage life in great danger. Bond doing looping in helo just to grab a ring, above a super crowded area full of innocents. this is not Bond anymore, this is Marvel. and i forgot Q death. like if the n°1 of brit secret services coudn't be protected appropriatetly. frankly they should not release a Bond without having a solid (realistic) plot anymore. because right now they're making kids stuff, and they're slowly but surely ruining the series. which i think has still great areas to explore That's a rough burden that the franchise-makers have to shoulder, and it's ONE burden where I have sympathy for them. Bond in Hollywood is based on Bond the book-writings by Fleming. (Just a mention on the side, if you want a shocking treat, read one of Fleming's Bond books---they are like Mickie Spillane or similar detective thrillers: hard-boiled, no humor, brutal, callous, quick-reads). If the movie is "based" off one of Fleming's actual books, then the makers have to decide how much to stay faithful to what happens to that book's characters, or how much to bend away from the story, for maybe cultural or more-current world issues. I haven't read Casino Royale, but Vesper in the book DOES die. I think it has to do with this being Bond's "first assignment", so he's "learning" the levity of lying and betrayal, and fake humanity, unreliability of trust,...all part of the job and cruel stuff like that. Vesper's death is the ultimate hard-lesson personal stab that "graduates" him into his cold double-0 world. I like that Vesper's death comes after she has "taught" Bond the charming superficial things (cool wardrobe, refined anger instead of kick-face anger) that help explain the suaveness we see in Connery and Moore etc. I like that the guy who blackmailed Vesper was not caught until he could be pursued in a follow-up film (Quantum of Solace). I don't like how poorly they threaded that storyline through Quantum of Solace (it should have been a somewhat more connected and obvious run of clues to follow---lots of us LIKED Eva Green's character, and if you tell us Bond has a chance to find the man who caused her death, we'd say FInd Him and Make His Death Very Painful). But Quantum of Solace the movie was pretty weak, didn't take ENOUGH advantage of the Vesper-revenge thread for me. And it had NOTHING to do with the collection of short stories Fleming wrote in the "Quantum of Solace book". How much to follow the Fleming book each time, must be a very hard decision to make... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ViceFanMan Posted October 12, 2021 Report Share Posted October 12, 2021 17 minutes ago, Augusta said: That's a rough burden that the franchise-makers have to shoulder, and it's ONE burden where I have sympathy for them. Bond in Hollywood is based on Bond the book-writings by Fleming. (Just a mention on the side, if you want a shocking treat, read one of Fleming's Bond books---they are like Mickie Spillane or similar detective thrillers: hard-boiled, no humor, brutal, callous, quick-reads). If the movie is "based" off one of Fleming's actual books, then the makers have to decide how much to stay faithful to what happens to that book's characters, or how much to bend away from the story, for maybe cultural or more-current world issues. I haven't read Casino Royale, but Vesper in the book DOES die. I think it has to do with this being Bond's "first assignment", so he's "learning" the levity of lying and betrayal, and fake humanity, unreliability of trust,...all part of the job and cruel stuff like that. Vesper's death is the ultimate hard-lesson personal stab that "graduates" him into his cold double-0 world. I like that Vesper's death comes after she has "taught" Bond the charming superficial things (cool wardrobe, refined anger instead of kick-face anger) that help explain the suaveness we see in Connery and Moore etc. I like that the guy who blackmailed Vesper was not caught until he could be pursued in a follow-up film (Quantum of Solace). I don't like how poorly they threaded that storyline through Quantum of Solace (it should have been a somewhat more connected and obvious run of clues to follow---lots of us LIKED Eva Green's character, and if you tell us Bond has a chance to find the man who caused her death, we'd say FInd Him and Make His Death Very Painful). But Quantum of Solace the movie was pretty weak, didn't take ENOUGH advantage of the Vesper-revenge thread for me. And it had NOTHING to do with the collection of short stories Fleming wrote in the "Quantum of Solace book". How much to follow the Fleming book each time, must be a very hard decision to make... They have followed some of Fleming’s books in the past, other times they’ve combined a couple into one movie...other times they’ve not really truly followed a novel at all. Different decades pretty much dictated what kind of Bond film to make...and what would work on screen (compared to a novel), and what wouldn’t. The producers decided to to do away with the original 007 series/theme, and reboot it in a totally different style when they let Pierce Brosnan go, and brought in Daniel Craig. I think they were trying to be “darker” and more realistic (perhaps more like one of the original novels?)...which is okay to an extent. But, I think the original films/Bonds were “fun” & exciting to watch. James Bond is supposed to be unrealistic and almost fantasy like. They were supposed to be an escape from reality, and the dark depressing-ness of the world today. However, Daniel Craig’s films are definitely darker and more depressing. The escape from reality (not referring to special effects or stunts) and “fun” aspects were gone. I appreciated Craig and his style, but I will always love the original films & style best! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpaul1 Posted October 12, 2021 Report Share Posted October 12, 2021 (edited) fantasy is not ridiculous. car sub is fantasy, piloting a space shuttle is fantasy. trying to stop a ground convoy into a forest by hitting the vehicles with a civilian plane is out of reach of human spirit Edited October 12, 2021 by jpaul1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ViceFanMan Posted October 12, 2021 Report Share Posted October 12, 2021 13 minutes ago, jpaul1 said: fantasy is not ridiculous. car sub is fantasy, piloting a space shuttle is fantasy. trying to stop a ground convoy into a forest by hitting the vehicles with a civilian plane is out of reach of human spirit True...all of that is fantasy. Whether ridiculous or not, fantasy is not reality or realistic. 007 isn’t supposed to be “real”. He’s supposed to be fantasy & escape-from-reality entertainment. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Augusta Posted October 12, 2021 Report Share Posted October 12, 2021 20 minutes ago, jpaul1 said: fantasy is not ridiculous. car sub is fantasy, piloting a space shuttle is fantasy. trying to stop a ground convoy into a forest by hitting the vehicles with a civilian plane is out of reach of human spirit LOL, you cracked me up again!! Yes, both of you are expressing well that a Bond film has to ride a careful line between the seriousness and cruelness that Craig's and Ian Fleming's Bonds bring, and the "mess with the girls" and tongue-in-cheek gadgetry that Moore's and Brosnan's Bonds tended to bring. ....And Hollywood is sure to botch the attempt more often than they ace the attempt, we know that for sure! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ViceFanMan Posted October 12, 2021 Report Share Posted October 12, 2021 1 minute ago, Augusta said: LOL, you cracked me up again!! Yes, both of you are expressing well that a Bond film has to ride a careful line between the seriousness and cruelness that Craig's and Ian Fleming's Bonds bring, and the "mess with the girls" and tongue-in-cheek gadgetry that Moore's and Brosnan's Bonds tended to bring. ....And Hollywood is sure to botch the attempt more often than they ace the attempt, we know that for sure! Connery’s original Bond was also somewhat more tongue-n-cheek. Both he and Roger Moore had more silliness or humor woven in. Timothy Dalton & Pierce Brosnan both were a little more serious...but still incorporated just enough humor, or teasing of Q-or Money Penny that it worked! Daniel Craig was definitely more serious and “dark”...not much humor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Vigilante Posted October 12, 2021 Report Share Posted October 12, 2021 Last few days I watched the immortal classic "Samurai Cop", as well as the sequel "Samurai Cop 2: Deadly Vengeance. I had heard about this movie for years being one of most entertaining bad films of all time, and let me say that it certainly did not disappoint! Here's a screenshot that about sums up the movie. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vicefan7777 Posted October 13, 2021 Report Share Posted October 13, 2021 So tonight I went with light entertainment. I watched 1988's Elvira: Mistress of the Dark. A film I had heard about for years but never watched. Well I must say this film is a total riot. It is campy, goofy, filled with double entendres, a few jump scares, some outrageously funny scenes and of course Elvira's figure is properly displayed for us to enjoy. I will be watching this again. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marc Posted October 16, 2021 Report Share Posted October 16, 2021 The Hidden (1987) saw this last night and couldn't believe I'd never heard of it. don't watch the trailer and go in fresh. as it says on the poster it's a mixed genre film, buddy cop, science fiction, horror, comedy. main actor is Kyle MacLachlan from Twin Peaks and it says on the IMDb trivia that co-star Michael Nouri turned down the role of Martin Riggs in Lethal Weapon (1987) which was made the same year as this film. a fun little movie, good soundtrack, great opening car chase. I instantly recognised this song and think I might've shared it on here before. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators timm525 Posted October 16, 2021 Administrators Report Share Posted October 16, 2021 On 10/12/2021 at 4:01 PM, Mr. Vigilante said: Last few days I watched the immortal classic "Samurai Cop", as well as the sequel "Samurai Cop 2: Deadly Vengeance. I had heard about this movie for years being one of most entertaining bad films of all time, and let me say that it certainly did not disappoint! Here's a screenshot that about sums up the movie. I always loved the 80’s film Gymkata. About the stupidest movie made. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gymkata 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpaul1 Posted October 16, 2021 Report Share Posted October 16, 2021 been watching the latest Bond. it could have been a good Bond except i don't like the ending. it's like if they were saying, go pay for next opus, and you will know. it could have been a good Bond, the [not spoiling]stuffed bunny[not spoiling] twist is really good. I mean it gives a dimension no Bond had at this point. the stunts are pretty good, and tense too. but the ending is another of these 'excesses' we were talking earlier. i mean why, why the f.. why Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kladdagh Posted October 16, 2021 Report Share Posted October 16, 2021 (edited) My best "character" from the movie is ... PALOMA Ok ... I mean, it is a good movie, but not a typical Bond Movie ... And, of course, the ending ... Edited October 16, 2021 by Kladdagh 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Vigilante Posted October 16, 2021 Report Share Posted October 16, 2021 Watched "Halloween Kills" last night. I enjoyed it, but thought it went a little overboard. There were also some cringey moments similar to the previous installment. It definitely lives up to its title! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ViceFanMan Posted October 16, 2021 Report Share Posted October 16, 2021 59 minutes ago, jpaul1 said: been watching the latest Bond. it could have been a good Bond except i don't like the ending. it's like if they were saying, go pay for next opus, and you will know. it could have been a good Bond, the [not spoiling]stuffed bunny[not spoiling] twist is really good. I mean it gives a dimension no Bond had at this point. the stunts are pretty good, and tense too. but the ending is another of these 'excesses' we were talking earlier. i mean why, why the f.. why I didn’t care for the new 007 movie at all! The stunts were cool...but other than that the plot was weird/bizarre, and the ending sucked!! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ViceFanMan Posted October 16, 2021 Report Share Posted October 16, 2021 22 minutes ago, Mr. Vigilante said: Watched "Halloween Kills" last night. I enjoyed it, but thought it went a little overboard. There were also some cringey moments similar to the previous installment. It definitely lives up to its title! I watched Halloween Kills last night, too! I agree...it went a little overboard, and I didn’t care for what happened to ‘everyone’. This new trilogy is definitely trying to be as graphically gory as possible...rather than focusing more on suspense and scare. Personally, I prefer the depth of plot & suspense-scares of the original Halloweens, to the blood-n-guts of these new ones. But, you’re right...it definitely lived up to the title. I guess we’ll see how it all ends next year...as Halloween Ends is supposed to hit theaters in 2022. I read an article where Jamie Lee Curtis said she thinks Halloween Ends next year will anger or upset fans...but that is part of the plot and a way to end it all. She didn’t give anymore detail of course...but who knows? They’ll probably kill her off again, or ultimately introduce the idea of Michael being Laurie’s brother again (which this new trilogy reboot has purposely ignored that original aspect), or several other ideas could come about. I will always prefer the original Halloween movie-series, but these new movies are what they are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.