|
Post by fridayfan1979 on May 15, 2007 7:09:50 GMT -5
I just don't see things going very well if they'd made Jamie the killer. I think they made the right decision.
|
|
|
Post by d3M0n on Aug 25, 2007 22:23:46 GMT -5
Im in love...
|
|
|
Post by Halloween11 on Aug 25, 2007 22:26:56 GMT -5
Thats Awesome tommy now we both met Jamie
|
|
|
Post by Drayton Sawyer on Aug 26, 2007 12:32:26 GMT -5
You almost have a dirty look on your face. Like "If that camera wasn't here..." ;D
|
|
|
Post by Xч on May 13, 2008 19:49:01 GMT -5
I totally forgot about this thread. My bad ;D heres my new opinion on Jamie being the killer.
I think it would have been perfect,H5 was such a huge disappointment. Since the family thing was already introduced, this is how i would have made H5.
After the horrific events that happened at the end of part 4 Michael is dead (so we think) Jamie is taken into the Mental institution where Dr.Loomis looks after her.After 10 years she escapes (at this time we ignore part 6) and jump right into H20 where Jamie proceeds to hunt and kill her mother.Then just replace Michael from H20 with Jamie.At the end instead of Laurie decapitating Michael she decapitates Jamie.
Now for resurrection Michael comes back,the camera slowly shows Michael approaching haddonfield.Turns out Michael never died in part 4 he was just badly hurt and it took some years to recover from it.
Change the whole reality TV story and take out Kung fu busta and replace it with a more random killing machine Michael Myers,he finds a new victim in Haddonfield and goes after the kill.
The Laurie sister thing will no longer be in the story because there is no way Michael would be able to find her.So this way the Thorn idea is eliminated and we have the Michael myers from part 1 again.
What do you think? Should i have been hired to write the screenplay?
|
|
|
Post by Doomsday on May 13, 2008 19:56:27 GMT -5
I think the only problem about it is that it leaves out Michael too long, we have no idea what happens to him but then all of a sudden he returns like 3 movies later? also Jamie as a killer does seem like a good idea but again it leaves too much out.
if they made a Halloween 5 all about her all the fans would have been asking is where is Michael? Even as she grew up I really don't see her as a menacing killer but that's just me
|
|
|
Post by Xч on May 13, 2008 20:18:40 GMT -5
No not really H13 according to my opinion i ignored part 6 and i made H20 the new part 5.So Michael would only be missing in 1 movie.
Part 6 would be the new Resurrection"when Michael returns to Haddonfield".
As far as the fans asking where is Michael i based my opinion according to part 4's jamie ending,with Michael being dead and all(or so we think) so i think the fans were more let down by not having jamie be the killer in part 5. A lot of people were expecting that.
My version of Jamie wouldn't even wear a mask,just long thin black hair and a few bruises.
|
|
|
Post by jlaw on May 13, 2008 20:40:49 GMT -5
*Reposted thoughts from duplicate thread*
It's always been an appealing idea to me and I'm glad you stirred it back up in me. When I was young and I rented Halloween 4 for the first time and there was that ending, I was blown away. I was like damn, she's going to be the killer now, that's awesome. Unfortunately, I also rented Halloween 5 and was completely confused on why they didn't go in that direction after that set up.
By the end of Part 4, I think a change would have been perfect and she could have been featured as the killer for a few flicks, like suggested. Whether or not Michael was brought back over time, I think the results would have been better than what we received after Part 4.
XN, your further ideas are pretty good. Having Jaime go after her mother Laurie would have been interesting and to die by the hands of her mother would have made for some emotional scenes. having a movie or two with her featured as the killer would have made for a nice change of pace and given us another break from Michael, making us want him even more. To have him make a triumphant return after being left for dead (and not being dormant in a bum's shack for a year) would have been pretty damn good.
|
|
|
Post by Xч on May 13, 2008 21:13:47 GMT -5
I agree Jlaw.Making Jamie the killer for 5 and die by the hands of her mother could have been a great set up for Michaels return in Resurrection.
By the time Resurrection comes along (Part 6 according to my opinion) the fans would go crazy when they see Michael return. He goes home, the only home he knows of (The myers place).
Then the part 6 story begins .
again,this is just my opinion. Thanks for reading.
|
|
|
Post by d3M0n on May 14, 2008 5:09:43 GMT -5
I always thought more along the lines of a sidekick scenario. Never her without Michael. I always wanted to make a banner with them side by side ready to kill.
H5 was probably one of the worst movies in horror and the fact that it's a Halloween makes it worse... so ANYTHING woulda been better then that thoughtless movie... total POS.
If Jamie were the killer it woulda breathed new life into the franchise. I HATE the family connection idea to begin with... but since Part 2 and 4 already took it there... they may as well have done something good with it like making her the killer. Just for Part 5 though... then Michael would fly solo again in Part6
|
|
|
Post by Xч on May 14, 2008 5:27:55 GMT -5
Great idea Demon.It would have been a blood bath if Jamie and Michael teamed up for a Halloween #Rock_On#
I agree,anything would have been better than part 5 IMO. Not sure why the part 5 writers or producers never saw this.
|
|
|
Post by Doomsday on May 14, 2008 7:09:56 GMT -5
I just don't see things going very well if they'd made Jamie the killer. I think they made the right decision. I agree. As much as I love the movie, it would have been Halloween 3 all over again, with the producers going right back to Michael as the focus after a stinging box office defeat. that's also what I think, if they made another movie where Michael wasn't involved, even if Jamie was the killer, I still think the majority of people wouldn't like idea simply becasue they go to the movie to see Michael, that's what drives them into it
|
|
|
Post by Xч on May 14, 2008 7:13:45 GMT -5
Are you happy with part 5's story? If not, what would you have done to fix it?
Would love to hear your ideas.
|
|
|
Post by Doomsday on May 14, 2008 7:33:03 GMT -5
I have no problem with part 5, I could make up a diferent storyline for it but it wouldn't make much sense and it would take me a little while
P.S I'm in school right now so I'm trying to keep my posts short for the moment ;D
but I'll get back to this XN
|
|
|
Post by Xч on May 14, 2008 7:34:30 GMT -5
Thats cool man. Glad somebody was able to enjoy Part 5.
|
|
|
Post by jlaw on May 14, 2008 8:24:30 GMT -5
Does anyone know if they ever said why they had that ending for Part 4 and then went the route they did for Part 5? It makes no sense and Part 5 just reeks of laziness and lack of creativity.
|
|
|
Post by Doomsday on May 14, 2008 22:14:06 GMT -5
I also remember hearing something on the Halloween 5 special featuers where they are talking to Donald Plesence on the set and he was talking about how fast they where putting out Halloween movies, he said by the time he was done it could be like Halloween 12 or something ;D
|
|
|
Post by Doomsday on May 15, 2008 14:29:38 GMT -5
I knew I was wrong
|
|
|
Post by Chainsaw on May 15, 2008 15:35:22 GMT -5
Maybe if there was like another 5 year gap between 4 and 5 and somehow there were 2 killers in part 5, it could have worked for a moment.
Has anybody else noticed the face in the tree in the above picture with Michael walking by it?
Did you put it there Demon, or am I crazy?
It's right over Michaels shoulder between it and his nose.
You guys see it?
|
|
|
Post by Drayton Sawyer on May 15, 2008 15:49:09 GMT -5
Sorry Chainsaw I think you are nuts. Seriously though I do see it. It's like a little wooden face on the tree. Probably a natural formation. But pretty cool.
|
|