Die von den Produzenten favorisierte Fassung von Halloween 6 - Der Fluch des Michael Myers (1995) kam beim Publikum der Testvorführung nicht wirklich gut an, weshalb der Regisseur Joe Chapelle damit beauftragt wurde, den Film umzuschreiben und die neuen Szenen zu drehen - gegen den Willen fast aller Cast- & Crew-Mitglieder.
Diese als Producer's Cut bekannte Fassung wurde bislang nie offiziell veröffentlicht und ist nur als Bootlegs erhältlich. Der Schnittbericht mit den Unterschieden zur bekannten Kinofassung findet sich hier. Am 26. Oktober 2013 wurde der Producer's Cut jetzt jedoch überraschenderweise erstmals nach der Testvorführung öffentlich aufgeführt - als original 35mm-Print in einem Kino in Los Angeles. Der Drehbuchautor des Films, Daniel Farrands, gab einige Infos zum Stand dieser Fassung.
Demnach weigerte sich der Rechteinhaber Disney den Producer's Cut zu veröffentlichen, weil sie der Meinung waren, dass sie damit kein Geld machen könnten. Ebenso wollten sie die Fassung nicht an ein anderes Label lizenzieren, aus Konkurrenzangst zu ihrer Veröffentlichung der regulären Kinofassung. Da diese DVD mittlerweile aber Out-of-print ist, versuchte Daniel Farrands es abermals und scheint nun endlich mehr Aufmerksamkeit von Disney zu bekommen.
Seiner Aussage nach sollen Diskussionen laufen, ob und wie der Producer's Cut doch noch veröffentlicht werden könnte. Es könnte also ähnlich ablaufen wie bei Clive Barkers Nightbreed, der nächstes Jahr von Scream Factory nach Jahrzehnten doch noch in seiner Ursprungsfassung veröffentlicht wird.
|09.11.2013 00:17 Uhr - azrael.ba|
Welche Fassung ist den jetzt besser bzw. bietet mehr?
Und was macht Disney mit so einer Lizens?
|09.11.2013 00:30 Uhr -||
Selbst der Producers Cut ist allerdings immer noch eine Vergewaltigung von Farrands Original Script, das wenn es getreu verfilmt worden wäre der bei weitem beste Halloween Film seit dem Original geworden wäre und einen sehr würdigen Abschluss für die Charaktere Loomis und Jamie dargestellt hätte.
Alle bisherigen Fassungen (Kinofassung, producers Cut, Unrated Cut) entsprechen nichtmal ansatzweise der Vision die Farrands für Halloween 6 als großes Finale für die Story aus 1,2,4 und 5 geplant hatte. Weder von der Story noch von der Art der Inszenierung.
Dies ist hauptsächlich Produzent Paul Freeman und Regisseur Joe Chapelle zu verdanken. Freeman hat fast alles umgeschrieben (teilweise am Set) und Chapelle war nie wirklich daran intressiert einen würdigen Halloween 6 zu machen sondern seinen "eigenen Halloween" - daher auch die fehlende Zahl im Titel. Seine und Farrands Visionen konnten unterschiedlicher nicht sein und damit wurde der Film leider im Endeffekt zerstört. Die später entstandene Kinofassung verschlimmerte einen ohnehin schon vollkommen zerstückelten und ruinierten Film nur noch umo mehr. Der Producers Cut ist also bei weitem nicht die Idealfassung des Filmes, sie ist nur das geringere Übel.
Halloween 6 ist ein Paradebeispiel wie ein großes Studio einen Horrorfilm durch ihre finanzielle Macht kaputtmachen kann. Nur ein Jahr später hat Dimension das ganze dann bei Hellraiser 4 wiederholt.
Beide Filme fallen daher leider in die Kategorie "Es hätte so großartig sein können"
|09.11.2013 00:34 Uhr - FishezzZ|
Wuhuuu! Und jetzt sollen die Rechte mal an ein ordentliches Label in Deutschland gebracht werden!
|09.11.2013 00:37 Uhr - KarateHenker||
Immer mit der Ruhe, bisher ist doch noch nicht einmal ein US-Heimkinorelease sicher.
|09.11.2013 00:37 Uhr - Derstrich|
Disney???? Halloween?????? What the fuck!??????
|09.11.2013 00:46 Uhr - KarateHenker|
Miramax/Dimension Films gehörten damals zum Disney-Konzern.
|09.11.2013 01:15 Uhr - Dexxter|
Hab den WP hier aber würde mich über eine BD in Deutsch freuen :)
|09.11.2013 01:27 Uhr - Paratrooper||
Gegensätze ziehen sich an...
|09.11.2013 05:01 Uhr - NicoRau|
Hoffentlich wird auf Bluray veröffentlicht.
|09.11.2013 07:03 Uhr - babyface|
Ist mir manchmal 'eh ein Rätsel wie sich Produzent/Director /Cast und Crew während eines Drehs fetzen.Gelder sind stellenweise nur beantragt,das Budget für dieses und jenes fehlt.
Zeitplan durcheinander,Management hat andere schon auf andere Sets gebucht.
Hey-! alles wie im richtigen Leben ( oder wenn man ein Haus baut,grins.)
|09.11.2013 08:34 Uhr - Dale_Cooper||
Mir ist das überhaupt kein Rätsel, und du hast es ja selbst auch schon ganz gut erklärt ;o)
Dazu kommt, dass Produzenten als Geldgeber meistens so wenig Risiko wie möglich eingehen wollen, da sie ja das Geld auch wieder "reinkriegen" wollen durch Kino- und Heimkino-Auswertung.
Für gute Regisseure ist Hollywood deswegen häufiger mal ein faustscher Pakt...
Beispiel aus jüngster Zeit: Aronofsky und seine "Noah"-Verfilmung.
Zurück zu Halloween: ich hab Teil 6 immer als einen der grottigsten in Erinnnerung...durch diese News dämmert mir, woran das liegen KÖNNTE. Bin gespannt, wie der ursprüngliche Film ist, FALLS es mal zu einem Release kommt. Glaube aber nicht an ein Meisterwerk, da mir eigentlich nichts (Darsteller, Kamera, Setting...) gefallen hatte...
|09.11.2013 08:36 Uhr - Barry Benson|
Na ja,... Disney`s HALLOWEEN halt;-)
P.S.: Es gibt ja auch: Disney`s Gruselspaß an HALLOWEEN!
|09.11.2013 08:37 Uhr - Barry Benson|
Und damit sind nicht der Producer`s Cut und die Kinofassung gemeint!;-)
|09.11.2013 10:16 Uhr - The Pest|
Als Dreingabe zum Mediabook währ es ideal gewesen, doch jetzt nochmal bestimmt 20€ oder mehr für den Producers zu zahlen? Ne, da muss des schon Hand und Füße haben! Eine Ultimate wie bei Armee of Darkness würde sich anbieten, gibt ja noch mehr Fassungen ;-) Nur das Ganze im Battle Royal und The Raid Style, mit schönen Silberdruck von Michaels Maske^^!
|09.11.2013 13:18 Uhr - silverhaze|
Langweilig, her mit der unrated!!!
|09.11.2013 13:30 Uhr - ParamedicGrimey|
...obs die Gurke besser macht?
|09.11.2013 14:36 Uhr - BoondockSaint123|
Ich bin einer der wenigen, der den sechsten Teil sehr gut findet. Das Phänomen Michael Myers ist lange an mir vorbeigezogen, gerade als ich den ersten Teil vor ein paar Jahren gesehen habe, da bin ich fast eingeschlafen (ok,ich stell mich schon mal ins Eck). Erst als das Remake erschienen ist, hat mich dieser Charakter etwas fasziniert. Dann habe ich auch angefangen die anderen Titel zu schauen (bisher den dritten Teil noch nicht gesehen) und muss sagen, dass mir der sechste Teil wirklich super Unterhaltung geboten hat. Bin mal gespannt ob der Producer`s Cut auch noch so gut ist.
|09.11.2013 22:15 Uhr -||
Ich sags gern nochmal: Auch der Producers Cut macht den Film nicht unbedingt besser. Es ist klar die bessere Fassung des Filmes aber auch diese entspricht NICHT dem Original Script von Daniel Farrands und dessen Vision des großen Finales der Story von Jamie und Loomis die hier vorgesehen war.
Hier mal ein paar Beispiele was in Farrands Script passiert wäre aber weder im Producers, Unrated oder Kinocut entalten ist (sprich nie gedreht wurde da es entweder gestrichen oder vollkommen umgeschrieben wurde):
- Jamie überlebt Michaels Angriff, wacht am Ende aus einem Koma auf und stellt sich Michael zum ultimativem, finalem Kampf (ala Laurie in H20) der zwar mit ihrem Tod endet aber sie opfert sich freiwillig um ihr Baby zu retten. Natürlich wäre das Danielle Harris gewesen in der vorgesehenen Version
- Tommy ist nicht von Michael , Thorn etc. besessen wie im Film sondern eine gequälte Seele der immer wieder Alpträume und Flashbacks an die Nacht von 1978 hat und erst durch Kara, Loomis und das Baby die Kraft findet sich seinen Dämonen (=Michael) zu stellen.
-Der Konflikt von Wynn und Loomis wäre ein zentrales Element gewesen. Wynn sollte von Christopher Lee gespielt werden (Farrands schrieb die Rolle explizit für ihn) und Loomis und Wynn hätten am Ende um Michaels Seele gekämpft.
-Die ganze Inszenierung wäre sehr stark wie in Carpenters Original gewesen ohne plakative Jason-artige Kills und mit viel Atmosphäre und Spannung inszeniert. Die Musik wäre auch kein moderner Gitarrensound gewesen wie im Film sondern hätte sich größtenteils Carpenters Musik aus 1 und Howarths Musik aus 4 und 5 bedient.
-Der Thorn Fluch wäre viel simpler ausgefallen ohne Sternenkonstellationen und den ganzen Quark. es ist lediglich ein Fluch der eine Person befällt (im Grunde ist Thorn der Teufel), dessen seele konsumiert wird und der erst frei ist wenn er seine ganze Familie umgebracht hat. Danach geht der Fluch auf die nächste Person über. Es wird gezeigt und erklärt das Wynn für die Geburt von Jamies Baby sorgte um einen reinen und ungeformten Kandidaten für den Thorn Fluch zu erschaffen, quasi einen Antichristen den Wynn kontrollieren kann.
-Der Thorn Kult war im Original script keine klischeehafte Kultisten-Sekte sondern eine Illuminati-artige Organisation die ihre Finger überall hat und deren Mitglieder nach aussen hin ganz normal und seriös wirken. beispielsweise hätte der Thorn Kult ganz Haddonfield heimlich kontrolliert, da die Verantwortlichen der Stadt alle Untergebene des Kultes gewesen wären
Und das sind wirklich nur ein paar der Beispiele die zeigen das Halloween 666 (wie er in der Scriptfassung hiess) ein wirklich gänzlich anderer Film geworden wäre unter einem Produzenten und Regisseur die Daniel Farrands Script und Vision getreu umgesetzt hätten. Donald Pleasance selbst sprach vom besten Script das er je gelesen hatte seit Carpenters Halloween. was auch der Grund war warum er trotz seiner arg schwindenden Gesundheit (er starb während der Produktion des Films) unbedingt dabei sein wollte um dieser Story und seinem Charakter einen würdigen Abschluss zu geben. Wenn er wüsste was am Ende dabei rauskam würde er sich wohl im Grabe umdrehen (RIP Donald)
Aber ob nun Kinofassung, Producers Cut oder Unrated Version - den wahren Halloween 6 werden wir niemals erleben :( Fuck you, Dimension, Freeman und Chappelle.
|09.11.2013 22:50 Uhr - sonyericssohn|
Könnte hier auch mein Evil Dead .... Rev...oh ....falsches Thema
|10.11.2013 04:38 Uhr - Isegrim|
Ich danke Dir sehr für Deine Ausführungen!!!
Das war mir bisher noch nicht bekannt. Verdammt, hört sich wirklich sehr gut an das original Script!
Gibt es irgendwo die Möglichkeit, es ganz zu lesen?
Das mit Hellraiser 4 ist mir auch bekannt. Verdammt, ich würd zu gern die renaissance Szenen sehn!!!
|10.11.2013 05:18 Uhr -|
nicht das ich wüsste. Ich hab das alles aus einem großem Interview das mit Farrands von einer Horrorwebsite geführt wurde, wo er alles ganz detailliert erzählt hat wie er zu dem Job des scriptwriters von H6 kam, wie dieses eigentlich aussah, was er damit erreichen wollte und wie Dimension bzw. Paul Freeman und Joe Chapelle sein Script vollkommen zerpflückt und umgeschrieben haben.
Dimension wollte laut Farrands unbedingt den Jamie Charakter loswerden (Teil 4 und 5 waren ja nicht von Dimension) und sie sollte ursprünglich sogar gar nicht in H6 dabeisein. Farrands und Akkad mussten ganz schön kämpfen das sie überhaupt im Film dabei sein konnte. Währends Farrands in seinem Skript vorhatte das Jamie sich am Ende Michael entgültig stellt um ihr Baby zu beschützen und sich dabei opfert, wollte Dimension sie einfach so schnell wie möglich killen. Das plus die Tatsache das Dimension Danielle Harris wie Dreck behandelte sorgten dafür das Danielle ihren Hut nahm (Hätte man Farrands Version verfilmt wäre sie definitiv dabei gewesen) und durch JC Brady ersetzt wurde.
Und obwohl Farrands unbedingt Christopher Lee als Wynn haben wollte (und dieser auch Intresse hatte!) und ein richtig Duell der Horror Ikonen Pleasance vs Lee fürs Finale im Sinn hatte lehnte Dimensions ab und brachte stattdessen Mitchell Ryan rein der Wynn laut Farrands ganz anders darstellte als Farrands das im Sinn gehabt hatte was seiner Meinung nach auch diesen ganzen zentralen handlungsbogen zwischen Loomis und Wynn komplett ruinierte.
Und es hätte auch richtig Flashbacks der Teile 1, 4 und 5 gegeben. Farrands sagte in dem Interview das er vorhatte mit Halloween 666 die ganzen Fäden der vorherigen Teile zusammenzuführen und aufzulösen als Finale der "Familiensaga" um die Laurie-Jamie Bloodline und das ultimative Halloween Finale (dieser speziellen Story) abzuliefern.
Ja und ein Jahr später dann halt das selbe Desaster bei Hellraiser 4. Hätte man Peter Atkins Original Script verfilmt wäre das ein vollkommen anderer Film geworden, der sogar Ereignisse aus Teil 1 mit reingebracht hätte. Die Ironie des ganzen ist das Dimension den Film so heftig umschreiben und umschneiden liess weil sie Pinhead mehr zur Hauptfigur ala Hellraiser III machen wollten. In der finalen Fassung taucht Pinhead aber auch erst zur selben Zeit auf wie im Original script.
Übrigens, als Kevin Yagher bei Hellraiser 4 frustriert das Handtuch warf, wurde der Film nach Wünschen von Dimension von Joe Chapelle fertiggestellt - seines Zeichens Regisseur von Halloween 6 und einer der Hauptverantwortlichen warum H6 sich am Ende so von Farrands Script unterschied.
Farrands hat in jüngster vergangenheit übrigens die brillianten Dokus "Never Sleep Again" (Nightmare on Elm Street, Laufzeit über 4 Stunden) und "Crystal Lake Memories" (Friday the 13th, Laufzeit über 6 Stunden) geschrieben (und Regie geführt).
Mich wundert ja das Dimension Kevin Williamsons Script für Scream (der im selben Jahr entstand wie Hellraiser 4) nicht genauso ruiniert haben. Vielleicht haben die Weinsteins ja nach dem Halloween 6-Debakel doch noch gerafft das man das Script des Autors auch einfach mal getreu verfilmen sollte. Wes Craven hat da sicher auch ne große Rolle gespielt.
Ich such dir gerne nochmal das Interview mit Farrands zu seinem H6 script heraus.
|10.11.2013 06:23 Uhr -||
Ich hab das Interview gefunden. Genauer gesagt zwei verschiedene Interviews. Eins von 1997 in dem deutlich wird wie sauer Farrands darüber war was aus seinem Script gemacht wurde. Das zweite ist von 2005, das WESENTLICH detaillierter und ausführlicher ist und in dem er sehr ausführlich auf seine Vision für Halloween 6 und Michael Myers eingeht. Die Interviews sind extrem lang und ausführlich, sind aber ein Einblick hinter die Kulissen und in die Original-Vision von Halloween 6 die von unschätzbarem Wert sind und von jedem wahrem Halloween Fan gelesen werden sollte!
Hier mal die wichtigsten Auszüge:
DAS 1997 INTERVIEW
Wie es dazu kam das er H6 schrieb und was seine Vision für den Film war
"The series rights had been bought by Miramax/Dimension, and a gaggle of other (more established) writers had failed to deliver a script that anyone was happy with. I had several meetings with Akkad and his producer Paul Freeman and wrote several versions of a treatment before they decided that I was the man for the job. What impressed them most, I think, was that I had such an intense knowledge of the series and the characters. Morever, I came up with a scenario that intrigued them. My original intent for HALLOWEEN 6 was to bridge the later films (4-5) in the series to the earlier films (1-2) while at the same time taking the story into new territory so that the series could expand for future installments."
Über die Unterschiede zwischen seinem Script und dem Film und die unterschiedlichen Enden
I wrote something like ten different drafts of the script. My original script was much bigger in scope and tone -- it had a real edge-of-your-seat, "action movie" feel to it, which apparently couldn't be done for the modest budget Dimension had in mind. I tried to emphasize suspense over gore, a tack which was completely lost in the finished film. (Sorry, there were no exploding heads in my script.) As for the ending, that was a problem from the get-go. I had written more than a dozen scenarios for the end of the film. The final 15 minutes you saw in the final theatrical cut were completely re-written by Joe Chappelle, the director, who assured me that "everything would make sense" once I saw it put together on film. To this day, I am scratching my head. WHAT was going on in that operating room? WHY was Danny staring at X-rays? (Was he daydreaming about his future in pre-med?) WHY would Myers massacre those doctors (er, cult members)? WHAT were those floating babies in fish tanks supposed to be? WHAT was the green stuff in the syringe? And HOW ... please tell me (the writer, of all people) ... HOW Michael Myers ... evil personified ... the unstoppable force of nature who has survived countless bullet wounds, explosions and stabbings ... could be convincingly laid to rest with a LEAD PIPE??? Would Tommy Doyle of all people WALK AWAY after this vicious assault, convinced that his life-long bogeyman had been vanquished??? These are things that only Mr. Chappelle supposedly understands. After seeing his finished film, I wanted to bury my head in the sand. It was an affront to me and to the fans whom I felt I represented in some sense. Instead of employing Carpenter-style suspense, they gave us a gore-fest; instead of story logic, they gave us some kind of drug-induced X-Files episode. (Don't get me wrong, X-Philes -- I love the show!)
For those who have seen the original Producer's Cut (which has been floating around in the bootleg video market for some time now): that ending was culled from various scripted scenes from about ten different drafts. They basically took all of the simplest (translation: cheapest to shoot) elements from the script, threw them together and came up with one of the corniest endings in movie history. TOMMY: "It worked; the power of the runes stopped him!" I mean, PLEASE! Joe Chappelle wrote that line; he also wrote such memorable hum-dingers as, "Where did everybody go? I feel like I've been drugged." And the unforgettable, "Mommy, it's raining red ... it's warm." For me, it was like seeing my childhood dream turned into a living nightmare. I had no control; I was forced to stand by as the director (and producer) took their hand to the script pages and cut out everything that was scary and suspenseful. The producer was more concerned with getting it done as cheaply and as quickly as possible than with making a quality film. In the director's case, he was more concerned with his shots being "artisic" and "beautiful" rather than telling a solid, suspenseful story. All of this tomfoolery contributed to the dismemberment and evisceration of the final film. And I thought Michael Myers was the bad guy!
Über die schlechte Musik im finalen Film und das Debakel um Danielle Harris
The music (what there was of it) in H6 was terrible. The Producer's Cut had many more of John Carpenter's original themes; however, they weren't used to the best effect, due mainly to the producer's decision to record the film's tracks in Ultra-Stereo (translation = UltraCheap). Later, the director had the inspired idea that he could "save" the movie with reorchestrated music (again, doing all of this without the consent or knowledge of the composer, Alan Howarth). Joe wanted the score to be "edgy and hip." I argued that we don't need edgy, and we don't need "hip" -- we needed quality! The score should have been traditional and terrifying -- perhaps with a strain of Gregorian chanting to complement the black mass sequences. In the end, we got a mish-mash of sound design and a minimal amount of music. Joe Chappelle did not understand that the fans of this series expect not only a great movie, but a great score; just listen to the soundtracks for HALLOWEEN 1 & 2. He just didn't get it, or he didn't care, or he was trying to make his "own movie" without regard for the fans and without honoring the tradition that made HALLOWEEN a classic in the genre. He also cut out a number of key scenes -- such as a scene at the beginning which showed just how the Stranger abducted Myers AND Jamie at the end of HALLOWEEN 5. Joe told me that no one remembered HALLOWEEN 5 and it didn't matter how Jamie was abducted. (This on top of the fact that they cast a different actress as Jamie! For the Danielle Harris fans out there, Danielle was not only cast in HALLOWEEN 6 -- she walked into the auditions and DEMANDED that she play the role. It wasn't until Miramax refused her very modest salary request that Danielle pulled out of the project at the last minute.)
Back to the music dilemma: I don't know what Joe's rationale was -- all I know is that the music was non-existent, it was inaudible, and it was a major disappointment on top of the lack of excitement and suspense in the film.
Über den Outfitwechsel zwischen Michael und Wynn im Producers Cut und Original Script
Again, this ending was culled from various drafts. The idea was that Michael Myers was going to outsmart EVERYONE. He switched costumes with Wynn to make his final escape. I can understand why it was confusing in the P-Cut since it was never really made clear that Michael had changed into the Stranger's costume at the end. So no, Michael was Michael throughout the film. He just pulled a Hannibal Lechter costume switch at the end. The director's execution was quite corny, but it was better (and more clever) than the Tommy Doyle pipe beating, in my opinion.
Warum Farrands wohl so schnell keinen Halloween Film mehr schreiben möchte
I doubt very much at this time that I will be involved in HALLOWEEN 7 (zum Zeitpunkt des Interviews gab es H20 noch nicht) -- by my own choice, since I honestly could not bear to watch another one of my scripts turned into a debacle -- especially another HALLOWEEN.
Farrands über Donald Pleasance
I was fortunate enough to have met Donald during production of 6. He was a consummate gentleman and a phenomenal actor. It was a dream come true for me to write the role of Loomis for him one last time. He deserved a better swan song, in my opinion, after such a long and prestigious career. He loved the script for 6, however, and told me that he felt it was the best story since the original. Whether or not that was true, it was an honor to hear this from one of my idols. His agent in London actually phoned one day to say that she had to sleep with the lights on after reading my original draft of HALLOWEEN 6; that was a supreme compliment. I just regret that the finished film wasn't as satisfying to me or to the paying audience. And quite honestly, I am glad that Donald never saw the film; it would have made him very sad.
Farrands über Produzent Paul Freeman und wie dieser den Film ruinierte
Paul is a veteran producer with a proven track record. Unfortunately, in this writer's opinion, he doesn't understand (and frankly doesn't care) about the HALLOWEEN franchise or its fanship. He ran interference on every level. He contributed little (if anything) in terms of script development or problem-solving on the set. He chose to film the movie in Salt Lake City during the dead of winter (when we should have been shooting in the original HALLOWEEN locations. (I couldn't resist taking several "jabs" at Paul during the Barry Simms scenes. Remember where Barry is on his cell phone talking to "Paul" and he says, "I'm taking this show to the REAL Myers house where we should have done it in the first place!" When I got this scene on film and Paul never realized I was referring to him, I realized that the pen IS mightier than the sword!) Freeman sent the crew home when crucial scenes needed to be shot. He deleted scripted scenes indiscriminately, without regard for pacing, suspense or story logic. He took it upon himself to direct second-unit shots which looked like a child experimenting with his first Super-8 movie camera. He rewrote dialogue and action sequences, turning them into unintentional laughs. And he supervised the post-production phase of the original cut and made a series of blunders that were so embarrassing that it resulted in Miramax taking control of the film, ordering reshoots, and turning it into the even bigger disaster that was released in theaters. And here's an even sadder coda: Paul Freeman has been hired to produce HALLOWEEN 7. This fact alone might give you an idea of why I would happily pass the torch to the next hopeful writer. Notwithstanding that, I wish them all the luck in the world.
DAS 2005 INTERVIEW
Farrands über die Figur des Michael Myers und dessen Evolution und dessen Charakterisierung in seinem Script für H6
Yeah. That was always my intent, but I think as the script developed and other people got involved it just went too far in terms of attempting to provide an explanation of Michael Myers. My original take was never about the stars aligning. But the director wanted to create a real mythology for Michael. To explain to the audience: 'Why does he kill?' and 'why some years and not others?'. And I was basically given one night to kind of come up with something. And I thought... "Well ..." (laughs) And he opted for that version. I didn't really agree with that take.
I always felt Michael was, for lack of a better term, a sexual deviant. A child trapped in a particular moment in time. He's become so fixated on this event when he was a kid. Which I think had a lot of sexual context to it and a lot of underpinnings of repressed sexuality to it. The original Halloween was very voyeuristic in nature, which was part of what made it so scary. It's something the audience can't quite put their finger on. But really what Michael does for the better part of the movie is just follow the girls around and watch them. He's a watcher. And I think, at least in my view of who the character was, is that he became utterly fixated on this particular moment in time [the murder of his sister] and for whatever twisted reason he had to continually replay that for himself. Even as an adult. That's why he escaped and had to go back and search out a girl who reminded him of a sister that once was. It wasn't until the sequel [Halloween II] of course, where she [Laurie Strode] literally became the sister. But that was never the original intent. And I always thought it was much more interesting psychologically that Michael Myers fixates on a particular girl that excites him sexually. I think that's something that all of the sequels have missed out on. They always pushed it into a different realm. But the basic simplicity of that character makes it so much more frightening. And in a way, relatable. I really think the essence of it was this guy out there. With this crazy mask, who was unbelievably nuts and he will get to you ... he doesn't care if he knows you or you're related to him in any way ... the fact is that he will kill you. And that's the simplicity of the original Halloween, which worked so well. Even Halloween: H20, which proclaimed itself to be the definitive sequel, missed that sense of terror and realism. Well, that's just my opinion as a fan. (laughs) I do appreciate what you're saying though. I felt at the time, this guy's been burned and beaten and shot... how does he keep coming back?He can't just be a man anymore, he's gone beyond that. He's mythical. He's supernatural. So, I took it from that standpoint that there's something else driving him. A force that goes beyond the five senses that has infected this boy's soul and now is driving him. In justifying why and how this guy keeps coming back, we came up with this idea that he's gone beyond being human. That he's controlled by something much bigger then we could ever understand. And I thought that was a good launching point for the future films, but unfortunately they dropped all of that. And now he's just this guy in a mask who kills people on the Internet. (laughs)
Farrands über Jamies Story in seinem H6-Script und auf die Frage ob er wusste das Danielle Harris nicht zurückkommen würde
Nope. In fact, they didn't want that character in the movie at all. I had to push to really get Jamie to come back. And the way that I sold it was, she can literally be the "bearer of the torch" by passing it to the next set of characters ... in this case, a living baby. I thought Jamie could be in the opening scene so at least we see what's happened to her and at some point in the film she passes on. Literally, the torch she passes on in this film is this child. And Mr. Akkad took to that idea right away ... he thought it was a great way into this movie, with this baby. Which Jamie would gives birth to at the beginning of the movie. And I remember the way I got them behind the idea is by referring it to as 'Halloween' meets 'Rosemary's Baby.' And that somehow this child, this innocent, has something to do with continuing the bloodline of Michael Myers. And that's why no one's heard from Jamie in 6 years.
She's developed into a young woman and they've incubated her, these people ... who really are there to protect Michael Myers; not so much control him. They kind of have these bizarre pseudo-religious beliefs, weather they're true or not. I saw this "cult" as a kind of Heaven's Gate group or secret society that has been steeped in their belief system for so long that they have really come to believe that the murders and the blood sacrifices are God's way of preserving a natural balance and order. And from the earliest days, it is true that sacrifices were part of what would evolve into our modern Halloween traditions. Whether these things are true or not really doesn't matter. You can't argue with "true believers." But they look at Michael as sort of this avatar. A deliverer of these sacrifices. He may just be nuts (laughs) but these particular people see him as something far more. Ultimately we thought most of the town of Haddonfield would be in on this secret society (we were saving that reveal for 'Halloween 7' ha!) but decided initially to center the cult around the staff of the Smith's Groove Sanitarium where Michael's been confined all these years. So in answer to your question regarding Danielle Harris, at first they didn't want the character and I sold them on bringing her back. And when I did, they went out very quickly and started looking at actresses for the role. And Danielle came into the casting director's office and said, "What are you doing? This is my part, and I'm going to play it. I am going to see this through." And they were shocked because they didn't expect that she would want to do the film. But of course more than pleased that she came in and said "Hey, I'm in." So, that was the beginning of that. So, as I was continuing to write the script, I wanted to make the role juicier for her. So, the way I wrote it in the original draft -- the one I was happiest with -- was that Jamie lived until almost the end of the film. It was always agreed that she would not be the center of the action. But she was there at the beginning, and then put out of commission for the majority of the movie. Basically she's mortally wounded and ends up in the hospital. But by the end of the film, even though she's severely injured, she comes back for one last battle with the Shape. And she does it in a very heroic way. She did it in a way where she would fight Michael, not only to save her baby but so that it would allow time for the other characters [Tommy, Kara and Danny] to escape. The idea was that Jamie would've shown up in the tunnels beneath Smith's Grove at the end of the film ... the same place she had escaped from with help from the nurse at the beginning of the film. Jamie shows them the way out. But by now she's so injured, she knows she's not going to make it. So in a final showdown, she puts up this huge heroic battle to the finish with Michael Myers. She dies in the scene but I thought that would be so fantastic not only for the character but for the audience. You know, she made it, not literally but figuratively. Jamie fights to the end. She lived and died a hero. That's the way it should have been done.
And I think it eventually became an issue of money. And I can't blame Danielle for stepping down prior to production. I don't think anyone blamed her, even Mr. Akkad. But the studio just wasn't willing to pay her as a featured character. I think they wanted to pay her basically a weekly rate. Which is ridiculous. I mean, she's on the poster for Halloween 5! She was the character the audience identified with. I remember we were all really disappointed when she dropped out, but we understood her reasons. So that began a whole new series of changes in the script and cutting and cutting back on everything to the point where all of the things I thought were exciting and special about it slowly started to disappear. So, it was really disappointing.
Farrands über Tommy Doyles Rolle in seinem H6 Script und die Rückkehr alter Charaktere aus Carpenters Original
One of the first things I pitched was, let's bring back characters we know. What I really wanted to do with this film was make it the one that takes all of these little threads... although it doesn't necessarily do it very well in the final version! ... but the original intent was to bring together all of these threads from the previous films; not only from the original Halloween, but also the characters and plots of 4 & 5. And tie them together in this one film, so as they're all existing now in the same universe. Whereas before it was about Laurie Strode.
And with this one, I wanted to bridge all of that. And initially, it was going to be both Tommy AND Lindsay from the original film as boyfriend and girlfriend. And Tommy would have run this pirate radio station out of the college. It sort of evolved from there. Having the radio element obviously. But if I remember correctly I think the producers were more interested in having Tommy return as this really strange, reclusive guy. I mean, his arc is virtually the same as Jamie Lee's character in H20. He's a survivor of the original massacre who's been completely traumatized by this event. So the turning point toward the end of the second act was Tommy having to stop running and confront his childhood bogeyman all over again. But again, as the script developed we just kept losing more and more of that. My original draft had all kinds of flashbacks to the original movie. Like when Kara and the little boy are screaming and pounding at the door "Please! Open the door!", it should have been this insanely daja vu moment for Tommy. It's the same event all over again -- 17 years later. And so there would have been flashes in Tommy's mind to his childhood ordeal. But all of that stuff got kind of lost. But it was always my intent to bring Tommy in. He's a great character. I liked Paul Rudd a lot. And I think it was a great way to bridge the original movie with the sequels. The intent at the time was to make Tommy into the successor for Dr. Loomis. Have Donald [Pleasence] pass the torch to Tommy. There was a lot of torch passing in Halloween 6 ... except no one could seem to hold on to it! And of course he [Pleasence] unfortunately passed away. We thought what a great in if we've got this other (and younger) character in Tommy who has become as obsessed with Michael as Loomis was. We thought Tommy could bring this voice of sanity ... a kind of modern Van Helsing, the fearless Michael hunter! I think that's what the last two films were missing was a character like Loomis or Tommy ... someone to track Michael and give voice to this evil within him and to provide a sort of moral core to the stories, as twisted as they may seem. The thing I liked about the early films was there was always this theme of good vs. evil.
Farrands über Dr. Wynn und warum er unbedingt wollte das Christopher Lee die Rolle spielt
Unfortunately after Donald Pleasance passed away, a few months after the first shoot, things began to devolve rapidly. My idea was always to end the movie with this incredible battle for Michael Myers' soul between the good doctor and the evil doctor and that was really what it was building to in the script. I had written the part of Dr. Wynn with the idea of casting a serious equal for Donald. I never thought anyone would get the reference to the original (except J.C., who got it right away). But I think it's great that the die-hard fans knew right away that it was supposed to be the same Doctor Wynn from the original movie. And I went back to that line where he says to Donald Pleasence, "He didn't know how to drive a car." And Loomis says, "Maybe someone around here gave him lessons." And I thought, let's literally go with that. Wynn (and his staff) really did give him lessons! (laughs) And there was even a reference to that line in the finale of my original script where Wynn is sort of explaining to Loomis what's basically been going on under his nose all these years. And he says, "We even taught him how to drive a car." I never imagined this secret society to be anything like the Temple Of Doom version they shot. (laughs) I imagined it to be much more relatable, like the Satanists in 'Rosemary's Baby'. The scary part of it is they could be the nurse, the guy working at the bus station, or the old lady across the street. And I thought that was a very scary idea. So, Doctor Wynn as I had wrote him, was a much bigger character and I had begged the producers to offer it to the actor I had in mind as I was writing ... I actually wrote the part for Christopher Lee. This is perfect because you have two amazing horror character actor veterans. Two giants in one movie.
That story didn't come out until much later, but I had heard Christopher Lee was offered the role of Loomis (in Carpenters Film) and he had always regretted not taking it. So I thought -- here's our opportunity to bring him into the series! And the reaction I got was pretty much, "He's too old. Nobody knows who he is. And it doesn't really matter." I thought "What the hell are you talking about!?" And now of course, a decade later, he's in Star Wars and Lord of the Rings and he's got a whole second career playing the ultimate bad guy. Donald Pleasance, to me, deserved to be on screen with a contemporary. Someone in his league ... not the guy from Lethal Weapon! (Mitchell Ryan der in H6 Wynn spielte war auch der Bösewicht in Lethal Weapon) That was just another thing I remember being shot down and standing there thinking, "you can't be serious!" Knowing in my heart that this was absolutely the right way to do this. And then having it made very clear that I wasn't the one calling the shots.
I mean can you imagine him (Christopher Lee) being revealed as the man in black? He had the right persona and the right build. And those gaunt, glacial features. He was just the perfect person to play off of Donald. Imagine seeing those two on film together ... in what turned out to be Donald's final screen performance. It would've been insane. For horror film lovers and all the way back to the Hammer films. And all those amazing films that they had both done. It would have elevated this movie to a place where no Halloween film had gone before. It would've been a class act.
Farrands über den Producers Cut
It was supposed to be the final movie. It was what they intended to put out. It was a final cut. It was mixed. Everything was done for release. But it was tested and it tested very poorly, which I completely understand why. It was terribly made, in my opinion. It was one of those things, where time after time & not to get down on the director [Joe Chappelle] because he was a really nice guy. But just because you're a really nice guy doesn't mean you should be directing a particular type of movie.
The original director attached was Fred Walton who did 'When A Stranger Calls', but he had to drop out, I think again, over money. I never personally got the sense that Joe cared about making Halloween 6 as scary as possible. He just wanted to put his own stamp, his own style, on it.He didn't want it to be the next in this ongoing series. He wanted his film to stand on its own, or so he said when I would question him about things like, "Why is there no pumpkin in the opening title sequence?" (you gotta have the pumpkin!) Or: "Why is the 'Halloween Theme' being played on an electric guitar?" Or: "Why is the guy's head exploding on the fuse box?" With all due respect, I just don't think he got what sets Halloween apart from Friday The 13th. To me, Halloween should be about the suspense and the build up. It's not about blowing people's heads up. I didn't get it. I still don't get it. I don't know why they went that route with it. I always liked the way I pitched it, and I think the way the executive producers saw it ... as very classy, classic horror/suspense film. There's nothing wrong with continuing a tradition if it works.
Farrands über die Änderungen die Joe Chapelle für die Kinoversion vornahm, das neue Ende und warum er glaubt das Chapelle Hallloween einfach nicht verstanden hat
The director and another uncredited writer would basically take the pages I turned in and toss them aside and start over. And then I think it came down to that they only had like a week to shoot all of that new material. And remember this is after Donald Pleasance had already passed away. They had to sort of cleverly take the footage they had and infuse the new scenes into that. Dialogue was literally playing against someone who was not there. Which was just creepy. I thought I was seeing a ghost one day, I went onto the set and there's this old man walking around with a cane and I thought, "Oh my God, it's Donald Pleasence." No, that's his double. (laughs) It was very bizarre.
It came down to an element of time. The director was shooting stuff that in my opinion didn't need to be shot. And the crew was there on the final night of filming until 3 AM, and they literally ran out of time and couldn't finish the movie ... so here's what you get. And that's why you see a mask with a needle lying on the floor at the end. Because there was no time to shoot a real ending. Again, I'm not pointing figures. I think Joe's a nice guy and has done well for himself. But I just don't think he had an understanding of what makes Halloween, HALLOWEEN.
Farrands über seinen Pitch für Halloween 8 und was er mit einem 5 Minuten Auftritt von Jamie Lee Curtis in dem Film gemacht hätte (was schliesslich verworfen und stattdessen in Form einiger Comic Ausgaben veröffentlicht wurde in den USA)
That really was my pitch for Halloween 8. Invariably, it's an honor and very sweet each time I get a call from the producers when they're going to do another movie. They invariably call me and ask what should we do? If we bring you in, will you pitch us something? So, alright, here's what I think you should do given the last movie. When the opportunity came around to do a Halloween 8, right after H20, first my answer was (as above) ... just don't do it! You killed him, so don't cheat the audience. But then I started thinking about it, and I knew they had Jamie Lee Curtis for 5 minutes in the movie as a cameo. And I thought, wait, this could be really cool. What if WE know we have Jamie Lee but let's not let the audience know we have her for 5 minutes, and make it the big twist ending? You can play this movie out like a traditional Halloween movie, and I pitched it as a sort of wraparound. That Tommy Doyle had been accused of the murders from H20. He's been locked up for it in Smiths Groove. He's been basically treated like Michael Myers. He escapes very much like Michael in the original film. And he goes back to Haddonfield where Lindsay is living, as a reporter. And he holes up with her and they spend this long night going through the records and journals of Dr. Loomis. And through this, they learn of what happened all those 16 years while Michael was locked up in Smiths Groove.
And so we get to go back in time, ala Titanic (laughs). Not quite that epic, but going back to that early story of why Dr. Loomis has been so obsessed with his patient. What was Michael doing during all these years of silence? And what happened between Michael and perhaps some of the other people in the hospital? And then you book-end that with the Lindsay and Tommy story. And ultimately what you find out is that Michael Myer's has come back for them, or so we think, but at the end of the movie, the mask comes off ...and it's Laurie Strode. It's even sort of hinted at at the end of H20 ... after she chops off his head, she's looking pretty deranged ... and breathing in an awfully familiar way!
That was pretty much exactly my pitch for Halloween 8. Which eventually I ended up doing for the comics. Because I thought, if you're going to get Jamie Lee for 5 minutes, make it THE best 5 minutes of the movie. Give it that 'Sixth Sense' type ending. So, people could walk out and say "Holy shit. You have to see this movie. I can't tell you why, but just go see it." Of course they didn't buy it. So instead we got Laurie Strode falling off the roof of a mental institution with a knife in her back. Talk about a less than glorious end for an unforgettable character. I kind of found that insulting. That that's the way she would die. I'm sure there'd be fans who would have hated to see her as the crazed killer ... but it makes more sense than sewing Michael's head back on! It would have taken the story full circle.
|02.03.2018 11:38 Uhr - FishezzZ|
Ruhe? US-BD iz da!...
Um Kommentare auf Schnittberichte.com veröffentlichen zu können, müssen Sie sich bei uns registrieren.Registrieren (wenn Sie noch keinen Account hier haben)