Halloween III was truly criminally underrated, back in the day they all thought it was THE WORST MOVIE EVAAAH! But a good cult following has given it the place of respect it deserves. Also THAT ending was epic and GENUINELY scary!
I always preferred his version of IT, I know its not scary but I like the characters more. It has a charm to it. Plus Tom Atkins kicks ass in Halloween 3 and Night of the Creeps.
This was a fantastic interview! I watched Halloween III for the first time recently-absolutely loved it. The story was unique, the themes were fresh, some genuinely creepy scenes were present, and Conal Cochran was a brilliant villain. The fact that Michael Myers wasn’t present didn’t bother me at all. Also, whilst I know its become popular of late to shit on the IT miniseries, and whilst it can’t be denied that it has some major problems, when the many restrictions placed on it are considered (TV censorship, only being allowed two episodes to tell the story, etc), I think Tommy Lee Wallace did a commendable job at staying true to King’s story. I didn’t know Wallace has been working on some new projects, but I’m glad to hear that he is!
This is fantastic! Seriously loving these interviews you guys have been getting, great stuff! Been a huge fan of Tommy Lee Wallace for as long as I can remember. It (1990) was one of the first few horror films I ever saw, and Halloween III always held a mystique to me as a child since it was always skipped over during the Halloween marathons every year. As soon as I found out about what it was and managed to track it down, I fell in love. It’s fascinating to hear him talk about all this. Thanks so much guys, this channel keeps growing and morphing into something special. Keep it up!
Tommy lee Wallace is a badass filmmaker. I love Halloween 3 Season of the witch it’s my favorite horror film. Fright Night Part 2 is a awesome sequel in fact i prefer it over the 1st movie. It (1990) I love both parts the spider ending is weak i will admit but the rest is so good I could look past it. Vampires los Muertos is a sequel to John Carpenter’s Vampires and it’s a pretty fun sequel i enjoy and find it very underrated.
Well since I won't be able to go Trick or Treating, relaxing while watching an interview with a Horror Filmaking Icon is the next best thing to spend Halloween 🎃
I'm grateful for these Halloween videos, both the holiday and the movies. I underwent gamma knife surgery recently, and had to have a facemask made out of an ugly beige plastic that was meant to keep my head still, tied to a table, so the machine could aim the right spots. The mask looked vaguely familiar to me... turns out it was reminding me Michael Myer's mask. I've never even seen the movies, but it's so iconic even I could recognize the similarity.
Loved the video, great interview as I loved the original Halloween and I've watched most of the others over the years. Loved the IT miniseries an am a huge fan of it and the novel, not sure how Terry Pratchett would feel about using a pic of the Great A'Tuin for the turtle in IT though.
Whenever a new horror filmmaker interview is posted, I can't click fast enough. Perhaps Stephen Hopkins or Steve Miner would be interesting to hear from? Keep up the sweet work.
Yes there was so many more topics I wanted to cover but time was of the essence in this interview unfortunately did not get as much time as I normally do
Halloween III was great. It had the look and feel of the original, thanks in no small part to Dean Cundy and of course TLW being so involved behind the scenes on the original. It would've been so awesome if Halloween was turned into an anthology franchise from 3 on.
An interesting interview, I've always thought Halloween 3 was better than the original film and a bit disappointed Tommy didn't talk more about it. Was there much cut from the interview?
@@MidnightsEdgeAfterDark Did you even read the IT Novel? I don't remember the IT (1990) Miniseries having The Leper in it. The new IT (2017) has The Leper in it and you can actually see how Pennywise ripped Georgie's Arm where in the Miniseries you don't even see that. And I can already guarantee that IT (2019) Chapter 2 will be completely different than the terrible second half of IT (1990) Miniseries and will be more in line with IT Novel and explore more of the Origin of the IT creature. And it will not have a terrible looking Stop Motion Spider. Probably the biggest Sin that the IT (1990) Miniseries committed was that terrible second half especially for someone who read the IT Novel.
@@CountCallous It's Okay. The Kids are all good especially Jonathan Brandis as young Bill Denbrough and Seth Green as young Richie Tozier. I think I don't need to tell you how great Tim Curry is as Pennywise The Dancing Clown. He pretty much stole the show in the first Half of the IT Miniseries and is the only redeeming quality in the Second Half. Some practical Effects look decent but some of them don't aged well and are now very noticeable. Especially those Stop Motion Effects. The whole Flashback Sequences between future and past over time turn really repetitive and just annoying. I mean I know that it is just like in the IT Novel but it isn't good executed in the IT Miniseries. That's why the new IT (2017) Chapter 1 did it better because it only concentrated on the Kids Section of the IT Novel where you have more flesh out characters and don't have those Flashback Sequences between past and future.
Horrormaster13 Well, I agree about the acting of the first part. It is true that the stop motion effects have not aged well, but considering the TV budget, I can kind of see why that is, and as such am somewhat forgiving of them. Still, they really aren’t good to look at, even when compared to other effects of the time. I personally found the flashback sequences engaging, but to each their own. You raised an interesting point about how the new films are showing the kids and adult sections in seperate chunks. Whilst I agree that this method lended itself well to the kids portion of the story, I’m not sure how Muschietti will pull of the adults portion this way, considering an important factor in the adult section of the book is the flashbacks to their childhoods. That said, I’m remaining hopeful that it will be great, or at least better than part 2 of the miniseries, which surely can’t be difficult (and this is coming from someone who kind of enjoyed the second part, in spite of the undeniably major flaws it has).
Halloween II and III are great movies. John Carpenter can't accept his failures and turn them into positives unless it's The Thing. If only he had accepted Halloween II into his heart, then maybe Halloween 2018 wouldn't have been mediocre. Halloween-themed analogies have never done well at the box office, just look at Trick R Treat.
People don't seem to realize a Halloween Anthology series would have gotten old real fast. How many things can you really do with the theme before you start retreading old ideas? It's become cool to shit on Myers legacy and bandwagon on the anthology idea.
@@Saber0003 If people want a anthology, that's fine. But it shouldn't take over the Halloween series. Just make the anthology series a seperate series to the Halloween franchise.
Its hard to talk about realism with a fantasy/horror character in a film per se? But you can believe that Stephen King's IT That the shapeshifting Demon character as a Pennywise the clown is potentially THAT lethal in the newer film whereas the 1990's TV mini series version yes is far more subtle and clever and would be able to manipulate victims moreso. Doesn't make the newer film wrong in any case, just different in its execution given what would scare audiences in a theatrical movie production. The 1990's Tim Curry version wouldn't scare film audiences today, Bill Skarsgård's version is far more appropriate for cinemas audiences today however! Film is a visual medium not just psychological with well written stories?, a film has to conquer both aspects of this element.
Wasn't addressing Midnight's Edge directly, my comment goes out to everybody. And i wasn't choosing sides for IT (1990's mini series Vs the 2017 film?) neither, simply stating pros and cons of how the eras of filming and execution in films have changed over time, for film Vs television etc's.
For the remake of IT, here are a few things I wish they did differently: 1) MAKE THE CLOWN FRIENDLY. Let him LURE George into the sewer. Maybe hire an actor with good comedic timing, a warm nature, and a funny voice, then what is truly terrifying is THE SWITCH. 2) DON'T SHOW MONSTER PENNYWISE. For the opening Georgie scene, DON'T SHOW MONSTER PENNYWISE! Keep his sharp teeth hidden until AT LEAST the end of Part I, and then expose him in Part II. Have Pennywise biting George's arm in the sewer UNSEEN. People fear what they don't understand, and there is nothing you can show on the screen that'll be as scary as something in your MIND'S EYE. 3) KEEP THE CLOWN FUNNY. After the opening, maintain the clown's friendly nature, and then show the switch. 4) DITCH THE SCARY TECHO-SOUNDTRACK. In the remake, there's this repetitive dub-step-esque soundtrack boosting at your ears throughout the movie. Let the horror ease in, and don't bash it into your skull. 5) MINIMUM JUMPSCARES. Jumpscares should be used at a minimum, and very wisely. Jumpscares aren't scary, they're startling. The only jump scares that should be used is at the beginning of a horrifying sequence, as a jumping-off point for a scary scene. 6) STICK WITH A TONE. In the movie, tonally, it blows. Sometimes it's a comedy, sometimes the horror's high-brow, sometimes it's cartoonish. It should stick with a tone, and run with it. With good characters, and a luring clown, that could make a switch, it's good enough. This one had half of that right. 7) SUBTLETIES. The movie is IN YOUR FACE. Make it subtle. Keep the jumpscares at a low, ditch the obnoxious soundtrack, and have the clown be luring, that makes a TERRIFYING, SUBTLE MOVIE. A good inspiration point should be "Hereditary". The soundtrack, characters, visuals, and timing is impeccable. 8) CHANGE THE THRID ACT. In the remake, it's your genaric, groups breaks off, girl gets kidnapped, kids gotta save her. King didn't even do that. I know this is a long-shot, but maybe kill off one of the kids in this remake. That raises the stakes, tightens the characters, and gives purpose for a meaningful confrontation. What about Stan? Give him a few character moments, and make a shocking, horrific death, with minimum jumpscares, minimum gore, and no techno-soundtrack. Then, have the kids confront the clown. 9) GIVE THE MOVIE CHARACTER. Picking a tone is easy, picking a DIFFERENT TONE, is where it get's a little hard. If I were to direct a remake of It, I would make the movie an ambient, off-kilter, coming of age-story, with your monster as the ultimate luring mystery. Maintain that dream-like, off-beat atmosphere captured in the novel, and execute it on the screen.
Or maybe don't remake it at all? I mean there are dozens and dozens of Stephen King stories that have never been made into movies. Pet Semetary is now being remade. When will this madness end??
@@wendathonrton6091 Lol I see your point, but studios don't see what we want, they see money, and if you're going to remake IT, I just gave a few things to change from the new movie. I agree though, remakes suck.
@@Clay3613 I thought some of the adult actors were pretty good: John Ritter, Annette O'Toole and Tim Reid gave good performances imo. I agree the rest of the performances were meh, and the ending WAS very weak (though I doubt King's ending can be properly adapted at all, especially back in 1990). I'm looking forward to seeing how IT 2019 handles these things.
I'm sorry the 2017 was nothing special. The kids were good but Pennywise sucks. Every scene he was a cartoon CGI, they didn't give him enough time to act. Its just HEY! JUMP SCARE!.....HEY! JUMP SCARE! ARE YOU SCARED?.....ANOTHER JUMPSCARE. It was the same movie other than Oh look remember this guy from the book...that's it. I'm not saying the old one was scary, off course its not. It was done way better especially the first part.
@@jwnj9716 That's the problem, the new IT movies are being judged BEFORE they're both out. IT: Chapter 2 may suck, it may blow away the crappy second half of 1990, we don't know, but I hope they don't screw it up, and until we see the finished product, we should reserve judgment. And tell TDKLION that the new IT is only HALF of the whole thing.
Yes good point, I'm actually looking forward to the second one. And yes the second part of the miniseries was the weakest. This is why I want to see where they will go with this. Who knows maybe I will love part 2 and then slowly as the years go on I will appreciate the first one. Its not worst King movie, off course not. You should try watching Trucks, fuck me. Its garbage.
@@Foebane72 "That's the problem, the new IT movies are being judged BEFORE they're both out." No, I judged It (2017) after I watched it. I know perfectly well it's only half of the story. Everyone who has seen the miniseries or read the book knows that. The problem with the second movie is that there is nothing to look forward to. All of the payoffs that are supposed to happen when they are adults kinda sorta happened in the first movie when they were kids. In the miniseries, when they are kids they face Pennywise (the projection of It), and they fight It with silver and Eddie's inhaler (tokens of their faith essentially). The physical confrontation (where they use physical force) is supposed to happen when they are facing It's physical body. In the first movie, the kids already beat the crap out of Pennywise with pipes and bats if I remember correctly, and they didn't seem scared at all at that point. So going back years later, why as adults would they be afraid of something that they were no longer afraid of as children? Plus, Bev and Ben already had a moment in the first movie, so when they do get together in the second movie (providing they don't change that) the payoff will not be nearly as strong. If we looked at the first movie like it was a standalone, it still has many problems. It is overly reliant on jump scares. The casting is very uneven in my opinion, as is the tone. The scene of the Loser's Club cleaning up the blood came off as whimsical. And I actually laughed in the theater during the scene of Pennywise dancing. I know he is supposed to be the dancing clown, but they did not pull that off well at all. And as it was mentioned in the interview, no kid would approach that psycho looking clown. No one would even approach a normal looking person who was acting that strangely.
this interview is great and appreciated but the stupid music in then background is unneeded and distracting ...the interview is enough i don't have ADHD...the interview is enough to hold my attention...hopefully others too
I’m just one of those people who like Halloween 2 way better than the 3rd one I just don’t like it but I also think that it’s becoming this cult classic and I just don’t get it no offense I just think the first Halloween will always be my favorite but I think the second Halloween had to get more into him just going balls to the wall or it would be way to slow with its pacing so I understand that MM is on this rampage because he had a need to kill his sister but it’s just my opinion.
Sorry, but H2 is a classic. I get sick of people trashing it because of the violence. Violence is a tool just like every thing else in cinema. It was different from H1, and isn't that what everybody wants in a sequel? I almost prefer it over 78 many times. H20? Are you for real Tommy? Haha. I love Tommy lee Wallace but he comes off as really obtuse sometimes. Personally I find H3 a bit overrated. People say it's good because it's a clever thing to say but it really is a mess of a film. I think the post stranger things world has been really kind to H3 because it has that kind of vibe.. but that doesn't make it a good movie. Also, Tommy Lee Wallace is being a bit hypocritical here and sanctimonious. H3 has a lot of violence and gruesome shit in it. Faces cracking open, heads being ripped off at the spine, broken nose bones, smashed children faces, and a womans head being drilled out. Why is he trying to act like he's a filmmaker that doesn't use violence?
H2 is my favorite of the series. It took part 1 up a notch and into the 'modern' slasher era. I get that people don't think like I do... but it doesn't change how I feel about it. It's a great film with great side characters and a rare sequel that picks up immediately after the ending of the previous one. H3 I do love quite a bit too and I wish there had been more of the anthology style films.
Thank you! Its very hip to like H3 these days, but it's an over complicated mess of a movie that people bandwagon on because "oh my god an anthology series woulda been way better!". Beyond the effects, I really don't see what people enjoy about H3, and those don't save the movie. That fucking commercial alone is reason enough for me to never watch it again.
