We’ve been hearing about it for years. They’re making a sequel but ignoring the X number of films between this one and the first one. Lately it seems like it’s more and more a standard.
Everyone who knows me know I’m a continuity snob. I prefer it when continuity makes sense and flows perfectly. I can forgive a misstep here and there but overall I like it when you can watch an entire series and see how it all fits together without any glaring issues.
While back in the 80s a lot of the horror movies kind of just shrugged this off it seems lately more and more it’s now in fashion to just make movies and not care if it jives with any number of movies that have happened in the past.
Awhile back it was announced that Fox was thinking of letting Neill Blomkamp do an Alien 5 movie that would ignore Alien 3 and 4. After explaining the story Sigourney Weaver sounded to be on board. The thought in the fan channels were that they could easily explain that parts 3 and 4 were dreams as a part of long term space sleep after the end of part 2. This version would show that Hicks and Newt did actually live and now Ripley was about to face the Xenomorphs once again. I was okay with this as the built in dream explanation at least somewhat worked. Yes dream logic is always not good but at least a reason was there. It even got to the point that some artwork was released showing some ideas for the film. Sadly it ended up being scrapped when Ridley Scott returned to the franchise for Prometheus.
Just this past few weeks there has been talk of doing this as well to Robocop. Not only ignoring the recent Robocop remake but also the TV show, TV movies, and possibly even Robocop 2 and 3. This means Murphy could once again be patrolling the streets with his partner Lewis who died in part 3. Now it’s not confirmed but the idea is at least out there.
And now the biggest offender in this whole thing is the Halloween Franchise. At first it’s not hard to follow. After part 2 Jamie Lee Curtis just didn’t want to play Laurie Strode again. So they decided to just do a new story with Halloween III. After that didn’t work they brought back Michael Myers but without a sister to stalk what would they do? How about give Laurie Strode a daughter? Kill Laurie off in a car accident? Sure why not. So for three films Michael now was stalking his niece. And for awhile Paul Rudd after he has Michael’s great nephew/son? I don’t know. Part 6 is a mess.
After deciding the whole series was a mess they decided “What if we bring Laurie back?” So they did and in doing so also stated that they were ignoring parts 3-6. Fine. I mean I wasn’t super on board but I could dig it. Although in H20 she does confess to faking her death in a car accident so that means she did so leaving behind a daughter that she didn’t care if she got stalked by her killer brother. What a bitch. After this she did agree to make one more appearance in Halloween Resurrection: Michael vs. Busta only if they would finally kill Laurie off. Not only did they do that but they pretty much killed the whole franchise.
Enter Rob Zombie. Well these two films were actually remakes so that’s a whole other argument. But . . . not good.
After years another sequel to the remakes never surfaced. There were talks of doing a 3D sequel thus capitalizing on the 3 in the title but that eventually fell apart. Then it seems out of nowhere Blumhouse announced they were working on a new Halloween movie. Blumhouse has been the horror company de jour over the past decade so it seemed interesting to have them jump into the pool with one of the biggest horror franchise on the planet. Then quickly after that is that John Carpenter would be on board to act as a mentor for the creative team on the movie. Offer advice, suggestions, and whatever else he could.
We were then left wondering how this was going to work. Is this a sequel to the Zombie films? Does this go back to original continuity? Is it another remake? Well before we got those answers we got the announcement that David Gordon Green and Danny McBride were brought on to direct and co-write the movie. Some fans were stumped but I thought they might do a good job. I know they were both horror fans and there has always been a dark undertone in all their previous work.
But before too long the bombshell was dropped. They were ignoring anything and maybe everything that happened after the first movie. This was a direct sequel to the first film and that Jamie Lee Curtis was returning once again as Laurie Strode. So that sounds that even the problematic plot point of Laurie being Michael’s sister may also be off the table.
I’m just not sure I like the idea of just wiping all the continuity out. I mean if there is any franchise that needed it it’s this one but to have it erase everything but the original film just doesn’t feel right to me. It’s like three times now they’ve just said “Eh we still haven’t gotten it right so we’re erasing the drawing board again.” How do you all feel about the erasure of cinematic continuity?