|
Post by Halloween King on Oct 5, 2014 1:19:38 GMT -5
Halloween 2 was great, too bad it gets a nasty rep for trying something new in the dead as dirt series. Halloween 3, I think they should wait for the right script and the right moment. Now is not the right moment. And for the love of everything, I hope they do not green light "Halloween 3D". That would be the worst ever. Personally I hate the Zombie Halloween films because Zombie took an Iconic film and turned it into a white trash movie. The family is dis-functional, almost every other word of dialogue is a cuss word, Sasquatch Micheal, his over use of his wife, the fact that his wife works as a stripper at an advertised topless bar but she does not dance topless, 50 mins of Halloween 1 was young Micheal Myers, he killed Danny Trejo, he killed Ken Foree, that white horse, His wife as a ghost, Micheal as a mask less hobo, just so many things. See in the original film Micheal lives in small town USA. Micheal commits murder for no apparent reason. Micheal is an average sized man so once he breaks out he can easily mix in and not be noticed. Micheal does not have a dramatic escape from the mental institution so Loomis is on his own in trying to get people to believe there is a Maniac on the loose. In the Zombie film we see Micheal living in very poor conditions with abusive parents, so it's like Zombie wants you to cheer for the killer, as is typical in all of Rob's movies. Micheal grows to gigantic size despite the fact he was a small kid in the beginning, so are we to believe they were feeding him HGH in that institute? Also he is so big people are bound to notice him and what he's doing so there goes any element of stalking the baby sitter. And last, Micheal kills a number of people to get out of his institution, so that would have sparked a massive manhunt to apprehend him.
|
|
|
Post by Self-Savior on Oct 5, 2014 2:42:58 GMT -5
I wouldn't really mind a 3D Halloween movie. I actually enjoyed both of RZ's Halloween films and felt that Tyler Mane played a great adult Michael Myers and if they do move forward with it...I hope they involve him again.
|
|
|
Post by Scarlet Begonias on Oct 5, 2014 9:18:35 GMT -5
Halloween 2 was great, too bad it gets a nasty rep for trying something new in the dead as dirt series. Halloween 3, I think they should wait for the right script and the right moment. Now is not the right moment. And for the love of everything, I hope they do not green light "Halloween 3D". That would be the worst ever. Personally I hate the Zombie Halloween films because Zombie took an Iconic film and turned it into a white trash movie. The family is dis-functional, almost every other word of dialogue is a cuss word, Sasquatch Micheal, his over use of his wife, the fact that his wife works as a stripper at an advertised topless bar but she does not dance topless, 50 mins of Halloween 1 was young Micheal Myers, he killed Danny Trejo, he killed Ken Foree, that white horse, His wife as a ghost, Micheal as a mask less hobo, just so many things. See in the original film Micheal lives in small town USA. Micheal commits murder for no apparent reason. Micheal is an average sized man so once he breaks out he can easily mix in and not be noticed. Micheal does not have a dramatic escape from the mental institution so Loomis is on his own in trying to get people to believe there is a Maniac on the loose. In the Zombie film we see Micheal living in very poor conditions with abusive parents, so it's like Zombie wants you to cheer for the killer, as is typical in all of Rob's movies. Micheal grows to gigantic size despite the fact he was a small kid in the beginning, so are we to believe they were feeding him HGH in that institute? Also he is so big people are bound to notice him and what he's doing so there goes any element of stalking the baby sitter. And last, Micheal kills a number of people to get out of his institution, so that would have sparked a massive manhunt to apprehend him. Exactly what I'm saying, why make the same exact movie for a 9th time? I'm happy he made something different, and for me it worked. It was a more realistic, real world take on the classic story. Sure, boogeyman Michael was excellent in the original, but it grew tired after endless sequels. Zombies Halloween brought a flare back to the series. The second one is much better than the first also, it's not a typical slasher movie, it's more of a Shakespearean tragedy than anything.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Apr 19, 2024 14:58:14 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 5, 2014 11:07:00 GMT -5
That chucky movie has been out for months
|
|
|
Post by Halloween King on Oct 5, 2014 12:39:35 GMT -5
Personally I hate the Zombie Halloween films because Zombie took an Iconic film and turned it into a white trash movie. The family is dis-functional, almost every other word of dialogue is a cuss word, Sasquatch Micheal, his over use of his wife, the fact that his wife works as a stripper at an advertised topless bar but she does not dance topless, 50 mins of Halloween 1 was young Micheal Myers, he killed Danny Trejo, he killed Ken Foree, that white horse, His wife as a ghost, Micheal as a mask less hobo, just so many things. See in the original film Micheal lives in small town USA. Micheal commits murder for no apparent reason. Micheal is an average sized man so once he breaks out he can easily mix in and not be noticed. Micheal does not have a dramatic escape from the mental institution so Loomis is on his own in trying to get people to believe there is a Maniac on the loose. In the Zombie film we see Micheal living in very poor conditions with abusive parents, so it's like Zombie wants you to cheer for the killer, as is typical in all of Rob's movies. Micheal grows to gigantic size despite the fact he was a small kid in the beginning, so are we to believe they were feeding him HGH in that institute? Also he is so big people are bound to notice him and what he's doing so there goes any element of stalking the baby sitter. And last, Micheal kills a number of people to get out of his institution, so that would have sparked a massive manhunt to apprehend him. Exactly what I'm saying, why make the same exact movie for a 9th time? I'm happy he made something different, and for me it worked. It was a more realistic, real world take on the classic story. Sure, boogeyman Michael was excellent in the original, but it grew tired after endless sequels. Zombies Halloween brought a flare back to the series. The second one is much better than the first also, it's not a typical slasher movie, it's more of a Shakespearean tragedy than anything. Wow you just said so much that I STRONGLY disagree with. • It was a more realistic, real world You must live in a polar opposite world than I do. I've never seen a home with that much vulgarity through out the house. Growing up I did not hear a cuss word until I was in school. In the movie in the Myers house it seems like every other word is a cuss word. This is what I call lazy writing. Why bother and try to develop an original story that requires creativity when you can just hurl cuss words at the audience to achieve shock value. Small town USA is calmer, more laid back, simpler life, so it would take a special kind of trash to be that Vulgar and offensive. This part of the Zombie remakes really sticks out as being the complete opposite of real world. The Sasquatch sized Micheal was ridiculous. In the original Micheal was an average sized man doing extraordinary things, but because he was an average type of guy he was going unnoticed. With the Zombie version some how Micheal went from being 3 feet tall to being 7 feet tall? That does not happen, tall adult men were also tall boys. Plus with him being so big it kills the feeling that he is doing something beyond an average man's capabilities. And also his size makes him stick out like a sore thumb, he would not be able to creep around and go unnoticed. Right away as soon as someone saw a 7 foot tall man in a mask creeping around their home you better believe the police would be called. To me Rob Zombie's version of Halloween is just a remake of the Devil's Rejects. Only he substituted Micheal Myers as the killer and took all of the spoken lines away from the killer. And then the sequel is Rob Zombie showing us his nepotism in hiring his wife again, despite the fact that she dies in the first film. He also shows us how much of a one dimensional film maker he is by opting to be as Vulgar as possible again. I can only thank god the Studios/Producers wised up and took the franchise away from him. I would love to see a reboot. OR a sequel to the older movies. The Rob Zombie films should be gathered together and burned.
|
|
|
Post by Self-Savior on Oct 5, 2014 12:58:08 GMT -5
Dimension Films and The Weinsteins didn't take anything away from RZ...he only signed on to do the 2 films.
So you'd rather have a sequel to that crap heap that was Halloween Resurrection? No thanks.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Apr 19, 2024 14:58:14 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 5, 2014 13:18:08 GMT -5
I didn't know who he was when watching the film, but his death was really unsettling to me (doesn't happen often). I remember thinking I'd rather watch a film about that character & how he got to where he was...angered me that he died so brutally. For me, I was just so fed up with watching that little boy/young Micheal Myers take up 50 mins of the movie that when I saw the nice Semi, and then Joe Grizzly, it was such a breath of fresh air. I was glad to see an awesome truck driver in the movie. But then they took the Sasquatch Micheal and had him kill Joe Grizzly. There was so many things wrong with the Rob Zombie Halloween films. I considered myself a fan of Zombie until I saw those movies. Once I saw those movies I saw him for what he really is. Did he write them?? Idk how hands on he was allowed to be with the scripts.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Apr 19, 2024 14:58:14 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 5, 2014 13:24:15 GMT -5
I totally agree with some of you, Rob Zombie IS stuck on a white trash joyride you can see it in ALL his films!!!!
Being older I actually saw Halloween at the movies, very scary film as was Halloween 2. John Carpenter is one of the best horror/fantasy directors of all time.
I think the main thing is the way society and America has changed so much since the original Halloween came out. I mean what would it take to make you scared at a film nowadays?
Seeing zombie movies/ slasher movies and possession movies for thirty years they pretty much done all they can do with that genre, you probably seen every over the top kill or gross out gore fest there is to see.
Even if they came up with a good story you already HAD a good story with the original film. They need to go somewhere different with the retelling of the original and yes I agree white trash hillbilly Halloween wasn't the right direction.
|
|
|
Post by Halloween King on Oct 5, 2014 13:25:42 GMT -5
For me, I was just so fed up with watching that little boy/young Micheal Myers take up 50 mins of the movie that when I saw the nice Semi, and then Joe Grizzly, it was such a breath of fresh air. I was glad to see an awesome truck driver in the movie. But then they took the Sasquatch Micheal and had him kill Joe Grizzly. There was so many things wrong with the Rob Zombie Halloween films. I considered myself a fan of Zombie until I saw those movies. Once I saw those movies I saw him for what he really is. Did he write them?? Idk how hands on he was allowed to be with the scripts. Check IMDB Writers: Rob Zombie (screenplay)
|
|
|
Post by cordless2016 on Oct 5, 2014 13:42:01 GMT -5
Zombie is trash and ruined the Halloween series. Yes the series needed a reboot but zombie inserted his white trash crap, constant swearing, little character development, and pointless deaths and gore into a series that was known for none of that. The farther he is away from this series the better. His second Halloween movie was one of the worst movies I ha e ever seen.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Apr 19, 2024 14:58:14 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 5, 2014 13:44:09 GMT -5
Zombie is trash and ruined the Halloween series. Yes the series needed a reboot but zombie inserted his white trash crap, constant swearing, little character development, and pointless deaths and scares into a series that was known for none of that. The farther he is away from this series the better. His second Halloween movie was one of the worst movies I ha e ever seen. Yeah watch Lords of Salem and you will reconsider that statement that was the worst film ever I think he hit the pipe too much on that one!!!!! I do think his wife is ho though.
|
|
|
Post by Suckasays on Oct 5, 2014 13:53:39 GMT -5
Yeah I have to agree. The Zombie movies are pretty dang bad. They're well shot but as far as the liberties he took and how far out there he strayed from what we know...look...I see why he did it. We've "been there and done that" with Halloween. I understand wanting to do something different. But at the end of the day, I didn't like what he did. I'm perfectly ok with seeing another formulaic Halloween film. I really think that with Halloween II he was just doing whatever he wanted as a big "FU" to those who complained about the first one. If he's a fan of the Halloween series (as he claims to be), there's no way he can watch that film back and say "Man, that is a quality Halloween fick". No way possible. It's just a movie put out there to say "You thought I went way out in left field with my first run? You whined and complained that I changed things too much? Well wait til you see this crap". It just didn't work for me.
As for picking up where the zombie movies left off or a previous sequel? I'm cool with the picking up with the previous series. I mean...why couldn't they go back to any point they want to go back to? They did it with Halloween H20. I could care less about a definitive timeline. I just want to see Michael Myers doing his thing. I don't need a great deal of originality and I don't understand why these companies haven't figured that out with fans. We sat through a big number of "same ole same ole" Friday the 13th films and were cool with it. Why do they feel the need to toss out the idea of a found footage Friday film when most of us would be cool with a rehash of what we've already seen? Same goes for Halloween. Why do we need a big explanation of why Michael went off the deep end or some other gimmick such as 3D?
|
|
|
Post by cordless2016 on Oct 5, 2014 17:56:10 GMT -5
Yeah I have to agree. The Zombie movies are pretty dang bad. They're well shot but as far as the liberties he took and how far out there he strayed from what we know...look...I see why he did it. We've "been there and done that" with Halloween. I understand wanting to do something different. But at the end of the day, I didn't like what he did. I'm perfectly ok with seeing another formulaic Halloween film. I really think that with Halloween II he was just doing whatever he wanted as a big "FU" to those who complained about the first one. If he's a fan of the Halloween series (as he claims to be), there's no way he can watch that film back and say "Man, that is a quality Halloween fick". No way possible. It's just a movie put out there to say "You thought I went way out in left field with my first run? You whined and complained that I changed things too much? Well wait til you see this crap". It just didn't work for me. As for picking up where the zombie movies left off or a previous sequel? I'm cool with the picking up with the previous series. I mean...why couldn't they go back to any point they want to go back to? They did it with Halloween H20. I could care less about a definitive timeline. I just want to see Michael Myers doing his thing. I don't need a great deal of originality and I don't understand why these companies haven't figured that out with fans. We sat through a big number of "same ole same ole" Friday the 13th films and were cool with it. Why do they feel the need to toss out the idea of a found footage Friday film when most of us would be cool with a rehash of what we've already seen? Same goes for Halloween. Why do we need a big explanation of why Michael went off the deep end or some other gimmick such as 3D? Agreed 100%. Especially with the last part about Michael's backstory. One of the reasons why the original Halloween was so great was because of Michael's mysterious backstory. From the little we're told he was a normal child in a small, normal American town who decided to murder his sister out of the blue. His doctor spent almost 2 decades with him and couldn't get any more info than we the audience did. That's was made Michael such an interesting character and helped build the suspense of the original film. Not knowing Michael was a socially awkward, chubby little kid who grew up in an abusive, white trash home with a stripper mother and no father. As for picking up where one of the previous films left off, I'm fine with that. I'm not a huge fan of H20 but it stuck to the formula and was better than most of the Halloween flicks. Or make a sequel to the original film and start a new storyline. We could follow a new path following the events of Loomis shooting Michael off the balcony. Maybe Michael decides to go after Laurie after she is released from the hospital. Maybe they forget the Michael/Laurie brother/sister storyline and he goes after another group of babysitters he stumbles upon that night. I'd be all for a doing something like this than continuing the beyond terrible Zombie films.
|
|
|
Post by Suckasays on Oct 5, 2014 20:30:57 GMT -5
I really like what they did with Halloween: Nightdance. If you haven't read that graphic novel, it's pretty neat. It takes place in a neighboring town where Michael wondered off to after the 2nd film.
|
|
|
Post by Robert69 on Oct 5, 2014 21:07:31 GMT -5
If it is anything like Zombies attempts at remaking Halloween he shouldn't be anywhere near it and it should be left alone entirely. The second half of the 1st Halloween remake he did was ok. But the 2nd film he did was among the worst films I've ever seen. Agreed. I thought the 2nd half of his first flick was decent, and the hospital sequence in 2 was amazing -- the rest was god awful. I do LOVE Tyler Mane as Michael Myers, though.
|
|
|
Post by Robert69 on Oct 5, 2014 21:11:50 GMT -5
Did he write them?? Idk how hands on he was allowed to be with the scripts. Check IMDB Writers: Rob Zombie (screenplay) I do believe Zombie basically insists on either fully writing, or re-writing all his scripts...
|
|
|
Post by Halloween King on Oct 5, 2014 21:57:01 GMT -5
Yeah I have to agree. The Zombie movies are pretty dang bad. They're well shot but as far as the liberties he took and how far out there he strayed from what we know...look...I see why he did it. We've "been there and done that" with Halloween. I understand wanting to do something different. But at the end of the day, I didn't like what he did. I'm perfectly ok with seeing another formulaic Halloween film. I really think that with Halloween II he was just doing whatever he wanted as a big "FU" to those who complained about the first one. If he's a fan of the Halloween series (as he claims to be), there's no way he can watch that film back and say "Man, that is a quality Halloween fick". No way possible. It's just a movie put out there to say "You thought I went way out in left field with my first run? You whined and complained that I changed things too much? Well wait til you see this crap". It just didn't work for me. As for picking up where the zombie movies left off or a previous sequel? I'm cool with the picking up with the previous series. I mean...why couldn't they go back to any point they want to go back to? They did it with Halloween H20. I could care less about a definitive timeline. I just want to see Michael Myers doing his thing. I don't need a great deal of originality and I don't understand why these companies haven't figured that out with fans. We sat through a big number of "same ole same ole" Friday the 13th films and were cool with it. Why do they feel the need to toss out the idea of a found footage Friday film when most of us would be cool with a rehash of what we've already seen? Same goes for Halloween. Why do we need a big explanation of why Michael went off the deep end or some other gimmick such as 3D? The Friday the 13th reboot is another film that I think was horribly written. It's another prime example of movie makers thinking the killer needs to be a giant to be an imposing figure. Aside from Sasquatch Jason his under ground tunnel system was another mind frack. In the original story Jason was a mentally challenged young boy. The people who were supposed to be watching this special needs child were off fooling around, and as such the boy drowns and the mother goes on a killing spree. So the first films clearly establish that Jason is mentally intellectually- disabled, yet in the reboot he has an under ground complex and tunnel system underneath the camp grounds? He also sets off booby traps, how is a mentally intellectually- disabled individual going to think this all out, construct it all, and execute his scheme? The reboot just went off and did it's own thing, just like Zombie, all while using an Iconic character and franchise.
|
|
|
Post by Robert69 on Oct 5, 2014 22:53:17 GMT -5
Yeah I have to agree. The Zombie movies are pretty dang bad. They're well shot but as far as the liberties he took and how far out there he strayed from what we know...look...I see why he did it. We've "been there and done that" with Halloween. I understand wanting to do something different. But at the end of the day, I didn't like what he did. I'm perfectly ok with seeing another formulaic Halloween film. I really think that with Halloween II he was just doing whatever he wanted as a big "FU" to those who complained about the first one. If he's a fan of the Halloween series (as he claims to be), there's no way he can watch that film back and say "Man, that is a quality Halloween fick". No way possible. It's just a movie put out there to say "You thought I went way out in left field with my first run? You whined and complained that I changed things too much? Well wait til you see this crap". It just didn't work for me. As for picking up where the zombie movies left off or a previous sequel? I'm cool with the picking up with the previous series. I mean...why couldn't they go back to any point they want to go back to? They did it with Halloween H20. I could care less about a definitive timeline. I just want to see Michael Myers doing his thing. I don't need a great deal of originality and I don't understand why these companies haven't figured that out with fans. We sat through a big number of "same ole same ole" Friday the 13th films and were cool with it. Why do they feel the need to toss out the idea of a found footage Friday film when most of us would be cool with a rehash of what we've already seen? Same goes for Halloween. Why do we need a big explanation of why Michael went off the deep end or some other gimmick such as 3D? The Friday the 13th reboot is another film that I think was horribly written. It's another prime example of movie makers thinking the killer needs to be a giant to be an imposing figure. Aside from Sasquatch Jason his under ground tunnel system was another mind frack. In the original story Jason was a mentally challenged young boy. The people who were supposed to be watching this special needs child were off fooling around, and as such the boy drowns and the mother goes on a killing spree. So the first films clearly establish that Jason is mentally intellectually- disabled, yet in the reboot he has an under ground complex and tunnel system underneath the camp grounds? He also sets off booby traps, how is a mentally intellectually- disabled individual going to think this all out, construct it all, and execute his scheme? The reboot just went off and did it's own thing, just like Zombie, all while using an Iconic character and franchise. I actually disagree, about Ft13th. While I mostly detest Zombie's remakes as basically being The Devil's Rejects: Mikey Meyers Edition...I felt that a LOT about the Ft13th reboot did the soul of the franchise justice. Jason was always an imposing figure over the other characters. Even Kane Hodder (who's not THAT big of a man) was cast against a small group of 'teens' in order to make him more imposing. This is why they recast him with Kirzinger in FvJ -- they wanted more imposing. Jared Padalecki was a considerable choice as a hero, probably my favorite, with the most potential, since dude from IV-VI. He's a massive man, in his own right. The writing was rough, at times but -- slashers are rarely Oscar-worthy. Most we can ask for is 'witty', and intelligent. I thought it did a great job at embodying the first 3 films into one. The one thing I did hate here is that they chose the most unlikeable group of kids possible. Jesus. All that said, I thought the reboot was decent enough that I DO want to see a sequel to it. Especially if it's set during the winter, as they had been talking about. As for H3 -- get a different Director in there, for sure. Did anyone else see the motion comic concept trailer a couple years ago? -- it was damn good...I'll try to find it.
|
|
|
Post by Halloween King on Oct 5, 2014 23:40:27 GMT -5
The Friday the 13th reboot is another film that I think was horribly written. It's another prime example of movie makers thinking the killer needs to be a giant to be an imposing figure. Aside from Sasquatch Jason his under ground tunnel system was another mind frack. In the original story Jason was a mentally challenged young boy. The people who were supposed to be watching this special needs child were off fooling around, and as such the boy drowns and the mother goes on a killing spree. So the first films clearly establish that Jason is mentally intellectually- disabled, yet in the reboot he has an under ground complex and tunnel system underneath the camp grounds? He also sets off booby traps, how is a mentally intellectually- disabled individual going to think this all out, construct it all, and execute his scheme? The reboot just went off and did it's own thing, just like Zombie, all while using an Iconic character and franchise. I actually disagree, about Ft13th. While I mostly detest Zombie's remakes as basically being The Devil's Rejects: Mikey Meyers Edition...I felt that a LOT about the Ft13th reboot did the soul of the franchise justice. Jason was always an imposing figure over the other characters. Even Kane Hodder (who's not THAT big of a man) was cast against a small group of 'teens' in order to make him more imposing. This is why they recast him with Kirzinger in FvJ -- they wanted more imposing. Jared Padalecki was a considerable choice as a hero, probably my favorite, with the most potential, since dude from IV-VI. He's a massive man, in his own right. The writing was rough, at times but -- slashers are rarely Oscar-worthy. Most we can ask for is 'witty', and intelligent. I thought it did a great job at embodying the first 3 films into one. The one thing I did hate here is that they chose the most unlikeable group of kids possible. Jesus. All that said, I thought the reboot was decent enough that I DO want to see a sequel to it. Especially if it's set during the winter, as they had been talking about. As for H3 -- get a different Director in there, for sure. Did anyone else see the motion comic concept trailer a couple years ago? -- it was damn good...I'll try to find it. What are your thoughts on a Mentally intellectually- disabled Jason being able to mastermind an underground network or tunnels and rooms? Or his ability to set up traps?
|
|
|
Post by Robert69 on Oct 5, 2014 23:55:27 GMT -5
I actually disagree, about Ft13th. While I mostly detest Zombie's remakes as basically being The Devil's Rejects: Mikey Meyers Edition...I felt that a LOT about the Ft13th reboot did the soul of the franchise justice. Jason was always an imposing figure over the other characters. Even Kane Hodder (who's not THAT big of a man) was cast against a small group of 'teens' in order to make him more imposing. This is why they recast him with Kirzinger in FvJ -- they wanted more imposing. Jared Padalecki was a considerable choice as a hero, probably my favorite, with the most potential, since dude from IV-VI. He's a massive man, in his own right. The writing was rough, at times but -- slashers are rarely Oscar-worthy. Most we can ask for is 'witty', and intelligent. I thought it did a great job at embodying the first 3 films into one. The one thing I did hate here is that they chose the most unlikeable group of kids possible. Jesus. All that said, I thought the reboot was decent enough that I DO want to see a sequel to it. Especially if it's set during the winter, as they had been talking about. As for H3 -- get a different Director in there, for sure. Did anyone else see the motion comic concept trailer a couple years ago? -- it was damn good...I'll try to find it. What are your thoughts on a Mentally intellectually- disabled Jason being able to mastermind an underground network or tunnels and rooms? Or his ability to set up traps? My first summer job was for a gent down in FL, doing roofing, etc...we had a mentally intellectually- disabled dude named Dusty who worked on the crew. Pound for pound one of the top 5 strongest people I've ever known. He would haul multiple bundles of shingles up to the roof on his own, with no help, repeatedly. He had no off switch, either. We had to make him take a break. It was damn near super-human. Mentally handicapped folks tend to not be able to grasp the concept of restraint, therefore when they exert force, they exert it in a preternatural way. I think most all of us have heard these stories, or witnessed it at some point...couple this with no moral compass at all, a violent temperament, and no concept of physical exhaustion -- you have Jason. The hunting/traps...Jason was what? 6-9 years old when he 'died'? More than old enough to be taught the basics of hunting, knot tying, booby traps, etc...a lot of mentally handicapped folks tend to 'Rain Man' something, and they specialize in that one particular skill. Perhaps Jason took extremely well to survival stuff/hunting, etc, as a child? I mean, it's basically stuff the Boy Scouts may teach ya... I don't think it's out of the realm of possibility. Convenient? Absolutely, but -- not out of the question. The tunneling -- while I felt that entire aspect was pointless, it's not exactly a mastermind required to dig a hole, or bunch of holes. Just someone with a whole bunch of time. Which he had. Reverting back to that 'mentally intellectually- disabled people learn certain things really well' -- being a kid, his age range would have been around Vietnam. There were definitely stories about the Vietcong tunneling etc...again, convenient -- not impossible.
|
|