Haven't seen either yet, but which would you prefer? Wonder who's bitchfight idea it was to release them on the same day.

I'll be honest I liked Zombie's version of Halloween, but TFD seems like it would be more fun/interesting.

MARK SPOILERS PLZ

Porn. It's porn, man.

As much as I like me some good porn, between TFD and Zombie's Halloween 2, I'd say Halloween 2! Final Destination was good don't get me wrong, but after 2, it was overkill! I think it's too soon to start a retcon of it!

Final Destination is one of those predictable coockie cutter everyone gets brutally killed but one man and one woman sort of flick. Each one is about the same. Wash, Rinse, Dry, Repeat. The Final Destination better be The Final Sequel. Even the commercial looks bad.

Halloween 2's commercial seems badly executed, while the movie will still probably be good.

Either way, i'm probably going to pirate H2 and enjoy it for free like the last one and pirate FD2 just so i can laugh at it.

I voted for Halloween 2. Not much of a choice there for me.

Final Destination is one of those predictable coockie cutter everyone gets brutally killed but one man and one woman sort of flick. Each one is about the same. Wash, Rinse, Dry, Repeat. The Final Destination better be The Final Sequel. Even the commercial looks bad.

Halloween 2's commercial seems badly executed, while the movie will still probably be good.

Either way, i'm probably going to pirate H2 and enjoy it for free like the last one and pirate FD2 just so i can laugh at it. Yeah, it was cookie cutter, but a true horror fan doesn't necessarily base it on story alone. A good kill, is a good kill even if it's a commercial horror flick!

I think that's why they retconned it to restart the franchise, and unfortunetly, as long as you have people going to Saw flicks, you'll get people to see the renewed TFD franchise.

I think that's why they retconned it to restart the franchise, and unfortunetly, as long as you have people going to Saw flicks, you'll get people to see the renewed TFD franchise.

That's gotta be the worst comparison ever. Saw is actually worth watching for the story and twist alone. FD, however, is just the same story every time, you're more in it for the ride. Especially seeing as it's 3D this time. The FD franchise is not something anyone watches for the story, more for the suspense and jump-moments and body-counting and splatters. Not necessarily a bad thing, but at least Saw is in it for more than that.

vastalis, what do you mean, retconned?

Yeah i gotta go with Zak on this one. Saw at least has the brilliant storyline that follows through each movie and not to mention the traps are more than suspenseful wondering if the people will get out of them and figure them out in time. Not to mention the thought that goes into the design of the traps.

With TFD it's just CAR FROM OUT OF FUCKING NOWHERE followed by "I wonder who's gonna die next? Oh that person's acting like a bitch, she's so gonna get it. Oops, they're both having sex, we all know about the sex rule in horror movies". There's not really much of a ride when you know what's going to happen. So people are getting killed and mutilated in wild ways. Big deal, there's also the internet.

It's not hard to guess the superior franchise.

i don't know man, saw 32354320920394823 is coming out. obviously the quality is still the same!

(not saying that the first saws weren't bad. it's just getting a bit ridiculous)

also, they're totally reaching for disasters in TFD francise. first one with airplane? cool. second one with huge car crash? cool. third one with a roller coaster? -.- fourth one with nascar crash? mega -.-

vastalis, what do you mean, retconned?
Cause although it's considered a sequel, none of the characters have anything to do with the previous films! so it's a standalone movie hence the name The Final Destination rather than part 4.

Yeah i gotta go with Zak on this one. Saw at least has the brilliant storyline that follows through each movie and not to mention the traps are more than suspenseful wondering if the people will get out of them and figure them out in time. Not to mention the thought that goes into the design of the traps.

With TFD it's just CAR FROM OUT OF FUCKING NOWHERE followed by "I wonder who's gonna die next? Oh that person's acting like a bitch, she's so gonna get it. Oops, they're both having sex, we all know about the sex rule in horror movies". There's not really much of a ride when you know what's going to happen. So people are getting killed and mutilated in wild ways. Big deal, there's also the internet.

It's not hard to guess the superior franchise.Ill admit the traps are good, but the premise like all horror movies is the same. Eventually each sequel gets more and more redundant cause the kills get more focus than the actual story where they just throw in a plot twist and voil� you have a segway. Pretty much the producers don't know when to quit.
After Saw 2, they should've canned the series. No horror film can go more than 2 sequels and still be good to a wide audience. Only the core fanbase asks for more!

They should have ended Saw with the last film since Jigsaw is actually DEAD now. I'd like to see what happens now, but it's probably not going to go as well as people would want it to. I admit Saw has it's good share of flaws but the other choice...Damn.

Halloween looks interesting, I'd probably see it if I had the chance.

I'm not too particularly fond of Saw, I think it should have just stopped at 2.

Can we leave Saw out of this :(

I wasn't nuts about Rob Z's first take on Halloween, especially the trashy first half, bleh, but the overall franchise still interests me much more than Final Destination.

I'm Joe Grizzly, bitch~

I'd say both are kind of 'meh' to me, but the 3D gimmick might be worth it for TFD.

You can always DL Halloween 2 in a few weeks or so.

I don't enjoy the new wave of 3D movies for two reasons:

1 - higher ticket price
2 - I wear glasses, so I have to put the 3D glasses over those. This dilutes the effect to a degree, and also makes me fucking uncomfortable for at least 1 1/2 hours.

BONUS - Most of the 3d shots are just as gimmicky as they ever were. LOOK THIS KID IS DOING YO YO TRICKS AT THE SCREEN, LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!

Cause although it's considered a sequel, none of the characters have anything to do with the previous films! so it's a standalone movie hence the name The Final Destination rather than part 4.

i think it was just a naming gimmick, like calling it fast and furious instead of the fast and the furious 4. also, when i was walking the theater, i heard the audio say, "there have been reports of other people surviving disasters, but they all died. EVERY SINGLE ONE." so it does reference the other 3, and is therefore part of continuity and not a retcon (i am basing this on that snippet of audio i heard. i have not and probably will not see the whole movie)

SAW went crap when the 2nd one came out, only the first was any good, same with any horror film really, they often end up being Untentionally Funny by the time the 3rd movie comes out.

Funny enough I thought the 3rd FD movie was better than the 2nd, but still not better than the first.

Having watched bloody valentine i have to agree it seems the studio sacrifice any kind of good story for just in your face moments, im wondering if FD 3D is going to be like that, it sure looks that way from the trailer.

H2 is no different, I mean you already know exactly what is going to happen, its a flip of the coin thing really in what you want to watch.

The whole state of horror movies has been lame this decade if you ask me, apart from the first SAW and FD1 theirs been no stand outs, just crappy remakes of better OG films, next up freddy.....great.

crappy remakes of better OG films

original gangsta?

Halloween 2 was pretty good, it was really weird to see actual plot and character development.

i think it was just a naming gimmick, like calling it fast and furious instead of the fast and the furious 4. also, when i was walking the theater, i heard the audio say, "there have been reports of other people surviving disasters, but they all died. EVERY SINGLE ONE." so it does reference the other 3, and is therefore part of continuity and not a retcon (i am basing this on that snippet of audio i heard. i have not and probably will not see the whole movie)If that line is really the only thing that connects all the movies together, then thats a pretty lame connection! lol


SAW went crap when the 2nd one came out, only the first was any good, same with any horror film really, they often end up being Untentionally Funny by the time the 3rd movie comes out.

Funny enough I thought the 3rd FD movie was better than the 2nd, but still not better than the first.

Having watched bloody valentine i have to agree it seems the studio sacrifice any kind of good story for just in your face moments, im wondering if FD 3D is going to be like that, it sure looks that way from the trailer.

H2 is no different, I mean you already know exactly what is going to happen, its a flip of the coin thing really in what you want to watch.

The whole state of horror movies has been lame this decade if you ask me, apart from the first SAW and FD1 theirs been no stand outs, just crappy remakes of better OG films, next up freddy.....great.It's only cause no one can come up with an original idea these days. the 28 series was good! I liked they're whole premise on the zombie survival horror genre -it also reminded me of Helping tag. lol.

I think thats why indie horror is getting so popular these days, cause no one makes anything new!

Without any spoilers, did Zombie's Halloween II use the same story as John Carpenter's H2? Because I really liked that one. A lot.

having read both plots on wiki, they seem sorta similar, but there are aspects that are different.

Yeah, Rob Zombie didn't really want to change the story, just update it, and give a better explaination of why Michael Myers is how he is. I actually liked his premise better than how the original explained it where you don't really know anything except that he killed his sis, spent his life in an institution, and Laurie is actually his little sis.

I thought showing that he comes from a crappy home life and such was just kind of...weak, predictable. It conflicts with the "he's just fucking evil" angle as well. If you have one, why do you need the other?

I hate that "he's just evil" angle cause it seems like a copout! I mean if your entire movie is based on a single character, then why not flesh them out rather than just giving an answer like "They just are!" or like the Simpsons "Poochy" episode: "A wizard did it!"

I think no explanation is better than the likes of "his stepdad is mean", that's pretty played out. And the "he's evil!" reasoning is still in the film, so the whole white trash home-life angle serves little purpose aside from exploitation. Cheap thrills.

the very fact they had the cheek to call the 4th film "The Final Destination" makes it the worst thing in existance.

gimme pron.

the very fact they had the cheek to call the 4th film "The Final Destination" makes it the worst thing in existance.

gimme pron.

I second that, didn't really like the remake of Halloween and I was never a fan of FD. So pronz.

I think no explanation is better than the likes of "his stepdad is mean", that's pretty played out. And the "he's evil!" reasoning is still in the film, so the whole white trash home-life angle serves little purpose aside from exploitation. Cheap thrills.I get what you mean about the "if they only would've hugged Timmy more" type explaination. What I meant about the whole "He's just is" type thing was actually to show the progression from his childhood to adult, not necessarily bad childhood, but like show how soulless he is, like torturing animals or hurting little kids just to make them cry. shit like that! Like when psychologist look at most killers childhoods and see how aside from bad childhoods, they went around doing stuff that were red flag signs.

I got ya, I think that was all fine.

Okay, just saw Final Destination. It was cool, the 3D thing was fun at first but got old kinda fast.

I also didn't like how they kind of got lazy with the old gimmick use of the "signs" in random places and instead made Nick have more premonitions. Well, now that I think about it they made just as good use of the signs as they did in other films, but really, the movie would have been better without those "dreams". That was just insulting.

Still entertaining. 6/10.

Neither. As for "Halloween 2", another useless remake destroying the original. I mean come on. We have had so many remakes in the last decade, "Halloween", "Hills Have Eyes", "Hills Have Eyes 2", "Texas Chainsaw Massacre", "Assault On Precinct 13", "The Fog", "Friday The 13th", and I could go on. Let's think of some new movies and quit copying the originals. Besides, remakes NEVER live up to the originals, especially now with "Halloween 2". What next, "Halloween 3"? "Silent Night, Deadly Night"? "Kingdom Of The Spiders" (with Brad Pitt taking Shatner's role)?

Probably Final Destination - as the advantage with that is that you don't know how the story is going to turn out. With Halloween 2, things are alot more predictable if you've already seen the first film. Though if this was about picking between Halloween 2 and Final Destination 2 I'd have found this question alot harder to answer lol!

Probably Final Destination - as the advantage with that is that you don't know how the story is going to turn out.

sure you do. they all die. DEATH ALWAYS GETS WHO IT COMES FOR!

"Final Destination Spoilers Below"


sure you do. they all die. DEATH ALWAYS GETS WHO IT COMES FOR!

Actually the end of the first FD movie doesn't make it clear whether or not they all die - it only leaves you guessing. Also, the second FD movie makes it clear there was at least one survivor left over from that ending - when it comes to how the story was left open by the finish of the first. :p

I vote for The Final Destination.