I read somewhere that there was a sequel planned for the film "BLACK CHRISTMAS" The sequel was to have the killer come back on October 31st to begin killing once more. However the idea was discarded, but somehow managed to morph into "HALLOWEEN".
Any validy to this??
-------------------- A good friend will bail you outta jail. A TRUE friend will be sitting in next to you saying "DAMN THAT AS FUN!!" Posts: 8 | From: Seattle, Washington | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
Wikipedia says that it has some truth to it - the idea of a sequel was only hypothetical. Though the wikipedia page on Halloween only makes a passing reference to Black Christmas influence being stylistic.
-------------------- W.W.F.S.M.D? But this image of Bush as some sort of Snidely Whiplash tying the fair maiden to the railroad tracks is beyond the pale. - Joe Bentley Posts: 2311 | From: Minnnesota | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
Yeah, it's kind of true. There's a few different versions floating around, but the generally established wisdom seems to be this.
John Carpenter and Bob Clark (director of Black Christmas) were working together on a script (what for is not revealed), while Clark worked on an idea for a sequel for Black Christmas, in which the killer escaped from an asylum and terrorised a small town on Halloween. The rough script was called Halloween.
Clark decided that he didn't want to do a sequel after all, as he didn't want to be pigeonholed as a horror director, and told Carpenter that he could have the idea if he wanted it, at the same time as Carpenter was offered a TV movie called "The Babysitter Murders" which was, surprisingly enough about a bunch of babysitters being killed by a force of pure evil that couldn't die. Carpenter (and Debra Hill) combined the two ideas and produced such a strong script and film that it was upgraded from a TV movie to a cinema release.
In the commentary for Black Christmas, Clark does say that he offered the idea to Carpenter, but that he doesn't know if it was actually that which inspired him, and notes that the tone and execution of Halloween was very different from what he would have envisioned. The main difference, of course, is that the killer in Black Christmas is hardly seen, but is often heard on the phone (in some great bits of sound editing that are very effective), and Michael Myers is seen but not heard, other than the breathing (although he does phone Laurie at one point and breathes down the phone at her. Or maybe he doesn't, it's left a little ambiguous).
That said, there are marked similarities in style. Both films are pretty much bloodless. Both films feature extensive killer's POV shots (steadycam in Halloween, and a camera mounted on the cameraman's shoulder with a special rig in Black Christmas), including a lengthy one that begins the film stalking around the outside of a house. In fact, the modern, urban setting was something of a novelty for horror at the time, and both films were unusual in using it (although neither were the first to do so). And both films feature the heroine entering a room in which the corpses of her friends have been arranged towards the end of the film.
So, is Halloween the sequel to Black Christmas? The answer is both yes and no. Certainly, though, both are great films, and if you enjoyed either one, then you should see the other. And if you've seen neither...get thee to a rental shop.
Agnes, it's me, Billy.
-------------------- seriously , everyone on here , just trys to give someone crap about something they do !! , its shitting me to tears. Posts: 16061 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |