ROB ZOMBIE TO FUCK UP THE BLOB NEXT

Monday, August 31st, 2009 at 4:30pm by Axl Rosenberg

the-blob-eats-a-jock

I didn’t think it was possible that Rob Zombie’s Halloween X II could be any worse than Rob Zombie’s Halloween IX I*, and yet there I was, sitting in the theater, wishing that someone had slipped cyanide into my slushie. That someone could (allegedly) so revere John Carpenter’s original classic and yet (seemingly) have no understanding whatsoever of what made that movie so fucking great is a kind of a head-scratcher to me; I mean, Zombie’s Halloween movies are really just unwatchable drek. The nicest thing I can think to say about Zombie’s film is that it moves at twenty-four frames per second, giving the illusion of motion. That’s about it.

Now Zombie has set his sights remaking on another horror classic: The Blob.

Look: I’m actually not opposed to someone remaking The Blob. The original 1958 film launched the career of Steve McQueen and is still a lot of fun to watch, but is in no way, shape, or form scary – it’s just way too campy for modern audiences. Furthermore, the film was already remade once, in 1988, in a version that was written by Frank Darabont – the dude who would go on to make The Shawshank Redemption. That version of The Blob, kind of surprisingly, remains the epitome of everything a remake should aspire to be: it maintains the basic concept and a few key scenes from the original, but otherwise goes off more or less in its own direction. It is also still, twenty-years later, pretty scary. Director Chuck Russell (who’s no Rob Zombie, but still) made the decision that this blob should be able to move crazy fast, and he had the cojones to kill a little kid (in a very violent and unpleasant manner), which is a big no-no in Hollywood-funded horror flicks. Again, the ‘88 Blob is no masterpiece or anything, but it is a really fun movie.

So, of course, right off the bat, Zombie is displaying no understanding whatsoever of what made those movies work. From Variety:

“My intention is not to have a big red blobby thing — that’s the first thing I want to change,” Zombie said. “That gigantic Jello-looking thing might have been scary to audiences in the 1950s, but people would laugh now.”

So Zombie is making a movie called The Blob that won’t have a blob? What the fuck is it going to have then? And why even call it The Blob? That wasn’t the first movie to be about an alien that destroys a town and it won’t be the last, so are you just trading in on name recognition in hopes of making a quick buck? And if that’s the case, wouldn’t it better to just, y’know, jump off a fucking cliff onto some sharp rocks already?

The simplicity of The Blob is a big part of why both movies were successful. Yes, a slow-moving jelly thing is not as scary as it was in ‘58, but like I said, someone already figured out a way to fix that problem. I cannot imagine that Zombie has a better idea for how to improve the concept.

No word yet on a release date for Rob Zombie’s Not The Blob, but based on Zombie’s other directorial efforts, there are two things we know for sure about this movie already:

  1. The characters are going to be white trash.
  2. One of those white trash characters will be played by Sherri Moon Zombie.

Here’s the trailer for the ‘58 The Blob

…and a collection of some of the gorier kills from the ‘88 The Blob:

-AR

*Side-note: Zombie’s Halloween II was actually out-grossed this weekend by The Final Destination, which is in 3-D. The Weinstein Company – a.k.a. the people who funded Halloween II – have now announced that Halloween III will be in 3-D. Is Zombie coming back? How will his awfulness translate to three dimensions? Stay tuned to find out…


59 COMMENTS on “ROB ZOMBIE TO FUCK UP THE BLOB NEXT”

  1. \m/Eluveitie\m/ says:

    So Zombie is making a movie called The Blob that won’t have a blob?

    No, he’s using the kid from the previous photo contest.

  2. groverXIII says:

    Wow, a lot of hate for Zombie’s Halloween movies. I thought they were okay. They’re certainly not cinematic masterpieces, but they’re decent horror movies.

    • Canvas Of Flesh says:

      They’re okay, but they could easily be named something else. I’m sure that people just don’t like seeing their favorite classic film being drug through the mud. It doesn’t bother me to the extent that it pisses me off, but it is kind of sad when you see that Hollywood is so out of ideas that they need to “reimagine” (read: remake) classic films.

      • groverXIII says:

        I’d still take this any day over one of those retarded parody movies…

        I had a concept, back in the day around the time that Superhero Movie or whatever the fuck it was called was released, for a parody of parody movies called “Movie Movie”. (I’m apparently not the only one, as there are other similar concepts on the internet.) And sure enough, those motherfuckers are making it.

        • Canvas Of Flesh says:

          Ugh, I hate those parody films. Who the fuck are these assholes that keep going to see those fucking things?!

  3. NoCowNoFood says:

    Yeah Im drinking Wine and laughing at ur faces in front of the PC yeah

  4. Killczar says:

    I’m absolutely obsessed with Halloween II, because I can’t believe that no one tried to stop it at any point. Why is there a horse? Is there really a place where the chicks listen to the MC5 and Diamond Head and everything is just a brisk walk away? Do people really talk like that?

    Seriously though, it was the funniest movie I’ve seen all year.

  5. SP420 says:

    He should be shot, seriously. He’s up there with Uwe Boll with directors whose ideas should NOT be funded for any creative reason whatsoever.

  6. Beard says:

    So he may or may not be remaking Halloween III. The one about the masks and terminators, right? Fuck.

    • groverXIII says:

      I’m pretty sure he’s said that he’s definitely done with the Halloween series.

      And in all fairness, this movie isn’t a remake so much as an original sequel to the last movie.

      • stu1 says:

        Yeah, this “Halloween 2″ is not a remake of Carpenter’s “Halloween 2.” It’s a sequel to Zombie’s “Halloween.” That being said, I wouldn’t mind someone doing either a remake of Halloween 3 or some kind of sequel to that.

  7. d.o.g.o.b.g.y.n. says:

    Shitty remake after shitty remake gets pumped out and the movie industry STILL wonders why they’re floundering?

  8. Pete says:

    If you hate Zombie’s movies so much, specifically his first Halloween, why did you pay to see this one?

  9. John says:

    Why does hollywood still think Rob Zombie is in any way relevant?

  10. Vikingfromhell890 says:

    Rob Zombie needs to stop and do the cool thing; which is reunite with White Zombie.

  11. !?! says:

    Will someone please tell me what was so great about John Carpenter’s Halloween? The most memorable thing about that movie is the score. Rob Zombie took a boring franchise and IMO made a thrilling movie out of it. Yes, the thrills rely around over-the-top violence, but damn if Rob isn’t good at over-the-top violence.

    • Yes, the FRANCHISE is boring, but Carpenter’s original is great. It’s a simple story told with incredible efficiency, and the scares depend not on violence (which I’m not opposed to per se, but come on), but through pretty expert use of dramatic irony – think of that shot of Jamie Lee Curtis resting against the couch, winded, thinking Michael is dead, and then he silently rises behind her. Or when her friend thinks it’s her boyfriend under the sheet dressed as a ghost – and it’s Michael. Ever seen those moments with a audience? It’s the most tense, unsettling thing in the world.

      Zombie makes Myers the product of an abusive, white trash family. OF COURSE he became a serial killer. Carpenter made him the average kid next door who killed for no apparent reason. He’s just evil. Which do you find scarier?

      • groverXIII says:

        I like the backstory that Mr. Zombie came up with… and I don’t think it makes him any less scary. If anything, it makes him a little bit scarier because it becomes plausible (well, beyond the superhuman strength and endurance… I mean, where the fuck did he get so strong? He didn’t have a fucking Bowflex in the asylum or anything.)

        The funniest thing about the original… where the fuck did he learn to drive? (Yes, I know the retconned that later.)

        • Canvas Of Flesh says:

          He had HSAN. I think that helped explain his superhuman strength.

          I agree that Carpenter’s original masterpiece was…well….a masterpiece. It wasn’t so caught up with being the horror/porn shit they have today.

          • cougar party says:

            Halloween was a great horror film. It’s one of the only movies that ever actually gave me the creeps. Also, I agree with Axl about the fact that what made Michael Meyers so scary was the lack of motivation behind his killing. No abusive childhood or anything, he just wanted to kill.

            Movies today are more like torture porn. It’s all about the visual stuff. Halloween actually got in your head.

      • !?! says:

        I think the more plausible option is the scarier one. Not that an average kid next door couldn’t by chance turn out to be a vicious killer. It happens, sure. But Zombie places Myers in an environment that just might produce a vicious killer. Just because it makes sense doesn’t mean it’s any less scary.

        Meh. I might give Carpenter’s original another shot. But if a gag with a sheet is the best thing it has going for it….

      • stu1 says:

        Carpenter’s Halloween is an absolutely CLASSIC. It’s one of THE ESSENTIAL films of the genre. I’m also with you on the “motivation” thing. Making Meyers the product of an abusive white trash family totally diminishes the effect. Listening to Donald Pleasance’s (sp) lines about Meyers being “pure evil” or the “embodiment of evil,” is chilling.

  12. here’s an idea… write a GOOD original movie. he’s yet to do it. apparently there’s no such thing as an original horror movie anymore.

    • Canvas Of Flesh says:

      That would require originality and creativity. Honestly though, you should really go blame the people that go see this tripe. The studios look at these people and figure “hey, it’s easy money.”

      • d.o.g.o.b.g.y.n. says:

        Absolutely. The market dictates what’s out there, and the market apparently begs to see wusses who somehow manage to pass for vampires, as well as poor excuses for “creative individuals” who are content with turning chicken salad into shit.

        If no one encourages idiots like Rob Zombie to rape the movie industry, they will have no reason to continue their travesties.

        • d.o.g.o.b.g.y.n. says:

          (Correction: turning chicken salad into chicken shit)

        • stu1 says:

          Totally. There are new and creative scripts out there. But it’s the public that’s to blame. Hollywood simply cashes in on what the public will pay for. If there were 2 or 3 horror remakes in a row that totally shit the bed, you wouldn’t see another.

  13. Kevin says:

    Great…

  14. goolash says:

    Shit, I really like The Devil’s Rejects. But, Halloween is aight i guess. I have no desire to see H2.

  15. ceth carter says:

    Like him or not,get used to seeing his movies. He turns a profit for his movie companies almost imemdiately upon release. Say what you want about the movie only making 17 million on the first weekend but the budget of the entire movie was in the 15 million dollar range. As long as he keeps making decent movies for stupidly low budgets by hollywood standards you will keep seeing his flicks as long as he turns a profit. There is almost no downside for a studio funding one of his films because he puts them together for so cheap and has a relatively steady following that will make money for the studio every time out. Axl,simply by going to see that movie you basicly helped to ensure that you will be seeing more movies that he makes even though you hate them.Until the guy makes a real stinker on a huge budget you will be seeing him for a good time to come.

    • stu1 says:

      Totally. He’s essentially a modern “b film” maker. He turned around this Halloween 2 in less than a year I believe, right? That’s amazing in Hollywood.

  16. Rui says:

    I must say that I kind of liked the first Halloween RZ did, but that the second one… is.. just… a horribly bad movie. Slow paced, predictable, bad story, bad dialogues… I can’t find one positive thing in the money I gave. Well, it wasn’t raining inside the theater.

  17. Eric J says:

    He’s right, a big Jello monster won’t scare today’s moviegoers. The thing that terrifies people with taste now is The Rob.

  18. Sammy says:

    Axl, if you look at a hammer and think, “If I pick up this hammer and hit my thumb, it’s going to hurt,” and then pick up the hammer and hit your thumb, why would you be surprised when it hurts?

    You know, you could wait for the movie to fail and then watch it on DVD in three months. This is Metalsucks, not SuckyMovieReviewsByMetalGuys.

    • ceth carter says:

      Well technically he is going to have to wait forever for it to fail because financially it is already set to make a pretty tidy profit even if it does not make blockbuster ticket sales.

      • Sammy says:

        “Forever”? Ceth, the average time from theatrical release to DVD release is less than four months. And that statistic is from two years ago: http://msl1.mit.edu/furdlog/docs/latimes/2007-03-12_latimes_dvd_release_cycle.pdf

        • ceth carter says:

          You miss the point,yes obviously the movie will go to DVD but the movie will not have ever been a failure. So yes he can watch it on DVD but he is going to be waiting forever for it to be a failure for the reasons stated above.Rob Zombie movies and movies in general with 15 million dollar budgets are not made with the expectations of blockbuster magic but with the intentions of making a decent movie that turns a profit. Mission accomplished is all i am saying. the movie will never be regarded as a failure because sky is the limit goals were not expected from this movie in the first place. It has already served it’s purpose in only one week.

          • Sammy says:

            Ah, I see. We were making different points. Yeah, I probably shouldn’t have chosen the word “failure”. I just meant to chastise Axl for purposely punishing himself by watching something he knew would suck.

  19. ski says:

    He claims he’s not doing “Halloween 3-D” . . . of course, he said the same thing about Halloween 2.

    If he had guts, he’d push for a remake of “The Stuff” instead. Larry Cohen rules.

  20. metalguy says:

    I. LIKE. BOTH.

  21. Any chance that he’ll remake Manos: The Hands of Fate next?

  22. rayray says:

    The first Zombie Holloween was the worst movie in 07. I am sure this one is god awful. I would not accept money to go see it.

  23. kb says:

    Even though I’m not a big fan of Zombie’s Halloween movies, I gotta call this article out on something. It says the Blob did it right by taking the original concept and going in a totally different direction with it.

    Now, again, I’m no big fan of RZ’s Halloweens, but that’s exactly what he did with those… those are DEFINITELY taking the series in a different direction… especially the new one.

  24. Raul says:

    Looks like the Weinsteins will be outta business before we ever see The Blob or H3. They were counting on H2 to save ‘em…

    • ceth carter says:

      No they were not, Inglorious Bastards has more or less pulled Weinstein out of the shitter with the 2 pretty big first weeks it has had. That movie is looking at probably 80 million in the states before its all over which is a very nice profit for Weinstein and as mentioned above,H2 is already on track to turn a profit after 1 weekend so i think even with these smaller movies Weinstein has to be somewhat happy,positive cash flow is on the way with these 2 movies.

      • stu1 says:

        Kind of surprises me how many people here don’t seem to realize “failure” isn’t based on a gross profit, but rather a net profit.

        • Sammy says:

          I think you mean “gross receipts” or revenue. Gross profit is revenue less cost of goods sold, whereas net profit is gross profit less general and admin expenses. In other words, the bottom line before taxes. In the case of the first Zombie Halloween, I totally erred in using the term “failure”. Iin looking at profits of the movie, I have no way of knowing what the gross profit was, but revenue ($80 million) minus total cost ($15 million) – unless that figure doesn’t include promotion and advertising – is $65 million in profit. That’s an 81.25% net profit. By one definition, I was WAY wrong using the word “failure”.

          However, failure and success are not solely determined by percentages, but also by expectations. I’m guessing that the margins achieved by this film far surpassed expectations, further proving I should have used a different way to phrase my original statement.

  25. I thought Halloween one and two were great. Looking forward to the BLOB. What I would really like is for him to make some more music.

  26. Slaughterhouse says:

    The new Halloween movies are fanfuckingtastic……..

  27. stu1 says:

    Two fan reviews of the first Halloween remake that stick out in my mind:
    1- Zombie should have just gone to Carpenter’s house, rang his doorbell, punched him in the mouth, then pissed on him.
    2- “I’m doing a re imagination of Citizen Kane, in which the main character is a space samurai and ‘rosebud’ was the giant space lizard he rode on Mars while fighting space ninjas.”

Leave a Reply


(required)

(required)
To have a custom avatar appear with your comment, register for free at Gravatar.com.