Connect with us

Editorials

[Discussion] Do You Want to See Dr. Loomis in Next Year’s ‘Halloween’?

There’s a petition that’s been circulating around the net in the wake of Blumhouse and John Carpenter announcing that a new Halloween film, penned by Danny McBride and David Gordon Green and set to be directed by Gordon Green, is headed our way next October. The petition, to date signed by well over 1,000 fans, was created in an effort to beg Blumhouse to cast Robert Englund in the role of Dr. Loomis.

The reason we haven’t shared the petition, as other sites have, is because it’s incredibly silly for a multitude of reasons. For starters, we have no idea if Dr. Loomis is even going to appear in the new Halloween film (the script hasn’t even been written, and we’ve been provided with very little insight at this time), and besides, as fun as fan casting might sometimes be, going one step further and starting a petition to beg a studio to bring YOUR vision to the screen is, well, it’s idiotic. Besides, didn’t Englund basically already play Dr. Loomis in Behind the Mask, ten years ago?!

Now I can only assume the petition was started in the wake of Danny McBride revealing that next year’s Halloween reboot will continue the story told in the original versions of Halloween and Halloween 2 – the assumption from many fans is that this means the new film will be set in the 1980s, and that Dr. Loomis will once again find himself going toe-to-toe with Michael Myers. Of course, we have no idea if it’ll actually be set in the ’80s or jump forward to the present day, but even if it does take place directly after the events of Halloween 2, wouldn’t it stand to reason that Loomis would have died in that hospital explosion? After all, that was Carpenter’s vision… until Halloween 4 came along.

Which brings me to the question I thought worthy of discussing here today. Do you want to see Dr. Loomis in McBride and Gordon Green’s Halloween? Or is Loomis, at this point, better off dead?

Some fans would argue, perhaps rightfully so, that a Halloween film just isn’t a Halloween film without Dr. Loomis – he is, after all, the Ahab to Michael’s Moby Dick – but personally speaking, my number one hope from the new Halloween movie is that it provides a fresh new vision for the franchise. I already wrote a lengthy article about why I think we should all be excited that McBride and Gordon Green are the men in charge, but the gist was essentially this: I’m ready for something new and different.

At this point, we’ve seen two actors play Loomis across seven movies, and I’m just not sure there’s anything left to explore in regards to that doctor-patient relationship. Furthermore, if Gordon Green’s Halloween is set right after the other two, it’d be incredibly jarring to see a new actor trying to be Donald Pleasence; and that’s honestly just not something I have any desire to see.

Robert Englund? He deserves better than playing a character another actor already nailed.

The Halloween franchise no longer needs Dr. Loomis. It doesn’t even need Laurie Strode. It needs only one person, and that person is Michael Myers. I don’t know about you, but I’m ready to see him interact with new characters. To do things we haven’t already seen him do. I’m ready, simply put, for the Halloween franchise to break free from nostalgia and bring us something fresh.

Sorry, but there’s just nothing fresh about Robert Englund as Dr. Loomis.

Again, we’ve already seen it…



AROUND THE WEB


COMMENTS

59 Comments
  • Barry Goldsbury

    I just want a classic Halloween film. I don’t need or want anything different. I just want Michael being Michael and scaring us like he used to do. Just a fun, entertaining movie. As for Loomis, he is either dead (although I hope not) or is recuperating from his fire burns. He can be written out either way. However, they can go the Rogue One Peter Cushing/Carrie Fisher route and have Donald appear ala CGI in one or two scenes and out.

  • Blade4693

    I love Loomis and I think he is a Halloween staple (as important as Michael and Laurie) but if this new film is really supposed to be after Halloween 2, I think I am ok with the idea of him dying in the explosion at the film’s end.

    Donald Pleasence (R.I.P) played him so getting a new actor to play the character in the same timeline/universe would bother me just a little bit. Zombie’s Loomis being different didn’t bother me because it was it’s own universe/timeline.

  • Hero

    I’d say either get someone with a striking resemblance to Donald Pleasence who can do the accent, or do the Rogue One thing like Barry said, or just leave him out. Robert Englund is too recognizable and there’s not enough of a resemblance to Pleasence to justify casting him as Loomis. If he were in a Halloween movie, he could play another psychiatrist, maybe, an associate of Loomis’s.

  • ScriptGiverrrr

    No Loomis. No Laurie. Please.

  • Khy

    No. New territory please. No Loomis. No Laurie. No Jamie.

  • Geno1987

    I’d love to have Robert Englund in the movie, but not as Loomis. Perhaps another doctor who studied Loomis’ notes and is a detective in tracking down crazed lunatics.

  • Biscoito18

    No.

  • macguffin54

    Horrible idea. Corny. And Englund is basically playing roles for laughs these days. “Oh, ha-ha! Look, it’s Robert Englund.” You couldn’t take it seriously. Plus, why mix movie series? The character doesn’t really need to be there, either.

  • Millegeo

    I agree with the article. Let’s get something new. Lets ditch the characters, for the most part, and move on. If it’s set directly after the first two movies, Laurie would have to be insanely stupid to not have skipped town, immediately. And Loomis should not be replaced; they should go with Carpenter’s original idea and have him dead. but that’s just me, I never found the Halloween movies that scary anyway, and think part 3 is the best one.

  • Matthew Renn

    Robert Englund is a fine actor, but I feel Donald Pleasence really made the character his own, and I feel it’d be inappropriate to replace him like that.

  • Darkknight2149

    If it’s a sequel to “Halloween II”, then no. He should be dead. There’s no way he could have survived that. I was hoping that him surviving in “Halloween 4” would be retconned by H20.

  • Darkknight2149

    Doctor Loomis should be played by a brit. Doug Bradley would be much better casting.

    • Darkknight2149

      That’s if he’s in the film, of course. I don’t want him to be. After some of the “Halloween” comics, I’m hoping that this film will focus on something outside of the ‘Michael killing his family’ plotline. Maybe Michael can be hunting someone with a vague connection to the Myers family.

  • Khalil Wright

    I’m gonna defend the petition for a second here, and mention the fact that it does acknowledge the fact that either Dr. Loomis might not be in any more movies, or that Englund probably won’t want to play the part at all.

    Besides that, I wouldn’t mind if they brought Loomis back, but I don’t care if they do. I just hope it does take place directly after part 2, and possibly have an 80s setting.

    That’s just me though.

  • Rohan

    Loomis and Laurie are dead. How about creating new characters for people to love that are original?

  • A-TOWN CALI DUDE

    it depends on what capacity. if it’s some kind of flashback or voice-over then nah, no problem. but anything more than that would be idiotic. using logic, as Dr. Loomis was a man of, there would be no way in hell he survived that explosion. It’s time to move onto new characters and NEW storylines

    • Bill Gober

      Aside from if the thorn keep him alive as he somehow brings balance to Michael; although that would be a tad ridiculous and sort of jumping the shark.

      • Saturn

        I’d actually like to see a return of the Thorn storyline, as I found it quite interesting. I’ve said before, many times, that it would be easy to tie in the events of H3 to the regular Halloween universe, by having the cult of Thorn being linked directly to the “old ways” mentioned in H3.
        With a pretty easy big of computer wizzardy, the scene in H3 with Halloween on the tv screen can easily be altered to something like NOTLD – so then the movies can tie in together.

      • A-TOWN CALI DUDE

        Meh, i say forget about the Thorn story arc. It was cool and interesting to go down that route when they did, but it totally strayed from what John Carpenter originally crafted. Michael Myers was purely and simply, evil. Without cause or form, rhyme or reason. It is what made him the Boogeyman.

  • Neckbeard The Terrible

    Really just begs the question of where they can go with the story . I can see Myers living through the explosion and fire as far as story is concerned. But , I cannot in my mind justify recasting Loomis, or using CGI .I also cannot see CGI used to de-age Curtis. So they need to find a new “voice” to guide the story . Either set it in present day with an older Laurie Strode mirroring Loomis , or in 1978 with another character with a different tone to their struggle with Myers.

    • Saturn

      I’ve always thought (after Resurrection anyway) that they could always bring Laurie back into it by having her not actually dead after all after the fall, but perhaps confined (permanently) to a wheelchair, having broken her back.
      She’s moved on with her life, and written a best selling book detailing the truth about the night HE came home, and is now living in a secluded area – with occasional visits from her son and grand-children to look forward to.
      A surprise birthday party is thrown for her, and many of her friends turn up to join in the celebrations – but sadly for her (but not us) someone wearing an old, battered Captain Kirk mask starts offing the guest-list in an orgy of blood. But Michael’s long presumed dead, isn’t he???

      It could finish with the reveal that her teenage Grandson/Granddaughter has inherited the bad gene, and is continuing the work of her most dangerous relative….******POSSIBLE SPOILERS****

      6666666666666666666

      666666666666666666666666666

      66666666666666666666666666666666666666

      something that of course was teased with the ending of H4.

      ****END OF POSSIBLE SPOILERS, BUT IF YOU HAVEN’T SEEN THE MOVIE I MENTION THEN WTF ARE YOU DOING HERE?????”””******

  • Creepshow

    Let’s all cut the bologna here for a moment. 80’s slasher sequels were mostly garbage. Everyone wants to see their favorite horror icons again, and say how easy it is to write these stories. Well…is it that easy? It’s hard to write good movies for characters that are dried up, and ended their reign being corny.

  • Bill Gober

    The best thing to do if it does take place directly after 2 is just mention the fact Loomis is in the hospital recovering from his injuries. This would maintain continuity moving forward as he appeared in 4 etc.; they could either be outside his room wanting to go in to speak to him about Michael being missing but are told it would be best to not bother him with it. At least that’s what I would do, it may seem like an easy out but gives enough of a nod while not essentially killing the remainder of the franchise that would occur afterwards.

  • dukeblues

    No thanks. Robert Englund playing anyone but Freddy Krueger instantly feels like DTV quality cinema. No offense to him, but it just would not look right. And for God’s sake, no cameos. An actor like Bryan Cranston would be better (if he would do it.)

    • Gd

      right, and glenn close could be the new mrs.blankenship, if meryl is too busy of course.

      • Yeah like Power Rangers is such high art next to Halloween for Cranston to turn down.

        • Gd

          who the fuck is talking about art? he would start in sharknado 6 if his check was big enough. it’s all about Budget.

          • Right because Cranston’s name is worth $5M or more seeing as he’s never starred in a blockbuster film outside of Godzilla (which he died 20 min into it).

            Paying him a small salary + BO % on the back end is how they usually get actors into small budget films like this. Business 101.

          • Gd

            no one gives a fuck what’s he’s worth, the man was just nominated for an oscar last year for god’s sake. you are nothing less than delusional if you think he would actually even consider it. . that’s all.

    • Modok

      I hate to say, but as cool as it would be to see Englund get a substantial role, there’s little chance a major studio would cast him as Halloween’s most prominent (unmasked) role aside from Laurie. They need a name to sell tickets and legitimize the movie, so someone like Anthony Hopkins seems more in line with what they’d be looking for.

      But really, re-casting Loomis is a bad idea, period. This isn’t a reboot or “re-imagining”; it picks up after the sequel, which means Donald Pleasance is still Loomis. Find a new character and create a new protagonist-antagonist relationship. It can’t be that hard.

      • Bill Gober

        You bringing up Hopkins just makes me think he could be Loomis’ mentor of sorts and take on the role of a new character. He could be an expert on such cases and takes this one over while Loomis is recovering, only downside would be people associating Hopkins with Hannibal Lecter through the psychologist connection.

  • Nick

    I don’t want him to be killed off but don’t want him in it either as someone noted earlier a brief explanation of him being in hospital or elsewhere will be enough

  • No. Loomis is dead. Pleasence is dead. Let’s move on.

    • Saturn

      Indeed, if the new movie really is a direct follow on from the original 2, then have it that Loomis died in the hospital – and just create a new time-line which follows 1,2,the new one and potential other follow ups, H20.

  • Rez

    Ok…..let me begin with if they mention Dr. Loomis it should be in a flash back and use original footage and it should be done sparingly. This would only be used to continue the story of Micheal Myers. If they are going to do this right which I have a good feeling that this is going to happen, There is no need to replace Dr. Loomis, just keep this story going instead of trying to reboot it.

    • Paulo

      OR they could use a younger actor play a younger version of Loomis in flashbacks.

  • Mr. Screamer
  • Gd

    NO..no..NO…Did i say no already? Cast robert on a new original character…yes Hollywood, those are a possibilty..shocking, i know.

  • Raul Calvo

    Without Donald Pleasence it makes no sense bring Dr. Loomis back. But if they don’t want to paint themselves in a corner like it happen with the previous movies, the most important thing is forget that Micahel Myers and Laurie Strode are brother and sister: it was a bad idea and hurt badly the franchise in the long run.

    • THGrimm

      That always irked me because Michael just busts out of the asylum after all those years and suddenly knows Laurie Strode is his sister by look after having not seen her since she was a baby? They would have been better off sticking to him tracking her down in the hospital just so he could finish what he started. Michael is a killer of fierce determination and discipline.

  • whysoserious1891

    I think Halloween is the most mistreated franchise in horror movie history, mainly because of this “let’s do as any of the previous entries had never existed” thing. They already did this with H20. I’m beginning to feel a little sick about it. That’s the same reason why I’m against Neil Blomkamp’s Alien, even if I can’t help feeling a little excited about it. My only hope is in John Carpenter’s hands. Maybe he and those guys can really come out with something fresh and good, making me forget this mess of a timeline. Anyway, I liked the Rob Zombie ones, so let’s leave them alone and see what happens.

    • Saturn

      I dunno, it could be (as I posted elsewhere) that this new movie can actually exist in the H/H2/H20 timeline.

  • The hard reality to this situation is that if Carpenter is excited w McBride’s take then I’m sure Dr. Loomis is dead as that would be the true continuation after Halloween 2 (dude blew himself up to stop Myers).

  • RKSDooM

    I would like to see a new, Loomis-type character. Mostly due to the fact that I always thought that the Loomis / Michael dynamic was a big part of what made the HALLOWEEN series different during the 80’s (when every slasher franchise was pumping out films annually).

    But not the actual Dr. Loomis character. If it takes place after HALLOWEEN II than leave him dead.

  • Richard

    Good article, I am looking for something different as well. I hope they dont over do the continuity thing, if they make a film that can stand on its own, then does it really matter what happened in the other movies?

  • Kristoffer Groves

    I say forget about Loomis and Strode. Do something original with the story. Maybe send Michael to outer space. Or send him to da hood.

  • Paulo

    I don’t think it is necessary but it’s okay if he is. Though Halloween II’s ending suggests he should be dead, if you disconsider the rest of the franchise. One I def want is the sister played by Jamie Lee Curtis (not really necessary too though).

  • shane-o-mac

    Donald Pleasence IS and ALWAYS will be Dr. Loomis and to me since he is deceased they should move on from that character cuz recasting Loomis would just be disrespectful to what DP did. Explore the baby all grown up in part 6 and maybe Paul Rudd’s character from 6 as the peeps Michael goes after, that be cool but then again it wouldn’t make,sense if they picking up right after part 2

  • diapers

    I’d strongly encourage no Loomis character.

  • Travis_Bickle

    Hologram?

  • Mike Chaleff

    I agree that Loomis should be dead from the ending events of Halloween II, but I disagree with one thing you said… That all the film needs is Michael Myers and that’s it. This is the first chance since H20, for the franchise to finally fix the continuity errors of the past, to erase what became convoluted and messy in 6: Curse of Michael Myers, to finally give glimpse and understanding to what and how Michael is what he is…. He’s NOT just some regular human psychopath/sociopath (and Carpenter can attest to this by the supernatural invincibility he has even during the first 2 films) which is what Rob Zombie was trying to do, and he’s also not just some product of a behind the scenes cult (Thorn) which was from the resurgence of the character between 4-6…. We need some kind of inkling of something new, something no one’s ever considered before… Something that will blow us all away…. Something that will finally fix the Original series and not try and remake/reboot nonsense…. Something that will finally perfect the original vision Carpenter had, something that will give respect and admiration of the fans for all these years and give us the justice in the series we’ve all been waiting for for decades…. Anyone hear what I’m trying to say here??

  • Michael Singer

    No. I was ok with it in the Zombie films because those were full-on remakes that they were recasting everyone. But if this is really continuing on from the first two films, then no they should NOT recast Donald Pleasance. Just say that Loomis died at some point (either in the hospital explosion at the end if Part II, or offscreen sometime later), and maybe throw in a few more references to him, MAYBE a voiceover/flashback, but that’s it.

    They could easily bring in a new character to be the “Michael hunter,” while giving them different motivations and a POV than Loomis had. That’d be a better option imo.

    Walton Goggins could be a really good choice for such a role I think.

  • Graham

    I think they should leave out Loomis and Laurie both. Reference them, sure (in fact, please do), but like you said, I think the series should try to do its own thing. Casting Loomis would just invite comparison and I don’t think that’s wise. I want the sequel to feel like the older films as much as anyone else does, but it doesn’t need to carry over characters in order to do that. It’s more about the feel of it than the subject matter for me. I think this one needs to stand on its own two feet if they want any chance at continuing the franchise.

    That said, if they were going to cast Loomis anyway, Robert Englund would be a fun choice.

  • Chris Genth

    He’ll ya, it isn’t Halloween without dr.looms. that why I’ve always love the Halloween series. That thing between looms and Michael, the doctor always searching for the evil. U can’t kill damnaton mister, it doesn’t die like a man dies

  • Flu-Like Symptoms

    Wasn’t so idiotic when fans were petitioning for Jackie Earle Haley to be Freddy in the Nightmare remake. From what I recall, it kinda fucking happened. Note to BD; getting a little tired of this writer asserting his opinions in a factual manner. Can’t speak for anyone else, but I don’t visit this site to be told what I should think nor which concepts to support and those I should oppose. Personally, I couldn’t care less if Dr. Loomis is in the next Halloween film or who plays him. But, if I did, I wouldn’t stand for basically being called an idiot for wanting to let someone on the project know about it.

  • Kainlegacy

    I respect your opinion but respectfully disagree. Robert englund is the perfect person to pay homage to Donald pleasances dr Loomis. Too many fans Halloween is more than Michael Myers we also love dr. Loomis. He became like a super hero to the die hard fans. The movie you have in mind has already been made and it’s called Halloween resurrection and it was the biggest embarrassment to the series.

  • John Connor

    The only reason I’d want Loomis back is if the story continues from The Curse Of Michael Myers and needs the character.

  • Halloween_Vic

    Honestly I mean if they are going based off the first 2 films you can’t replace Donald Pleasance as Dr. Loomis so just reference him or to make it fresh have Dr. loomis have a son in this film or something who learns about his father and Michael’s past. I think a Halloween film without Loomis would be OK if done correctly. It would be different but can be done. I think H20 did just fine without him but then again we had Jamie return as Laurie. So setting up Michael against a new set of characters will be interesting. Just make people fear Michael again.

  • Reginald Anselm Leppik

    I agree something completely new and fresh would be nice, but that would only be possible if we skipped Halloween 2 as well, since that’s the story that established Michael as Laurie’s brother and gave him familial motivations.

    So personally, I would love to see Robert Englund play the part of Dr. Loomis. I STRONGLY disagree that the character has been fully explored, they never really developed him in the sequels or showed anything of his past beyond his relationship with Myers.

More in Editorials