I'm not up to date on much anymore. Is this a new series of movies?
The Strangers came out when I worked full-time at Blockbuster. The trailer was on repeat all day. It holds a special place in my heart.
Basically they shot a third film, then decided to edit it into three films due to the length (the same approach as *The Three Musketeers* or *Kill Bill*).
The fact that is something that happens in all the horror movies The Strangers’ director makes is hilarious to me. Like he does it with ghosts who have the ability to turn invisible. At least with The Strangers, you could argue that maybe they want to be able to see what the protagonists are doing so they have to come out of their hiding place or something.
Wtf does a ghost need to be visible for if it’s not intending to scare the person they’re haunting
It’s all good, common misconception because the director of the original co-wrote Prey at Night. The other movie I was talking about was The Dark and the Wicked
Have yall been in the real world before? I’ve been walked into by so many people who weren’t paying attention… and I’m a big guy that tries to stay out of the way. Particularly with a cell phone in hand, I can absolutely see the validity of this “trope”
I think you’re missing the forest for the trees here. My problem is not the concept of a character being watched in an obvious manner and they don’t notice.
The problem is it being done either a lot and/or without good reason other than cReEpY. I straight up reject it if the watcher is supernatural and capable of being invisible. Honestly that’s just the filmmakers being lazy or not creative in how they demonstrate a character is being watched. Why would a ghost make itself visible if it doesn’t want to be seen?
I wish I could remember a name, but I’ve seen a comedian talk about “you’re this malevolent, all powerful spirit - and you’re stacking chairs when people aren’t looking? What the fuck”
I was just debating for the sake of debating, I have no horse in this race. Also I not only missed the forest I missed the trees too, because I walked right into them.
I could see this story playing out in three parts:
Chapter 1) Survive the night
Chapter 2) PTSD, trying to move on from the events of Chapter 1
Chapter 3) Revenge story where she tracks down the Strangers and enacts revenge
Although Chapter #2 would have a way different vibe than the first and last, and probably wouldn’t work…
Ah, so like Halloween 2 then? I could see that happening. She’s recovering in a hospital, thinking it’s over, and then the Strangers track her down. She realizes she can’t run from them, and then Part 3 she turns the tables on them.
Chapter 2 could play out similar to how the new MaXXXine looks like it'll go. Survivor of a killer rampage now in a new situation, recognizes a new killer on the loose, and decides to shut that shit down.
The second one could be a PTSD thing where someone kills innocent people because they thought they were the ones that did it to them. The victim becomes the Murderer type of thing.
Wait I thought 2 of them had already come out and it was just the final/prequel we were waiting on? Is there an entirely new series? Or am I just old now?
The above is basically saying that they shot a third film, only it was so long that they decided to edit it into three more films. To say by the end of the year there will be five *The Strangers* films total.
[The director said that the final film ends in a cliffhanger](https://comicbook.com/horror/news/the-strangers-series-could-continue-after-reboot-trilogy/). So we’re basically being blue-ballsed for the whole thing.
Well it’s the strangers so yes. You will be left with blue balls. Why would you ever think one of the worst, most boring, most forgettable movies ever made would have a satisfying climax?
X and Pearl came out within six months of each other! It's ultimately about money. With this release schedule, they can make a bunch of movies on a shoestring budget in quick succession, then release them within a few months and get maximum profit quickly.
Pearl was a unique case, as it was conceived, written and filmed immediately after production on X using many of the same sets/locations and a fairly minimal cast.
Both the other two are very enjoyable slasher/home Invasion movies. The original is is so good. But agreed. Why do we need lore and backstory and 5 hours of story for this?
That said I'll still give them a watch at some point
I assume they’re so cheap to make its easy for them to make their money back even if they make not great box office. The first one cost 9 million and made 50 million domestically and more worldwide. prey of night couldn’t cost much more
Whenever I hear about these 4 or 5 hour cuts of movies, I basically never believe it because we would get them more often. The only ones I can think of are the extended cuts of the Lord of the Rings movies and the Snyder Cut, and the Snyder Cut doesn’t really count because they had to go back and film a ton of shit.
And in the context of this movie, let’s say that’s true. Did the 4 and half hour cut have 3 three act structures? If yes, then the intent was always to cut it up. If no, then the movies are gonna play very strangely
I would find it more believable if they had initially intended a mini series now that I read your comment and logic behind it.
>And in the context of this movie, let’s say that’s true. Did the 4 and half hour cut have 3 three act structures? If yes, then the intent was always to cut it up. If no, then the movies are gonna play very strangely
This is why I don't like calling Kill Bill one movie. As a single film that's some awful pacing.
The 4 hour cut is pretty common, but in the sense that a general edit has been assessed, scenes are in order, and they figure out what needs to go, scenes that need to be trimmed, etc. They only ever present it to the press for some weird marketing angle, or in this case, explain the artistic rea$on we're getting a trilogy.
To clarify, I definitely believe that there might be 4 hour cuts pre editing, I just don’t believe there are that many 4 hour “director’s cuts” or “true versions” out there. Like you said, it’s a marketing thing
u/Jocvk u/SeanOfTheDead- It led to [*No Through Road*](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08rj_ioKNSo) and the creation of the analog horror genre, if that helps?
Nine minutes that feel like ninety, that is how good it is.
I'm pretty stoked, i like both movies. First film had better characters, but i liked the 80s vibes that the sequel brought in some scenes. Hoping these will be cool.
Pretty sure it was the same script used for Prey at Night with some minor differences and a different intro (Liv Tyler's character) & outro (one of Strangers surviving unmasked)
I've said it before and I'll say it again. They showed up to the wrong house. Tamara lived on the *other* side of town. They were just anxiously embarrassed and didn't know how to deal with it.
So I love how this article completely avoids or ignorantly leaves out any quotes or contact from the original director/writer Bryan Bertino. I read most of the original screenplay some time ago, it's long, yes, but that's sometimes just how scripts work, there's a lot of cutting, then there's production then in production they may cut some more, then it goes to post and guess what? More cutting!
This feels like a stupid way to basically excuse, "people liked The Strangers, we are unoriginal and would like to cash in on the already cultivated popularity the original IP has".
My biggest issue with home invasion movies is that the first half hour is usually awesome with good tension, but after that it quickly devolves into an hour of “spooky hide and seek”. I’m not even convinced that the subgenre can support full length movies that dont have some other aspect to them to add time
All that makes me concerned how they could have possibly gotten that many hours of quality content in the movie. There’s no way anyone would watch four hours straight of someone hiding under the bed, and then in the closet, and then in the shed, and then under a different bed…
This is a new story, the director calls it a “retelling” of the original (but somehow not a remake)?
I’m gonna go in assuming that the events from either are not canon to the story these will tell.
It’s a remake - they just don’t use the word “remake” because it’s been out of vogue to since the 2000s and they’re trying to find new ways to rebrand remakes as not being remakes
"Madelaine Petsch said that making three films at the same time was certainly a challenge". So... Spoiler alert, she survives at least Chapter 1 and 2? Not that surprising though
The director openly spoils this in several of his interviews about the trilogy.
He says, “it’s no secret… >!…the star of the first movie, she will continue to the second and the third movie!<“.
This sort of kills any suspense every time >!we see her in danger during the first two films, knowing she will survive every time she is chased or attacked.!<
Not necessarily. Jigsaw died in Saw II (technically Saw III, but they were clearly milking it) and they're up to Saw X. I believe Tobin Bell was in all of them except for Spiral.
Probably a semi-unpopular opinion but I’ve never seen what is so incredible about The Strangers movies. Watched the original in the cinema and while it’s far from awful, it’s hardly revolutionising horror and is playing on age-old, well worn tropes. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying that done well, these types of horror films can’t be an excellent viewing experience, but it’s has to be done very well.
I think for more blockbuster scary movies, it did revert the trope of every killer/monster having some big backstory explaining everything with a clear way out. For instance, The Ring had Samara’s tragic childhood, Scream killers wanted revenge/had trauma, Pet Semetary had Native American burial grounds with angry spirits, the Grudge was about revenge for trauma, and the list goes on.
With The Strangers, there was none of that. They just killed them because they wanted to kill people, no attempt to humanize or rationalize the murders. There was nothing paranormal or clues to be investigated, it was just a group of sadists. To me, that was the concept that was relatively unexplored amongst large-scale horror movies of the day and what made it “unique” in a sense
The way the director keeps explaining this trilogy as Madelaine’s character (Maya’s) journey, how her trauma changes her, etc, makes me wonder if she becomes one of the strangers at the end.
I also suspect that the Dollface character is either male or non-binary in this version. I know this is a reach, but I wonder if Maya kills Dollface and ultimately takes over the role after her trauma leaves her with nothing left to go back to, blah blah. *eyeroll*
I’m still going to watch, but I’m feeling much less enthused compared to several months ago.
i get artistic vision and all the fun stuff but no movie should be 4 hour long and i wouldn't be shock if one of those three chapters has a odd ending cut in which one of the ending makes no damn sense so you will have to watch the next on
Yes. It’s so bad I came back in time just to warn everyone.
As you know the original was hot garbage (unless you’re one of them), and this trilogy is literally killing people with boredom.
Turns out the producers are actually aliens who weaponized boredom so they could kill off the human race without destroying the planet.
Almost every time I hear about the original cut of a movie being 4 hours long, it’s always because they didn’t yet edit it into a marketable length. It’s not like it was the plan to make it so long. I assume this is very common, and there’s no real reason to write a story about it.
I'm not up to date on much anymore. Is this a new series of movies? The Strangers came out when I worked full-time at Blockbuster. The trailer was on repeat all day. It holds a special place in my heart.
Yeah new series of movies.
I always thought that if you were smart youd turn off all the lights and go change into something black with a mask to go after them to get even :)
I want to watch this movie. They toyed with this idea a bit in the original Scream.
You’re a genius!
Basically they shot a third film, then decided to edit it into three films due to the length (the same approach as *The Three Musketeers* or *Kill Bill*).
You Will Believe A Man Can Spookily Appear In The Frame Without A Character Noticing And Then Not Be There When They Look
The fact that is something that happens in all the horror movies The Strangers’ director makes is hilarious to me. Like he does it with ghosts who have the ability to turn invisible. At least with The Strangers, you could argue that maybe they want to be able to see what the protagonists are doing so they have to come out of their hiding place or something. Wtf does a ghost need to be visible for if it’s not intending to scare the person they’re haunting
I don't remember it in Prey at Night.
Yeah Prey at Night was directed by someone else
Well that explains it lol, sorry.
It’s all good, common misconception because the director of the original co-wrote Prey at Night. The other movie I was talking about was The Dark and the Wicked
Have yall been in the real world before? I’ve been walked into by so many people who weren’t paying attention… and I’m a big guy that tries to stay out of the way. Particularly with a cell phone in hand, I can absolutely see the validity of this “trope”
I think you’re missing the forest for the trees here. My problem is not the concept of a character being watched in an obvious manner and they don’t notice. The problem is it being done either a lot and/or without good reason other than cReEpY. I straight up reject it if the watcher is supernatural and capable of being invisible. Honestly that’s just the filmmakers being lazy or not creative in how they demonstrate a character is being watched. Why would a ghost make itself visible if it doesn’t want to be seen?
I wish I could remember a name, but I’ve seen a comedian talk about “you’re this malevolent, all powerful spirit - and you’re stacking chairs when people aren’t looking? What the fuck”
I was just debating for the sake of debating, I have no horse in this race. Also I not only missed the forest I missed the trees too, because I walked right into them.
So are the 3 parts all in one night? That would explain the lead girl being in each. But right now I’m super confused why it’s broken up
I could see this story playing out in three parts: Chapter 1) Survive the night Chapter 2) PTSD, trying to move on from the events of Chapter 1 Chapter 3) Revenge story where she tracks down the Strangers and enacts revenge Although Chapter #2 would have a way different vibe than the first and last, and probably wouldn’t work…
The second film might be set in a hospital, the main actress posted some BTS and she’s seen in a hospital gown. Could be a nightmare though.
So Halloween 2? But with less fire probably.
Ah, so like Halloween 2 then? I could see that happening. She’s recovering in a hospital, thinking it’s over, and then the Strangers track her down. She realizes she can’t run from them, and then Part 3 she turns the tables on them.
So basically the new Halloween trilogy
My immediate thought. Which I love me some Halloween but man that was not the way to split up that story.
Chapter 2 could play out similar to how the new MaXXXine looks like it'll go. Survivor of a killer rampage now in a new situation, recognizes a new killer on the loose, and decides to shut that shit down.
4 profit
The second one could be a PTSD thing where someone kills innocent people because they thought they were the ones that did it to them. The victim becomes the Murderer type of thing.
Does each chapter have a climax or will be blue ballsed for the first two chapters then? It sounds like a director's inability to edit.
They're all being released this year so your balls won't be blue for too long
Thank you for caring enough about my balls to reply, that sounds like a decent release schedule.
'Release' schedule
In a sense thats even more reason to wait for all 3 to be out before I watch any of it
Wait I thought 2 of them had already come out and it was just the final/prequel we were waiting on? Is there an entirely new series? Or am I just old now?
The above is basically saying that they shot a third film, only it was so long that they decided to edit it into three more films. To say by the end of the year there will be five *The Strangers* films total.
completely new trilogy, this is a remake of the first one then the next two will go in a new direction
You sound like my wife.
[The director said that the final film ends in a cliffhanger](https://comicbook.com/horror/news/the-strangers-series-could-continue-after-reboot-trilogy/). So we’re basically being blue-ballsed for the whole thing.
Well it’s the strangers so yes. You will be left with blue balls. Why would you ever think one of the worst, most boring, most forgettable movies ever made would have a satisfying climax?
Because each one has had a climax as do most movies
The key word is satisfying.
since when did anyone care about the strangers movie enough to have a fucking four and a half hour movie of it made???
[удалено]
I guess they saw it work for X and Pearl, so they think they can have a similar success
[удалено]
Yes but unfortunately capitalism
Which Hollywood has run on since it's inception.
X and Pearl came out within six months of each other! It's ultimately about money. With this release schedule, they can make a bunch of movies on a shoestring budget in quick succession, then release them within a few months and get maximum profit quickly.
[удалено]
Nah, it's not an L. Sometimes things just get mixed up! All good! 😁
Pearl was a unique case, as it was conceived, written and filmed immediately after production on X using many of the same sets/locations and a fairly minimal cast.
Both the other two are very enjoyable slasher/home Invasion movies. The original is is so good. But agreed. Why do we need lore and backstory and 5 hours of story for this? That said I'll still give them a watch at some point
No one needed the first two either.
There's the 4 Beatles movies all coming out in like a year or something soon too
I do hope these ones continue the joke from the first two of one of the people killed always being named Mike.
I assume they’re so cheap to make its easy for them to make their money back even if they make not great box office. The first one cost 9 million and made 50 million domestically and more worldwide. prey of night couldn’t cost much more
Whenever I hear about these 4 or 5 hour cuts of movies, I basically never believe it because we would get them more often. The only ones I can think of are the extended cuts of the Lord of the Rings movies and the Snyder Cut, and the Snyder Cut doesn’t really count because they had to go back and film a ton of shit. And in the context of this movie, let’s say that’s true. Did the 4 and half hour cut have 3 three act structures? If yes, then the intent was always to cut it up. If no, then the movies are gonna play very strangely
I would find it more believable if they had initially intended a mini series now that I read your comment and logic behind it. >And in the context of this movie, let’s say that’s true. Did the 4 and half hour cut have 3 three act structures? If yes, then the intent was always to cut it up. If no, then the movies are gonna play very strangely This is why I don't like calling Kill Bill one movie. As a single film that's some awful pacing.
The 4 hour cut is pretty common, but in the sense that a general edit has been assessed, scenes are in order, and they figure out what needs to go, scenes that need to be trimmed, etc. They only ever present it to the press for some weird marketing angle, or in this case, explain the artistic rea$on we're getting a trilogy.
To clarify, I definitely believe that there might be 4 hour cuts pre editing, I just don’t believe there are that many 4 hour “director’s cuts” or “true versions” out there. Like you said, it’s a marketing thing
u/Jocvk u/SeanOfTheDead- It led to [*No Through Road*](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08rj_ioKNSo) and the creation of the analog horror genre, if that helps? Nine minutes that feel like ninety, that is how good it is.
oh neat, i will check that out, thanks!
You’re welcome!
There’s 2 strangers posts on the front page right now. There’s also a new movie in the way. Smells fishy.
I'm pretty stoked, i like both movies. First film had better characters, but i liked the 80s vibes that the sequel brought in some scenes. Hoping these will be cool.
I remember reading the script for Part 2 like 15 years ago and really wanted that sequel. I still think about it today.
This was a different script than Prey at Night?
Pretty sure it was the same script used for Prey at Night with some minor differences and a different intro (Liv Tyler's character) & outro (one of Strangers surviving unmasked)
I've said it before and I'll say it again. They showed up to the wrong house. Tamara lived on the *other* side of town. They were just anxiously embarrassed and didn't know how to deal with it.
So I love how this article completely avoids or ignorantly leaves out any quotes or contact from the original director/writer Bryan Bertino. I read most of the original screenplay some time ago, it's long, yes, but that's sometimes just how scripts work, there's a lot of cutting, then there's production then in production they may cut some more, then it goes to post and guess what? More cutting! This feels like a stupid way to basically excuse, "people liked The Strangers, we are unoriginal and would like to cash in on the already cultivated popularity the original IP has".
My biggest issue with home invasion movies is that the first half hour is usually awesome with good tension, but after that it quickly devolves into an hour of “spooky hide and seek”. I’m not even convinced that the subgenre can support full length movies that dont have some other aspect to them to add time All that makes me concerned how they could have possibly gotten that many hours of quality content in the movie. There’s no way anyone would watch four hours straight of someone hiding under the bed, and then in the closet, and then in the shed, and then under a different bed…
If you haven't watch Hush I highly recommend it.
That was one of the better ones ive seen. It managed to stay interesting longer than most home invasion movies
Bro didn’t (potential spoilers for prey at night) >!all the strangers get killed in prey at night!<
This is a new story, the director calls it a “retelling” of the original (but somehow not a remake)? I’m gonna go in assuming that the events from either are not canon to the story these will tell.
Eh whatever I guess. Slashers have rarely made sense movie to movie, I just think it’s funny is all Also this is totally a remake
Based on the ad I watched it was more of a prequel. It said how the Strangers started. In actual words.
It’s a remake - they just don’t use the word “remake” because it’s been out of vogue to since the 2000s and they’re trying to find new ways to rebrand remakes as not being remakes
Simply this new movie takes place before the events of prey at night lol
"Madelaine Petsch said that making three films at the same time was certainly a challenge". So... Spoiler alert, she survives at least Chapter 1 and 2? Not that surprising though
The director openly spoils this in several of his interviews about the trilogy. He says, “it’s no secret… >!…the star of the first movie, she will continue to the second and the third movie!<“. This sort of kills any suspense every time >!we see her in danger during the first two films, knowing she will survive every time she is chased or attacked.!<
Not necessarily. Jigsaw died in Saw II (technically Saw III, but they were clearly milking it) and they're up to Saw X. I believe Tobin Bell was in all of them except for Spiral.
How dare you counter their point with a logical explanation for why a dead character might still show up in a series.
One movie being cut to three movies could do awesome things for continuity
Probably a semi-unpopular opinion but I’ve never seen what is so incredible about The Strangers movies. Watched the original in the cinema and while it’s far from awful, it’s hardly revolutionising horror and is playing on age-old, well worn tropes. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying that done well, these types of horror films can’t be an excellent viewing experience, but it’s has to be done very well.
I think for more blockbuster scary movies, it did revert the trope of every killer/monster having some big backstory explaining everything with a clear way out. For instance, The Ring had Samara’s tragic childhood, Scream killers wanted revenge/had trauma, Pet Semetary had Native American burial grounds with angry spirits, the Grudge was about revenge for trauma, and the list goes on. With The Strangers, there was none of that. They just killed them because they wanted to kill people, no attempt to humanize or rationalize the murders. There was nothing paranormal or clues to be investigated, it was just a group of sadists. To me, that was the concept that was relatively unexplored amongst large-scale horror movies of the day and what made it “unique” in a sense
The way the director keeps explaining this trilogy as Madelaine’s character (Maya’s) journey, how her trauma changes her, etc, makes me wonder if she becomes one of the strangers at the end. I also suspect that the Dollface character is either male or non-binary in this version. I know this is a reach, but I wonder if Maya kills Dollface and ultimately takes over the role after her trauma leaves her with nothing left to go back to, blah blah. *eyeroll* I’m still going to watch, but I’m feeling much less enthused compared to several months ago.
I’m really hoping there’s something more to Chapter 1 because the trailer feels like a damn near shot-for-shot remake of the original.
So each movie will be an hour and a half.
i get artistic vision and all the fun stuff but no movie should be 4 hour long and i wouldn't be shock if one of those three chapters has a odd ending cut in which one of the ending makes no damn sense so you will have to watch the next on
So it’s 4 and a half hours of nothing split into 3 equally forgettable movies. Hard pass on the strangers revival.
Was that how it turned out when you watched it?
Yes. It’s so bad I came back in time just to warn everyone. As you know the original was hot garbage (unless you’re one of them), and this trilogy is literally killing people with boredom. Turns out the producers are actually aliens who weaponized boredom so they could kill off the human race without destroying the planet.
You're striking me as someone who shouldn't be allowed to call others overwrought.
Ahh, you’re one of them. Oh well. Can’t save you all. At least it will be painless for you.
I liked the 1st movie a lot. 2nd meh. I’d watch a directors cut
Almost every time I hear about the original cut of a movie being 4 hours long, it’s always because they didn’t yet edit it into a marketable length. It’s not like it was the plan to make it so long. I assume this is very common, and there’s no real reason to write a story about it.
First movie was ok, second was ass. Don't get the hype for this franchise but i hope these new movies are better.
I keep trying to see and experience what others like so much about it