Halloween series

[Wolfman]

I saw the new Halloween the day it came out. I hated it. The ONLY Halloween movie I'll ever watch again is the original from 1978. No more sequels for me.

JP

[geezer butler]

I liked it a lot. It's def in my top 5.

I would say:
Halloween (1978)
Halloween II
Halloween H20
Halloween (2018) *after another viewing I think this may jump up to #3
Halloween III
Halloween 4

imo significant drop at this point

Halloween 5
Halloween (Rob Zombie)
Halloween Curse of MM
Halloween II (Rob Zombie)
Resurrection

[geezer butler]

So what do we think Michael Myers is: a supernatural monster? product of society? psychiatric disorder? If the administrators want this in it's own thread, please do so, I just figured I'd ask the question here.

We have 10 movies, the original novelization, and comments from John Carpenter as our sources.

John Carpenter is usually ambiguous. I believe he leans toward Michael having a psychiatric disorder (I read an interview where he references "schizophrenia"), but likes to leave open possibility there's something extra-real going on.

The original novel (maybe not canon?) offers both explanations. In terms of psychological disorders, my understanding (haven't read it) is the novel mentions Michael's sexual fixations as part of his pathology. But apparently the author also talks about the mythology of Halloween and suggests Michael is the product of a long lasting curse.

Halloween (1978) focuses on psychological disorders, but the last scene suggests some supernatural powers. Halloween II focuses on psychological disorders too, but then at the end, how can Michael survive two gun shots to the eyes without some supernatural powers?

Halloween 4 continues the psychological explanation imo, but Halloween 5 and Curse offer the most explicit supernatural explanations.

H20 continues with psychological theme.

Rob Zombie's Halloween flips the script and goes with sociological explanation. Lack of proper socialization produces the monster. I suspect Michael had some pre-existing psychological issues, but it's clear that neglect, abuse, and lack of socio-economic opportunity contribute to his pathology.

But with Halloween II, Zombie introduces his own supernatural plot line.

Halloween (2018) seems like pure psychological profile again.

I guess we'll never know, that's the fun of the character, but I think it's interesting to theorize.

[horrorhunter]

So what do we think Michael Myers is: a supernatural monster? product of society? psychiatric disorder?

I guess we'll never know, that's the fun of the character, but I think it's interesting to theorize.

In the original Myers was stabbed (with different implements) and shot 6 times by Loomis blowing him to the yard from the upper floor. In Halloween II he suffered more catastrophic damage including being shot through both eyes and blown up in a fiery explosion which made him burn like an inferno for several seconds before finally collapsing and continuing to burn. These two films have to be considered canon because HII is a direct continuation of the original with events taking place on the same night. Being crazy gets you so far but no human could possibly survive even a good portion of that level of damage. A supernatural element is the only thing that could explain it. The connection to Samhain is interesting and maybe best left ambiguous, though the obsessive fan in me would have liked more of an explanation to expand on the druidic "Lord Of The Dead" angle. Dark Gods and demonic forces make for good Horror. 

[Anton Phibes]

I saw the new Halloween the day it came out. I hated it. The ONLY Halloween movie I'll ever watch again is the original from 1978. No more sequels for me.

JP

It had a good soundtrack. It wasn't god awful if you view it through the lens of a Godzilla movie. By that I mean, Godzilla films are constantly catapulting their old continuity and then re-use the 1954 as a springboard for the "new" storyline/sequels. Until those run their course. Then they start over.

So in one continuity it's
~Halloween, Halloween 2, Halloween 4,5,6,
In another it's
~Halloween, Halloween 2, Halloween H20, Halloween: Resurrection

And finally, the newest
~Halloween 1978, Halloween 2018, and the inevitable sequel.

Rob Zombie's films don't exist in my universe. they stink.

As for the new film, it was littered with dreck, but had it's moments....I will admit I squealed like Pippi Longstockings when the Loomis recording was played. However they recreated his voice, it was nearly perfect.

[Wolfman]

Well for me it was waaaay too gory. Very disappointed in that. The original had almost no blood. Blood on a movie screen is not scary in the least. I'm surprised they went that route. For me, the scariest pictures have almost no gore whatsoever in them. Also, not scary in the least. I also didn't care for JLC in the new film. I thought she overacted her part. I've never been a sequel kind of guy, and this drove the final nail in it. I will watch the original over, and over, and over again with no problem.

JP

[Anton Phibes]

Well for me it was waaaay too gory. Very disappointed in that. The original had almost no blood. Blood on a movie screen is not scary in the least. I'm surprised they went that route. For me, the scariest pictures have almost no gore whatsoever in them. Also, not scary in the least. I also didn't care for JLC in the new film. I thought she overacted her part. I've never been a sequel kind of guy, and this drove the final nail in it. I will watch the original over, and over, and over again with no problem.

JP

This is how I feel about Psycho. The original I can watch over and over. Part 2 is good. Everything else is ca-ca.

[zombiehorror]

Michael is a supernatural force.  What exactly is unknown.

[batgirly]

So has anyone else here seen the new one? I've already seen it twice and I might even wind up seeing it a third time. I absolutely love it.

I loved it. I bought the soundtrack (also picked up Halloween III soundtrack), think it's great too. Planning on seeing it again tomorrow.

[geezer butler]

In the original Myers was stabbed (with different implements) and shot 6 times by Loomis blowing him to the yard from the upper floor. In Halloween II he suffered more catastrophic damage including being shot through both eyes and blown up in a fiery explosion which made him burn like an inferno for several seconds before finally collapsing and continuing to burn. These two films have to be considered canon because HII is a direct continuation of the original with events taking place on the same night. Being crazy gets you so far but no human could possibly survive even a good portion of that level of damage. A supernatural element is the only thing that could explain it. The connection to Samhain is interesting and maybe best left ambiguous, though the obsessive fan in me would have liked more of an explanation to expand on the druidic "Lord Of The Dead" angle. Dark Gods and demonic forces make for good Horror. 

Good points HH. That's right, I forgot to mention "Samhain" written in blood in H2. Def preponderance of evidence suggesting supernatural factors here. But it is interesting that John Carpenter (though his statements) and Rob Zombie (through first film) still try to integrate social and psychological aspects of MM. And why not? The Wolf Man deals with serious Ego and Id issues, not just that werewolf curse

[horrorhunter]

Good points HH. That's right, I forgot to mention "Samhain" written in blood in H2. Def preponderance of evidence suggesting supernatural factors here. But it is interesting that John Carpenter (though his statements) and Rob Zombie (through first film) still try to integrate social and psychological aspects of MM. And why not? The Wolf Man deals with serious Ego and Id issues, not just that werewolf curse

The psychological elements are viable, Geezer. I think Carpenter is intending the supernatural AND the psychological since they are by no means mutually exclusive. He also uses ambiguity since the unknown is really the most frightening of all. Supernatural curse affects psychologically troubled person who is used as a vessel for the Evil to move in the world. Crazy people make the best puppets for Dark Forces and so on. I accept the Carpenter films as canon.

I blatantly disregard the Rob Zombie material. Just my opinion, and anyone who enjoys Zombie's take on Michael Myers enjoy it with my blessings. It ain't for me.

[Big Bad Wolf]

When it comes to classic 1978 Michael, I like to think of him as a sort of internal cosmic horror. Usually cosmic horror is all about outer space, meaning around us and beyond, in the shadows beneath the sea or in the darkness between the stars. Michael Myers, however, is a cosmic horror reflecting the unknown terrors of inner space. The human mind, the human soul, these interior spaces are where unfathomable evil lies waiting until, for reasons we cannot comprehend, it wakes up and kills.

In other words, I kind of see him as an eldritch abomination like Cthulhu that exists in the Shape of a man. He is human and not human, all at once, and the supernatural force that drives him operates within him, not outside him. (In other words he's not like a vampire or a werewolf where the supernatural manifests itself externally through physical transformation or abilities.)

Such an unknown, unseen terror is so indescribable that we can only name it with a single word: evil.

[Haunted hearse]

Both Halloween and Season of the Witch, are great Halloween films. The first had the Boogeyman on Halloween, and featured so much of what we've come to expect from that day. The spooky old house, carving Jack-O-Lanterns, Trick or Treating, watching old monster movies on TV.  It was lightning in a bottle.
Season of the Witch was made at Don Post studios, and deals with the lore of Halloween. Plus it has that annoying ear-worm that is fun to torture people with.
   The rest of the series? I can take them or leave them. In the case of Rob Zombie? The less said the better. Due to mobility issues, I haven't seen the latest Halloween movie, although I hope to eventually.