Connect with us

Movies

John Carpenter Says Next Year’s ‘Halloween’ Disregards Everything Past Original Film!

From the very beginning, the belief has been that David Gordon Green’s Halloween will be picking up after the events of Halloween 2, disregarding all the sequels that came in the wake of the 1981 film. But as we recently speculated, comments from Gordon Green and co-writer Danny McBride have suggested that even Halloween 2 is going to be wiped from the timeline.

After all, McBride recently noted that he’s not a big fan of the reveal that Laurie Strode is Michael’s sister, which of course was presented in Halloween 2.

So what’s the deal here? Which film does Gordon Green’s use as a jumping off point? Halloween or Halloween 2? The former, according to John Carpenter himself!

Speaking with Stereo Gum today, Carpenter spilled the beans.

It’s kind of a… I don’t know how to describe it. It’s almost an alternative reality,” Carpenter described the film. “It picks up after the first one and it pretends that none of the others were made. It’s gonna be fun. There’s a really talented director and it was well-written. I’m impressed.”

Jamie Lee Curtis is reprising the role of Laurie Strode, while Judy Greer is in talks to play Laurie’s daughter, Karen Strode. John Carpenter may provide the score.

In the franchise “reinvention“…

“Laurie Strode comes to her final confrontation with Michael Myers, the masked figure who has haunted her since she narrowly escaped his killing spree on Halloween night four decades ago.”

Carpenter is executive producing the new film with Malek Akkad producing for Trancas and Jason Blum producing for Blumhouse. Gordon Green and McBride will also executive produce under their Rough House Pictures banner.

Michael Myers returns on October 19, 2018.



AROUND THE WEB


COMMENTS

353 Comments
  • Tony Harley

    I just wanna know if Laurie’s gonna be the new Loomis which would be amazing and bring back what’s been missing from Halloween since Donald’s unfortunate passing.

    • Saturn

      Indeed, perhaps Laurie herself went on to study psychology after the events of the first movie, under the tutelage of Dr Loomis, who has sadly since died, who warned that one day Michael would return once more…..

  • Michael Voorhees

    I’m ok with this since Laurie and Michael won’t be related anymore even tho i love 2,i hope shes a Loomis type character in this one

  • Halloween Scarecrow

    Probably the best way to do it and could lead to more sequels as well.

  • Barry Goldsbury

    I am a little disappointed because I love Halloween 2 and it took place on the same night. It just seems like it is part of the first movie even though it came out three years later. Oh well. I am still excited.

    • Motion Fiction Media

      I feel the same way

    • Saturn

      It’s fine – Halloween 2 will still exist.
      Sadly though, so does Rob Zombie’s H2……

      • American Atheist

        I love how overrated Zombie the director has disappeared as fast as his shitty movies have. Zombie and Roth are both severely overrated hacks.

  • Although I love the original, I never got this – if Laurie isn’t Michael’s sister, why is he after her?

    • Necro

      She is his sister, it just wasn’t revealed until part 2. That’s his motivation from the get go, it’s why he escaped and went home.

      • Yes, but looking at the first film on its own, as if the others were never made, what’s the motivation? Was it somehow known before release that there for sure would be a second one?

        • Necro

          Oh ok, honestly I think they looked at it as ‘the why’ is what makes ‘Halloween’ what it is, there was no motive, just pure madness. He’s just a masked psycho who escaped from a mental hospital and goes home to kill. No motive….more scary, everything is scarier when we don’t know. Now maybe the sequel wasn’t even a thought, they saw the obvious success of the film, studio steps in with “how do we keep this going? Blah Blah Blah” “I know maybe ‘Laurie’ is really ‘Michael’s’ sister and that’s why he’s trying to kill her!” Hence it wasn’t revealed until part 2 about the blood relation.

          • MrX13

            Good call!

          • Necro

            Thanks X! Yeah it’s really the only thing that makes sense.

        • Necro

          There’s nothing official with my comment either.

        • Darren Hood

          Halloween was a one and done thing, until it made a boatload of money, and its producers Akkad and Yablans, who then saw an opportunity to turn this into a franchise that sequel talks began.

      • Saturn

        But it wasn’t his motivation in the original movie at all – Carpenter himself said that they added the family tie in the sequel, the same sequel he didn’t really want to do, as an afterthought.

        • Necro

          Yeah my mind was somewhere else when I was responding, I was talking about Zombie’s version with a buddy, and at the same time I was answering to the reply about the original film on here and mixed up what I was saying.

          • Saturn

            Easy to do.

    • cn0122

      In my opinion leaving the reason out makes it much more interesting. Do we really need to know why ? Can’t he just be some crazed lunatic ? Still love Halloween 2 either way.

      • MrX13

        Same here. I always liked how she was the sister and going after her. But maybe not knowing a reason why could be even better. Still excited to see this new one though

      • Wes Draven

        I liked the fact that he was evil incarnate and targeted Laurie Strode for no reason in-particular. It reminds me of the scene from The Uninvited, “Because you were home.”

        • Mister B

          I’m fairly certain you were thinking about The Strangers. Although, I’ve never seen The Uninvited, so what do I know?

    • Saturn

      Because he escaped from a mental asylum and she was one of the first people he saw. Oh, and he’s a psychopath.
      There doesn’t have to be a reason – as Carpenter himself said “the shape is scary because he’s a shark – he doesn’t need a reason”.

      • Creepshow

        Well, Todd McFarlane will have “a shark in black water” (whatever that means).
        So, there!

    • He chose her randomly, and at any moment he can choose to stop chasing her. Personally I don’t think this is anywhere near as frightening has being eternally marked for death.

    • Reece Catlin

      I don’t buy it either! why wait 40 years?

    • Justin McGill

      Cause now she’s “the one who got away”..

    • Halloween Scarecrow

      The original Halloween was supposed to be called the babysitter murders…so the intention from the beginning was there was no motive.

  • MrX13

    So part 2 is going to be ignored too…Hmm. I’m excited to see how they go about this now. Yes, I’ve always liked the idea of Strode being the younger sister but I’m interested in what difference they will bring to this new movie.

  • Creepshow

    Stop it, John. You’re too old to be playing pretend. Someone get him some apple sauce.

  • Scott Wolf

    For Me part 2 was one of the best movies ever but the best one of all in the franchise and the way it should have ended it would be Halloween H2O that’s how the movie should end and that’s how it should have been left alone I mean do 1 2 and then skip 3 4 5 6 7 hell I don’t know I lost count and then put H2O and you’ve got the perfect scenario movie right there so if you own 1/2 + H2O you have the ending just don’t watch the rest .

    After all it returns 20 years later Lori cuts off Michael Myers head and the story and the movie It’s Over Michael’s finally dead

    That’s how it should have ended the rest of them were terrible however Halloween 3 in itself is a classic and I really like it a lot because it was different still it should not have been called Halloween III should have been called season of The Mask or something like that I don’t know or the Shamrock show or something I don’t know

    • Eddie Barsh

      I agree that 1,2, h20 (and ignore resurrection) creates the beat timeline. If we could make halloween movies telling ppl what Michael did from 1978 (when he attacked Laurie) to 1998 when he was killed by laurie

  • Ah, it looks like they are ditching Halloween II, contrary to the previous confirmation. Then again, all of Danny McBride’s statements have been contradictory, so this takes the cake.

    • Logan

      Like I said weeks ago, it sounded like they were erasing everything but the original. You were just going off of what McBride said when he originally signed on. Everything since then has pointed to them jumping off from the first one. Especially hating the brother/sister connection (even Carpenter hated it) and saying they don’t want him being “supernatural”.

      However, I’m not a fan of this decision. Now we have a “human” 60 some odd year old serial killer that’s waited 40 years just to find some random babysitter he didn’t kill on Halloween night. Not to mention I assume the only way Jamie Lee signed on this time around is that they have it in her contract that she kills him at the end. Suddenly, I’m far less excited than I was when this was initially announced.

      • Yeah, and there’s also some of the supernatural abilities/endurance that he displayed in the original. They will have to explain how he’s even still alive (and take for granted the other things that are unexplainable).

        For the age thing, my main theory right now is that the new film will be the played out as “The Final Halloween” (I.E. the ‘final’ death of Michael Myers) and there will be a passing of the torch. This is supported by the poster with the child’s hand and, if this is going to be a death film, maybe it’s best that he’s human so that they don’t have to contrive some forced mythology from out-of-nowhere (like the mystical stuff in Freddy’s Dead and Jason Goes to Hell). Just a theory, though.

        http://halloweendailynews.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Halloween-2018-promo-poster-courtesy-of-Collider-1-e1495576221193.jpg

        • Logan

          If that’s the way they’re going with it then color me disappointed. Myers will never truly die. I don’t care how this movie ends, eventually someone will reboot or remake it again to further confuse people and add another timeline/story. I’m actually worried how this is going to turn out now.

          • That’s true. Personally, I’d be fine with it as long as they actually keep in dead for a little while and have the replacement actually be worthy. For example, they already toyed with the idea of ‘passing the torch’ in Halloween 4, Halloween 6 and Halloween II (2009) but, because of Dimension Films, it never went anywhere. They just reversed it in the next sequel, if it even got a sequel. Overall, selling us on Michael’s death could be difficult. Only time will tell. Hopefully we don’t end up with another Halloween III situation where the audience is left scratching their heads and wondering “Hey, where did Michael go?”

    • Eddie Barsh

      He was never right for the franchise in the beginning. I don’t like the idea of the creative team behind pineapple express making a halloween film

  • Jared LaPine

    I’m cool with however they handle it. I trust them. BUT it will be very hard for me (and probably everyone else) to not think of them as siblings in the new film. Don’t think I’ll be able to block that out.

    • Eddie Barsh

      Sameeee

  • Biscoito18

    Next thing you know, they will say that it will also ignore the original and will be a full-blown reboot/reimagination.

    • Mr. Red Right Hand

      mood

  • yannick smit

    Because he escaped from a mental asylum and she was one of the first people he saw. Oh, and he’s a psychopath.There doesn’t have to be a reason – as Carpenter himself said “the shape is scary because he’s a shark – he doesn’t need a reason”.

    • Saturn

      Is there an echo?

      😉

  • Mr. Red Right Hand

    she gets away…and fourty years later michael comes back on halloween, targeting her family. no reason why, he just comes back. simple.

    even if the new outline is decent, carpenters so over this franchise – he’ll say anything at this point with checks dancing around him. just go back and watch his interview on H20 lol.

  • Reece Catlin

    this is all very strange, I thought JLC loved H20, so why come back and pretend it never happened?? also does the shape go after her or the other way around, also on IMDB it says Carpenter is a writer.

    • Eddie Barsh

      I loved H20, just thought Jodi Lynne O’Keefe and her bf charlie were lame characters and the film was too short and the CGI mask on some scenes were kinda frustrating. Other than that I thought it was one of the best sequels in the series

  • I’m going to keep my expectations very low and hope to be surprised, but honestly this movie sounds like a mess.

    • Eddie Barsh

      Agreed

  • Reece Catlin

    I find it strange after John Carpenter passing on H20 would come back now.

    • J Jett

      $$$$$

    • Matt the Bruins fan

      Might be Jamie Lee Curtis’ involvement that convinced him. (Or vice versa, who knows?)

      • HarryIsAScam

        She was involved in h2o and passed directing.

    • Nathan

      Well it’s the copyright thing. Didn’t he get the rights back like so many others after 30 or so years elapsed.

      • HarryIsAScam

        He was offered h2o and said no. Nothing to do with rights.

      • Darren Hood

        No he sold his stake in ownership of the Halloween franchise in 1986-1987. What happened was Dimension Films who owned the rights for the distribution of the franchise since 1994 lost the license in 2015. Under new ownership with Blumhouse and Universal, the new creative team asked if John Carpenter would like to be involved, and he said only if we can make the movie I would be proud of, or something to that effect. I think after 39 years, and the bitter resentment over his careless changes with II and the constant continuity wipes and stagnant plot devices have pissed him off so badly he felt it would be necessary to revisit Halloween before he dies, and right the wrongs, he feels he made 35 years ago.

  • The Godfather

    Maybe they go the Rob Zombie route. In his H2, the first twenty minute hospital scene was a dream. Just sayin…

    • Trent Owens

      with the word Fuck said every other sentence?

    • MySelfDestruct

      And the first 20 minutes were the most interesting part and then its just a dream. Such an odd choice to make.

      • John Connor

        It established what’s going on inside the character’s mind.
        You feel what she feels.
        There is nothing more important than a dream.

  • Reece Catlin

    or they could have done the original idea for Halloween 4? where the shape is a ghost who comes back on halloween.

    • Mr. Red Right Hand

      oh lord no

  • Nicolas Caiveau

    Ok. I won’t see it in theater >< This is just another reboot, when I wanted a regular sequel. Like MANY other fans, I see Halloween 1 and 2 as one long single movie.

    • Eddie Barsh

      It is def not a reboot. It has been confirmed to be a sequel. Have you not been paying attention? How can it be a reboot when they’re bringing JLC back to reprise her role?

      • Nicolas Caiveau

        I’ve been paying attention. It’s a whole new continuity, just like TCM 3D. Only difference with a full reboot is that the first movie also exists in the new continuity. To me it’s a reboot, as it ignores all the other movies of the saga.

  • In Halloween Michael only went after Laurie and her friends because they were babysitters and they vaguely reminded him of his sister he murdered at 6 years old.

    Halloween 2 ruined that image of outright, unexplained terror by bringing in a contrived plot line of family ties that limited the franchise’s potential. Michael now only had limited motivations, limited victims, and it got old fast because not only is it not scary – it’s silly.

    Halloween 4 – 6 brought in the worst possible storyline that was even more contrived and limiting and stupid. Cults and incest and everything in between? No. Just no.

    Halloween: 20 Years Later is stupid. People can praise it for having Laurie but it’s stupid. It’s a badly Frankensteined rip off of Scream. Awful unused music from said film and stereotypically flat characters.

    Halloween: Resurrection is even worse.

    I hope they do ignore the rest of the sequels, and I hope they don’t make the same mistakes by including Laurie and another new daughter we don’t really need.

    • gilles008

      He simply saw Laurie, when she came to drop by the keys. And that was it. He was on her, and her friends. No reason. No motive. Still the scariest film in the series thanks to that simplicity. I LOVE Halloween II but the sister stuff never sat well with me.

      The idea of Michael Myers coming back after 40 years to finish off the woman he once saw drop keys off at his house…is MUCH more twisted and scarier than anything the sister angle could ever bring.

    • Abby Braunsdorf

      I’m so glad that other people don’t like Strode being Michael’s sister. Finding another, previously unknown sister is either a) a wild coincidence or b) magic (Halloween 4-6 take the magic angle and run with it). Either way, I don’t like it. It’s much scarier if the victims were just in the wrong place at the wrong time.

    • J Jett

      Reece, i couldn’t agree more that the cult/incest storyline was 100% idiotic and lame.

    • American Atheist

      You conveniently left out Zombie’s white trash abominations.

  • Reece Catlin

    I wonder if this will be the last halloween movie! michael might be killed for good this time.

    • Ocelot006 .

      Yeah….that always works out

  • mark long

    I love Halloween II as a sequel, but it makes sense for them to go back to the original for the continuation. I enjoy the different story paths and the discussion surrounding them, but nothing can top MM just being evil and doing his thing for some unknown reason. Sometimes it is better left up to our imagination, as we will decide what scares us the most.

  • Demented Daniel

    I’m just hoping that this doesn’t turn into Hall-oh well.

    • Jake

      can’t be any worse than some of the actual sequels…

  • Halloween Scarecrow

    If this takes place after the original…I wonder what Mikey has been up to all these years leading up to 2018…..

    • Jake

      Trying to figure out spokeo to locate Laurie.

    • James F. Reilly

      The Apple Maps app is terrible.

    • Eddie Barsh

      Precisely.

    • John Connor

      Training.
      Now he knows kung fu.
      The legend continues.

  • Mac888 spectral

    I don’t get this at all. I understand the original stands head & shoulders above the rest, but Halloween 2 is an outstanding sequel. If Laurie is not his sister, then for 40 years he has been pissed off at a random chick who had the audacity to walk up to his porch and stick a key under the mat.

    • JoeInTheBox

      We’ll just have to see, but at least it opens things up to so many other possibilities.

      The revelation that she’s his sister has a nice capper to that story in H20. Now that she might not be, opens up a whole other realm of interesting story branches.

      • Mac888 spectral

        I will admit I’m intrigued by the idea that Michael simply vanished after Loomis shot him off the balcony and was never seen again until now. I’m assuming that’s the case, at least. I don’t want to find out he was recaptured and sent back to Smith’s Grove for 40 years.

        • JoeInTheBox

          Exactly. It really gives off a boogeyman vibe even more. Plus I can’t imagine the fear that would instill in someone, that survived that. Maybe he’s been doing “copycat” killings every Halloween since?

    • Jake

      What made him scary was that Laurie was just someone he became obsessed with for no apparent reason, while him being Laurie’s brother just makes it less scary.

      • Eddie Barsh

        No it doesn’t. I disagree

      • American Atheist

        What makes him scary is he’s a relentless force of evil. Dr Loomis sets the stage for Michael’s madness. Laurie doesn’t do shit to make him scary.

      • That’s a bingo.

    • Eddie Barsh

      Exactlyyyyy!!!! This is fuckin stupid!

  • Motion Fiction Media

    Then does this mean he’ll have the same mask from H1??

    • J Jett

      god i hope so!

    • Reece Catlin

      hopefully modern technology can help them clone or re create it.

    • Creepshow

      No, he will be rocking a Silver Shamrock pumpkin mask.

    • Darren Hood

      Not the same one, that one is sadly decomposing and in the hands of a private collector who after purchasing it, refuses to have pictures taken with it, let alone visitation rights. This is probably one of those repro masks currently for sale online and in stores.

  • The chicken man

    I love this idea. If I want to watch the original series, I can. This just opens up a new alternate time line.
    Very exciting, for a true fan.

    🙂

  • Nathan

    Reading the interview it sounds like Jamie lee is a small part. Apparently she is just written into the script they had before she spoke to the director.

    From the article:
    STEREOGUM: Jamie Lee Curtis is coming back for the new Halloween. Did you get involved with getting her on board?

    CARPENTER: No. She talked to the director. Her part was written into the script and they had this idea — it’s kind of a… I don’t know how to describe it. It’s almost an alternative reality. It picks up after the first one and it pretends that none of the other [sequels] were made. It’s gonna be fun. There’s a really talented director and it was well-written. I’m impressed.

    Sucks if she’s just a cameo I want her to go at him h20 style again.

    • Dylan Summers

      I doubt she is just a cameo. With all the publicity, the porch photo shoot and casting her daughter I’m sure she’ll be a main character. She was probably just a late addition to the script as the script writers thought she wouldn’t return. Originally Scream 4 was written without Sidney as Neve wouldn’t return but eventually after some public begging she signed on and Sidney was bought in to the script.

  • Grimphantom
  • pablitonizer

    Ok, now I’m starting to get upset. If they wanted to draw an alternate reality from the siblings story then I’m cool with that but why on earth are they casting Jamie back? It’s so not necessary at all, and makes it even worse for a 60-year-old killer to be on the loose again and magically come accross with this unrelated granny (laurie) just to say hi randomly. Seriously, make a direct sequel from Halloween but stay away from Strode’s story, this film will flop at so many leves and most audience won’t get a thing of what happened 40 years ago. And for those who remember what happened 40 years ago will be like “weren’t they siblings? What da hell is going on? “I can see the reviews already…this is geeting messier and worse than a continuation of Halloween in the 80s with a scary young michael

    • Dark Darth

      We don’t know the story yet so I don’t think you need to be quiet so emotional at this point. The story could go anywhere, she could chase him down after seeing reports on the news that he is attacking again, her daughter could go and chase him down because she knows its traumatized her mother and she wants revenge, who knows, but writing Jamie Lee off as a granny and then trashing a film we all know nothing about is bad form sir.

      • Roman

        and that person’s opinion. and who are you to tell anyone how they should react to any news about this film?

        • Dark Darth

          what? LOL, anyway to answer the legible part of your response, I’m not TELLING anyone anything, just offering my opinion as you are also doing 🙂 Anyway I’m excited for any new horror films.

      • Michael is a supernatural being – the incarnation of “The Boogeyman” – so he’s not going to be in his 60s or 70s. He’s evil incarnate – not a mortal human.

        • pablitonizer

          I get the boogyeman ageless factor. However, when the film states Michael first rampage was back in 1978, the audience will do the math and it’ll sound a bit bizarre. Unlike other horror films, Halloween has always made pretty clear of all the dates

        • John Connor

          There is a legit angle they can go with that makes him mortal.
          I’ll make a post elsewhere here explaining.

    • Eddie Barsh

      Yessssss!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You nailed it! Love Jamie Lee she’s a god but she isn’t right for this film

      • pablitonizer

        I love Jamie with all my heart and I’m so effin happy for her to comeback to halloween but if they’re erasing the biggest Michael’s motivation then there’s no reason for Jamie to be back. People complain about michael trying to kill laurie and how he was scarier when stalking random people but they don’t seem to remember he killed his sister first… this family bond nightmare has always been Michael’s motivation since the very beginning

        • Darren Hood

          No it hasn’t. It was retroactively attached by John Carpenter after seeing Empire Strikes Back and thought his movie needed a “I am your father” shocker. This was confirmed in many interviews with the director and he has regretted it ever since.

          Michael Myers at 6 years old brutally murdered his sister and was locked away for it, breaking out 15 years later he returns home to kill again, choosing his next victim because she walked on his doorstep. That’s it.

          Even if you take the “family bloodline was always there from the beginning” narrative at face value, then how do you explain away the following?

          How does Michael know where his sister was, if her adoption records were sealed?

          Why did he return home, instead of killing her in her bed if he returned home to kill her?

          How did he even know it was his sister when she walked up on the doorstep? The last time he saw her she would have been 3 or 6 depending if the dream sequence is intended to be literal, people change a lot in 15 years, and I doubt at first glance he could instantly recognize her?

          John Carpenter was against Halloween II when it was announced in 1979, because unlike Irwin Yablans and Moustapha Akkad who saw a cash cow in the making, both Debra and John were against the idea of a sequel because they said all they needed to say with the original. So how could something be there, if it was added after 1980, and if if the creators had their way would have been a one and done thing?

          • John Connor

            Michael was raised by the thorn cult in the asylum and they wanted him to kill his sister.
            He knew what she looked like through them.
            It was time to kill her and they let him out.
            He went home as a nesting/resting place until it was time (after school).

          • Darren Hood

            All of that was retroactively inserted. Looking at the first film and only the first film, there are no hints, or even flashes of any of this stuff in those 90 minutes of story. If you love and find it fun to piece every bit of continuity together, that’s one thing, but to argue that it was there from the beginning, when John Carpenter himself said that Laurie and Michael’s linkage was familial is completely baseless since it was a last minute change inspired by Darth Vader. It throws your argument away.

          • John Connor

            Wrong.
            The sequel brought those questions to your mind and a further sequel answered them.

          • Darren Hood

            Do you know what retroactive means? Listen, I’m all for fixing holes in a series, to make sense of everything, but I’m not going to agree that this was planned since 1978, when every piece of evidence says the opposite.

          • John Connor

            Never said what you’re saying (that it was planned from the beginning).
            You said that part 2 didn’t make sense with Michael being able to know what Laurie Strode looked like with her documents sealed or whatever.
            Its the boogeyman, he knows who you are and he knows where you’re hiding.
            And if that answer doesn’t satisfy you , it was established that he was evil (the boogeyman) , and could find his targets easily like a ghostly presence.
            And if that doesn’t satisfy you, its further explored and explained in 6 that there’s a cult helping this demonic evil to protect themselves, using open threads from the first film to further satisfy any BS ‘plothole’ you complained about like ‘how’d he learn how to drive’? “Maybe someone around here gave him driving lessons!”
            You say that you hate the Thorn material and the filling in it did, but you’re the dillhole raising those questions like ‘how did Michael know what his sister looked like?’

            Every sequel changes things because it starts filling in anything left to your imagination like what happens after or what happened before or during.

  • The Night King

    One of the main issues with the mask is that someone owns the rights. I don’t think it’s William Shatner, but whomever owns the rights to that 60’s/70’s era mask must be paid a fee for them to use it. Don Post already scanned one of the originals into computer so new ones can be made at any time. It’s the question of how cheap are the producers. It costs nothing to make a new, totally lame version and say screw the fans which is what they’ve done since 4. Carpenter’s original idea for part 4 (he was involved at one time) was to do a movie about the paranoia caused by Myers in the years following his rampage. How much do you want to bet in this one. Michael takes off the mask and is a character that is interacting with everyone . . . at least until he decides to kill again.

  • Tiger Quinn

    Hmmm….would I mind if Part 2 “didn’t happen”? The kills are over the top ’80s types, Curtis spends the movie dragging herself up and down hallways, and although I like the final explosion for the stuntman work, it doesn’t make a lick of sense. So all in all – yeah, I’m good with it.

  • A.J.

    I’m fine with them ignoring H2. I could never get over how she (implausibly) shot him in both eyes just for that glaring detail to be ignored in the rest of the sequels.

    • Nicolas Caiveau

      It wasn’t ignored. Michael simply regenerated. Remember he’s supposed to be supernatural.

      • oh_riginal

        I don’t believe that was ever meant to be a solid fact.

        • Darren Hood

          He was metaphysical evil. John Carpenter explains that you can stop evil, but cannot fully destroy it. This is why after being stabbed three times, once in the eye, gut and neck, he can still get back up. Why, after being shot 6 times he can get back up. Evil has to remain on Earth as a counter balance for good, one cannot exist without the other.

        • Nicolas Caiveau

          Of course it isn’t “solid fact”, as it was never said on screen, you just assume it while watching the movies.

  • IWC-3PO

    Am I the only one who would like to see a Tom Atkins cameo in the new movie?

    • Creepshow

      Only if he’s a drunk who buys his kids shitty Halloween masks, and never visits them again.

      • dukeblues

        Enough with cameos.

        • Creepshow

          Aw c’mon. It’s better than Jaime Lee.

    • J Jett

      Tom Atkins is awesome. 🙂

    • Eddie Barsh

      Nope

    • Darren Hood

      Thrill Me!

  • llcc1103

    Its just annoying now

  • Chris Farmer

    Lions Gate did this with Texas Chainsaw 3d lol let’s hope it goes well.

  • 2COOLEATHERFACE

    Hell yeah cant wait!!!

  • Dylan Summers

    I’m so torn about this movie. Half of me can’t wait to see Jamie Lee Curtis back and hopefully a return to the tone of the original movie but the other half just can’t forgive ANOTHER continuity rehash. I’m also really surprised the studio are going in this direction as obviously the actual Halloween fans are pumped but the majority of the movie going audience are going to be wondering why Michael Myers doesn’t look like a 7 foot homeless man anymore and the others will be thinking “Didn’t she kill him in the 90’s?”

    This movie is going to have to be AMAZING to pull off what they’re trying.

    • oh_riginal

      I get what you’re saying, but the cult timeline died with Donald Pleasance, and wasn’t very good to begin with, and the H20 timeline was ruined by Halloween: Resurrection beyond repair. No way people were going to take the franchise seriously after Busta Rhymes pulled out martial arts to defeat The Shape while in the middle of a house fire.

      • Darren Hood

        Not to mention the one liners were hilariously bad.

        “Trick or Treat, mutha f****r”

        Augggggggggggggggggghhhh!

    • SPN-86

      Feel the exact same.

      If it was a straight sequel to H20 i’d be incredibly excited for it to properly wrap up the original series and then they can fully reboot again in a few years.

      Jamie Lee Curtis returning is a huge positive but then it comes with the equally huge black mark of 20+ years worth of sequels being pointlessly erased.

      Think we’ll just have to take the glass half full approach and ultimately hope for another great Halloween movie, god knows it’s been long enough.

  • DukeStKing

    I absolutely loved the reveal in Halloween 2 when Dr. Loomis found out Laurie was Michael’s sister. Made sense that he kept coming after her instead of easier prey. Remember, he was stalking her at school and in the daytime for a reason.

    • Brian McNatt

      Ignoring Halloween 2, that reason could be as simple as him seeing her drop off the keys to the Myers place on the way to school, though.

    • Eddie Barsh

      Exactly! This is a terrible choice by McBride and Green. Just ignore everything after Part 2. There is a c!ear continuity between 1 and 2. Crystal clear. No reason to erase that. I understand erasing the terrible thorn curse but erasing 2 makes no fucking sense. I was excited for this project but the direction has me turned off now

    • oh_riginal

      But didn’t he only really start following her after she came up to the Myers door to deliver the mail or whatever? Wouldn’t that mean that she stumbled into his plan and not the other way around? The way I see it, he could have just said to himself “well, she’ll do” and she became his mark for the rest of the story. If he was only after her, he didn’t really have a reason to go after her friends too (which he went out of his way to do, since Laurie wasn’t with them for most of the night.)

      The whole point of his killing spree in the first movie was to sort-of recreate the murders he committed as a child, hence the headstone removal. He was trying to relive the murder of his big sister again. At least that is one way to interpret it, if ignoring the sequels, since the original movie didn’t even hint at Laurie and Michael being related.

      • cetkat

        Yep, you’re right. If she hadn’t come to the door he wouldn’t have picked her. She was about the same age as the sister he killed, became the main target, and then he followed her until she got home. It makes complete sense to me for him to come back later to finish the job. They’ll probably throw in an explanation that she moved away after that night, but is now back assuming by now he’d have to be dead or be an old man.

      • Darren Hood

        That was it. That’s what frightened viewers in 1978/1979. The fact that any mundane or routine action like walking on someone’s doorstep would mark you as a target for murder is increasingly creepy, and that feeling sticks with you long after you leave the theater. Michael brutally murders his sister in 1963 and even at 6 years old you can tell he enjoys it because he watches every blow as they happen with such enchantment, it becomes unnerving at first watch. Then he breaks out because it is close to 15 years after he committed the first murder and he wants to continue his rampage as an adult. I’m sure he saw his sister in Laurie and that is what drove him to attack her. Then her friends pissed him off in various ways.

        Annie called him a creep. Oh yeah she’s dead.
        Lynda and Bob were sexually promiscuous and that immediately regressed him back to 6 years old and Judith. He even kills Lynda similarly to Judith, she’s on the edge of the bed half dressed back turned unaware of the danger until it is too late.

        Had it not been Laurie, he would have picked another innocent face to torment. That is the scariest moment of Halloween to me, the fact he could pick anyone, and by sheer twist of fate chose her. The probability of it being you is that much higher in the same situation. Hell, the concept of fate is argued in the film as a English lesson, making the choice seem more profound. Was it fate, or coincidence?

    • I don’t think Michael is nearly as frightening or interesting when he’s just another killer choosing random people or a “type” of person. That’s boring.

    • Darren Hood

      Yeah, because he was a madman obsessed with her. Stalking her throughout the day is something a lot of predators do, it incites fear in their prey, and the psycho feeds off that fear. Laurie was a victim of circumstance, picked not because of some bloodline, but because she stepped on his doorstep, and it angered him. That house was sacred to him, so much he returned there 15 years after he was incarcerated. Anyone who trespassed was in mortal danger. Now for the obvious logic fail, how in the world could Michael even know who she was, or where she ended up, when it was revealed in the film that her records were sealed to protect the family?

      • John Connor

        The thorn cult was with him growing up, raising him.
        He knew what she looked like the entire time.

        • Darren Hood

          Again retroactively inserted. It only makes sense if you force it, and even then the cracks show up. In order for this to make sense you would have to assume that Smith’s Grove County itself was in on it to begin with. That the entire governing body was enabling Michael to kill his family, and had access to sealed documents that proved who Laurie was and ended up with, because that would be the only way anyone could sneak a peak at any adoption records sealed at a state level. You realize how messed up that is? All this to kill a teenager? Seriously. Michael comes across as a victim himself, and not the main antagonist, which is why fans hated the Thorn story to begin with.

          • John Connor

            Wrong. Sequels are allowed to continue the story and fill in questions it raises.

          • Darren Hood

            All it did was turn Michael Myers into a puppet for someone else’s gain. Again, I’m not knocking you for loving something that most hated, but saying the movies better because of thorn, and using that as your excuse why, is pretty lame in itself. I’ve explained why Thorn doesn’t work, one being if he is forced to kill anyone with his bloodline, then as long as you are not born with, or currently hang around with a Myers or Strode and choose not to live in the same house he grew up in, the chances you are safe are extremely high.

          • John Connor

            Family is one of the scariest things.
            You don’t choose who you’re related to.
            Being part of a family that’s marked for death all their life, especially finding that out at a young age, losing your innocence and the entirety of your idyllic life at this revelation, is pure horror.
            I love it and its something kinda unique and a trademark for the Halloween series.
            If you want random killings there are TONS of movies to fill that craving.

          • Christian

            And where exactly did the movie explain any of that social commentary? You’re making up you’re own beliefs for things that were NOT in Halloween 6 at all.

          • John Connor

            All that to kill a teenager and bring great fortune (life and survival) to the town.
            Happens all the time everywhere.
            Poison/kill many to bring great fortune to family and friends (of those in power).
            By comparison, the fictional cult is less evil than real life government because said fictional cult only needs to sacrifice one chosen victim for years.

    • Boydon

      carpenter admitted that when he was writing part II, he had come to a dead end with laurie’s character. he didn’t think there was a believable reason for michael to continue following her so he inserted the bloodline plot. it was lazy writing at best, something he regrets to this day. i still don’t understand why he felt that was necessary. he could have easily left out that reveal, and the audience would have still bought michael’s behavior. most predators would fixate on particular victims. not having finished his job is as good a reason as any and a lot scarier than some inane sibling/samhain/season of the witch bs.

  • PetCactus

    Sounds interesting. Can’t wait!

  • DaddyKo

    Just reboot it completely. Take Michael in a new direction.

    • John Connor

      A remake?
      Its okay to say remake.
      Its not okay to say ‘reboot’ because its fucking stupid and meaningless.

      • DaddyKo

        No because a remake would be doing the same movie again but different/updated aka rob zombies Halloween. I don’t need to see Michael origin or him hunting Laurie or another family member again.

        • John Connor

          A remake does not mean it has to be the same story.

          A remake means its the same franchise/name-brand but a new universe that is not connected to (or a part of) an older version/universe.

          • Boydon

            “A remake does not mean it has to be the same story.”

            a remake means exactly that. you can’t be that obtuse.

          • John Connor

            Nope. You can change things as much as you want.

          • Darren Hood

            You still have to keep the basic outline though, in this case. same names, same settings, same basic killer stalks babysitters plot. Remakes deviate from the original in ways that offer in depth explanations of plot threads that were hinted at, or become more graphic in violence and design, or certain characters may die earlier or later or not at all, but they always remain similar in plot.

            For example Halloween 07 kills the Strodes, and portrays the Myers family as white trash, but their deaths nor do the portrayals of auxiliary characters do not affect the plot, there is more in depth examination of Michael’s time in Smith’s Grove, so much so that Rob tries to paint Loomis as a father figure that Michael tries to admire, symbolism is given to make the mask more significant, and the babysitters die more horrifically, but the basic outline is still the same. Michael Myers after breaking out of a sanitarium, returns home to resume his bloody rampage.

          • John Connor

            You can change as much and anything you want in a remake.

            Take all The Mummy remakes by Universal for example.
            Sure they all involve a mummy of some sort cause duh that’s the premise of these movies but most of those remakes have original characters and quite different stories.

            My point is that the whole ‘reboot’ term is meaningless and a fad that Hollywood started because ‘remake’ was apparently being seen as a negative term.
            They call everything a reboot now: sequels and remakes.

  • steveninseattle

    So Laurie never married? If her daughter is named Karen Strode???

    • MYKEE WATTZ

      Odd

    • Dionysios Illustrations

      Or maybe she married a cousin or something.

  • American Atheist

    I honestly don’t care anymore. I’ll just stick with the original three and be happy.

    • Creepshow

      Yup. Know when, to say when.

      • American Atheist

        It’s dumb trying to recreate the magic of the original(s). It can’t be done. They are classics for a reason. Hollywood is pathetically lazy and immune of shitting out an original idea.

        • Creepshow

          That is exactly when I pull the plug. I don’t need to be entertained that badly to watch thrown together crud. I’ve got more important things to do, like counting rocks.

          • American Atheist

            I agree. Fucking PG-13 shit fests. I have an excellent library of classic horror movies (some new) at my disposal. Most are bluray, some VHS. I can happily watch them anytime.

            I try to support new horror when it’s original and good: The Witch, Trick r’ Treat, Drag Me To Hell and The Cabin in The Woods to name a few. (Not like there are many to choose from).

  • Actually i’m happy (yes at the same time i’m angry but c’est la vie) that they are ignoring everything but the original.
    The main issue with this saga since the first sequel is that every movie relied on “the family” aspect making it virtually impossible to go in any new direction. Once we got Laurie and Jamie out of the way we had Halloween: Resurrection…
    This is probably the only way to reignite the series.
    You just can’t have another Halloween movie without Laurie etc etc because that would mean to reboot the saga entirely.
    This is the best way to go: ignore everything but the first one, do a single proper sequel without al that family/thorn nonsense and then move on to new territories.

    • Lard

      Yesssss couldn’t agree more.

    • Nicolas Caiveau

      Just because Resurrection sucked doesn’t mean it’s impossible to have a good sequel with Michael killing new characters.

      • Christian

        A sequel to a horrendous flop released in 2002? Yeah, that’s what the audience wants!

        • Nicolas Caiveau

          It doesn’t have to have the same characters of even mention Resurrection… Just be set in the same continuity. Nightmare on Elm Street 3 is a sequel to Nightmare On Elm Street 2, yet doesn’t have a single mention of it, it only mentions the original movie.

          • John Connor

            They should have had Laurie survive the fall and walk with a cane like Loomis hunting and preparing for Michael.

      • Yeah, still the only proof we have is that movie so…

  • oh_riginal

    I don’t get why people are getting so upset over a franchise that has ALREADY done alternate timelines anyway.

    No way can you say H:4, H:5, and H:6 (either version) exist in the same universe as H20 and Resurrection.

    But as I said before, this is the ultimate choose-your-path franchise, and I’m cool with that.

    Optional ways to watch:

    1. Halloween
    2. Halloween, Halloween II
    3. Halloween, Halloween II, Halloween 4
    4. Halloween, Halloween II, Halloween 4, Halloween 5, Halloween 6 (bonus option to pick which version of 6 to watch, Theatrical or Producer’s Cut)

    5. Halloween, Halloween II, H20
    6. Halloween, Halloween II, H20, Halloween: Resurrection

    and now:

    7. Halloween, New Halloween Sequel

    and also:

    8. The Rob Zombie Duology (Theatrical or Director’s Cuts)

    • Eddie Barsh

      I believe #5 to be the correct timeline. Halloween, H2, H20

      • oh_riginal

        My only issue with H20 is that it’s a victim of trying to be so much like Scream, when it should have been trying to show Scream how its done. It also doesn’t really answer how The Shape survived having his eyes shot out and getting out of a pretty decent explosion unscathed at the end of part 2.

        Still, it’s not a horrible movie, and it’s much better than part 5 and 6. I still like part 4 a lot though.

        • That’s exactly what I love about it. These movies are all so indicative of the year they were each made.

        • Boydon

          every time i watch H20 i like to pretend it’s a copy cat going after laurie and that the real michael myers died in that explosion (it would certainly explain that horrendous ad hoc mask). i mean i can get behind the idea of mad adrenaline rush keeping you alive after taking six bullets to the chest and an axe to your shoulder, but the rest of the supernatural elements were always more at home in camp crystal lake.

          • SPN-86

            Don’t blame crappy H2 for making H20 look less realistic

            It’s yet another reason why the true best timeline for this series is simply Halloween 1978, then H20, the end.

          • Boydon

            you mean the same H20 where he takes an axe to his neck, a knife to his chest and survives a fall only to resurrect after being pronounced dead at the scene. yeah that movie is a study on epistemology! smh

        • SPN-86

          H20 didn’t “try” to be Scream, you’re only drawing comparisons because it was made at the EXACT SAME time period the Scream trilogy was.

          If the original Scream was made today in 2017 it would FEEL like a 2017 horror movie, and the exact same goes for H20.

          • oh_riginal

            It was also made by the same studio, looking to make more of what they felt was hitting with audiences, since Scream made them a lot of money. Kevin Williamson was involved in both productions. It’s not a conspiracy. H20 was trying to tap into what made Scream work, for better or worse.

            I can say one thing for sure, Halloween 4, 5, and 6 feel nothing like Scream. At least 4 somewhat resembled the tone of 1 and 2.

          • Darnell

            Sorry but H20 definitely had the feeling of Scream/I know what you did last summer.

            It didn’t have the feel of a Halloween film. They didn’t even use the classic chase music.

            I mean Scream 2 was playing in the girls dorm room lol.

            I personally feel H4 is the best sequel in the series after H2. It feels like a Halloween film.

            H5&6 were terrible which explains why the just went full reboot. There was really no coming back from H6.

    • John Connor

      Nope, 1-8 fits together.

      • Cappy Tally

        Incorrect.

        • John Connor

          False.

          • Cappy Tally

            Negative.

      • Flu-Like Symptoms

        How, exactly? Curious to your point of view.

        • John Connor

          How not?

          • Flu-Like Symptoms

            Ah man, so many things to note. A few off the top of my head; no Thorn symbol on Michael’s wrist before or after 4-6. Honestly, I don’t think it’s in 4 either, but can’t recall a clear shot of his wrist without researching it. H20 ignoring the existence of Jamie Lloyd (and her baby) and implying Dr. Loomis died in the care of Marion instead of at the hands of Michael at the end of 6. In H20, the rest of the world being totally unaware of Michael’s three rampages 4-6 and heavily implying he hasn’t been seen or heard from since the hospital fire at the end of part 2.

            I’m sure there’s a ton of other stuff people will note if this thread is still being looked at. But, here are a few plot holes I don’t think can be explained away without strong suspension of disbelief.

          • Nicolas Caiveau

            Laurie faking her death in a car crash was obviously a way to explain how she’s not dead anymore, as she was supposedly dead in H4. If it ignored H4, 5 and 6, they would have simply said she was still alive. The cop in the beginning of H20 also claims that Loomis died a few years ago, hunting Michael all his life. It’s an explicit reference to H4, 5 and 6, if they ignored it, he would have died 20 years ago in H2 and would have only hunted Michael one single night !

            Laurie was alcoholic and depressive, so you can imagine because of what Michael did to her, that she had 2 different children at a young age, of 2 different fathers. Everything that happened in H4, 5 and 6 could have been covered up and known only as an urban legend (that’s why Laurie’s aunt in H6 isn’t even aware that she lives in Myers house, because only in Haddonfield do they know about those events).

          • Darren Hood

            I’m sorry but abandoning your child, by faking your own death garners no sympathy points with me, I don’t care how messed up her life is, or how she did it for the child’s protection. To me it’s almost like she gave up her child as bait, to keep the heat off of her, why else abandon her in HADDONFIELD of all places?

            So if this is to be believed, Laurie fakes her death, along with her husband, cause in H4 he’s dead too, and then they just move off together somehow. Or he dies and she just slinks away and just wanders off. Don’t worry, Jamie will be fine, until she’s not when creepy uncle Mike comes calling, and Laurie doesn’t come back to get her? She’s repeatedly attacked and then brutally murdered and Laurie (I mean Keri Tate) does nothing. Just lets her be to her fate.

            Michael’s rampage made nationwide news, according to the newspaper clippings in H20, so I believe like with Ted Bundy, and every prolific serial killer, every attack would have been sensational news, the child of Laurie Strode the sole survivor, now a target by the same killer making headlines. You are telling me, if Laurie saw all of this, knew what was happening, she just ignored it? Wow, bravo, what a great character assassination you just committed trying to tie things up.

            Even if Haddonfield kept it hush hush, for whatever cover up Thorn BS you can think of, you would have to explain away John who was 17 in 1998 meaning he was alive when Laurie was supposed to die in the car crash, which was 6 months prior to the film’s start in the timeline. John would have been 6. So now to make all of this fit, they abandoned Jamie but kept John? Jamie doesn’t even mention John in 1988, which I would believe to be a big effing deal, being they would have been somewhat close in age and grew up together. She would be older than him by a year at most.

            No matter how you try to spin it, there are errors and logic fails.

          • Nicolas Caiveau

            Of course there are errors and logic fails, the saga isn’t perfect at all. Have you look at the Friday the 13th continuity ? It’s even worse !

          • Darren Hood

            Except with Friday, they tried to set it within the same timeline, Halloween kept rebooting ever other film it seemed. The logic and plot holes only stem from trying to fit pieces together where they clearly do not belong.

          • Nicolas Caiveau

            You are right. But like many others I HATE these alternate timelines stuff. So I prefer to view it as a single continuity, even if it’s flawed rather than 3 different continuities. I mean, it’s Halloween it’s not Terminator, why the hell do we even have several timelines to a simple slasher series ? What’s so hard about creating new characters and have Michael killing them ? >< Halloween is becoming as ridiculous as Texas Chainsaw where no sequel fit with the other ones. Even TCM 3D which was officially the "real" sequel to the first movie doesn't work as it implied that the original movie took place in the 90's instead of the 70's….

          • John Connor

            Wrong.

            Lots of mothers leave their children behind thinking they’re better off without them.
            Laurie was a big time mess.
            She slept around and had different baby daddies for John and Jamie.
            She likely already lost custody of John and ended up mending things with Mr. Lloyd but still always on the edge of breaking down again. They get in a car accident that he dies in (that she is likely responsible for probably via drugs or booze, she goes over the edge and realizes everyone she gets close to dies. ) Leaving Jamie with responsible parents/family was a good option. And Loomis was watching over things like an extra guardian. But somehow Michael came back and found out about Jamie, targeting her.
            Laurie was in no state of reliability. By the time she found out about Jamie’s disappearance, she realized her irresponsibility was at fault and got her shit together, taking back custody of her other child, John, and became an overprotective mother precisely because of what happened to Jamie.

          • SPN-86

            H20 has Laurie’s son specifically mentioning how Laurie watched him burn, clearly implying that THIS (Halloween 2) is the last time anyone had heard from Michael Myers since that night.

            Cops mentioning that Loomis kept hunting Michael only implies that Loomis was never convinced that he was actually dead but clearly nothing ever came of it.

            conclusion: the canons are separate. The end.

          • Jim Stafford

            Agreed. H20 is definitely a follow-on from II and ignores the rest.

          • John Connor

            The thorn symbol on his wrist:
            It didn’t always have to be on his wrist , it could have been added while in his coma (while being taken care of by the thorn cult) or if it was always supposed to be on his wrist since the early days, it could have been hidden by those long sleeves he’s always wearing.
            In H20 you can actually see the shape of the Thorn symbol on his wrist if you pause and go frame by frame on bluray when he puts his arm through the locked gate slashing away at John and his girlfriend.

            Jamie Lloyd:
            Laurie doesn’t mention it but she clearly has some deep dark regrets.
            She talks about how John’s father was a drug addict and its implied that Laurie was worse off than he was because he left her.
            Its clear to me that John and Jamie had different fathers and Laurie was likely seen as an unfit mother with John getting taken away from her custody or leaving him in the care of his father or his parents.
            Getting herself better for when she had Jamie but being so haunted that she left Jamie cause she’d be safer and better off.
            But after Laurie finds out about Jamie’ s disappearance or her death, she gets her shit together enough to get John back and become an overprotective parent to make up for what happened to Jamie. Its clear she has secrets/regrets she won’t talk about. Women have secrets in their past you will never find out about (at least while they’re alive). Their slutty and embarrassing events will never be revealed to their kid or their new boyfriends.

            Loomis:
            We don’t know what happens at the end of 6 when Loomis screams.
            It seems Michael is still alive and either kills/harms Loomis or Loomis screams because Michael is gone.
            Marion could have then cared for him and its even possible that she looked after him around 6 as well on a provisional basis.
            Whats clear is that H20 acknowledges the fact that Loomis survived and Laurie had a “death” that were established in 4. Why bother with any of that if it were erasing everything after 2? It would have been far easier to say Loomis died in the hospital fire.
            It simply doesn’t delve into anything beyond Michael and Laurie cause there’s no need to.
            Thorn cult was destroyed and all the focus is on the confrontation between these two with Laurie’ s past purposefully represented through her mania/depression/anxiety.

            Michael not being heard from in 20 years:
            Because everyone that discovered he was real is dead, with the survivors: Tommy Doyle, Loomis, and Laurie being deemed crazy if they mention him being alive.
            Yes, there were stories, fantastical tales, of a supernatural Michael Myers singlehandedly killing an entire police station and many townfolk with guns being unable to stop him.
            NOBODY BELIEVES THAT BECAUSE IT DOESN’T MAKE SENSE. (Even in 6 it was a folklore legend joke which is why no one believed Jamie on the radio except our lovable “crazies”.)
            Especially after the Thorn cult was uncovered and it became clear that it was obviously a group orchestrating those killings.
            Thats not strong suspension of disbelief, that’s pure and simple logic.
            Michael Myers would be a burnt vegetable at that time (in part 4).
            The thorn cult kept his care under wraps (no pun intended).
            Even his transfer back to Smith’s Grove was hidden from Loomis with all loose ends killed.
            This was one big conspiracy after all.

      • oh_riginal

        About as much as the X-Men franchise! 😀

        • John Connor

          That all fits as well.

          • SPN-86

            Wow, some epically bad trolling from you in all these comments XD

          • John Connor

            I’m one of the few sane and logical posters here.

            X-Men films fit together just fine.
            So does the Halloween films.

    • Flu-Like Symptoms

      I like to pretend 6 and 8 don’t exist. I can get down with any of the other timelines, though option 2 has always been the official canon to me. Intrigued to see if option 7 will unseat that lineage in my psyche.

      • oh_riginal

        As much as I love Carpenter’s filmography (at least up until the mid-90s), I’m going to take his word with a grain of salt. But if he is being seriously honest, and is actually impressed with the story that was cooked up and not just cashing a paycheck… I may find myself taking option 7 too.

        But even if it becomes my favorite, I’ll still rewatch the other options every other year, since I like to throw them into my October viewing schedule. You can go years without seeing the same option twice! It’s kind of amazing in a way.

        • Flu-Like Symptoms

          What gives me hope is him turning down H20. He could’ve cashed a major paycheck had he came back and directed it, but he turned it down because he simply did not want to do it. Seems like now he has genuine interest and motivation to restore Michael Myers. Fingers crossed.

          • oh_riginal

            My hesitation comes from the fact that Carpenter is coming on as a producer on the project. He’s done this before for other remakes of his films (example: The Fog remake), and all it really turned out to be was him being paid to have his name on the product, with no real involvement at all. And then after he would cash the check, he’d badmouth the remakes anyway, even if he said good things pre-release.

            But its the Halloween franchise. I really want it to be good.

    • Jim Stafford

      That’s only really two options – not sure just not watching the movies counts. But your point is valid – H20 already did this by continuing on from II.

  • John Connor

    If what Carpenter says is true and everything after the first film is seemingly contradicted, there is a way they can still make it fit into the timeline while even making Michael Myers as a mere mortal if they wanted to:

    Those events in the first film actually happened (though the supernatural aspect may have been mere legend propagated by the film John Carpenter made about that real life story (as seen in Halloween III).
    That would also mean this takes place in a world where the supernatural is very real as we are aware of Silver Shamrock.

  • Matheus Martins

    Well……

    So much for being excited…..

    Guess they will just turn Michael in a generic boring human psychopath…

    • Darren Hood

      That’s what Halloween II did in 1981, giving him a logical motivation took away the menace and terror from Michael Myers. Laurie Strode was originally just the girl he picked as his next victim because she dared walk on his doorstep. That’s it. The other victims pissed him off in other ways, one with her promiscuity that reminded him of his sister, killing her similarly in bed, half dressed, and the other for calling him a creep. He was an inhuman psychopath with no clear motivations he killed because he wanted to. His victims were of circumstance, and the setting being a residential neighborhood, was ultimately terrifying. Halloween was a setting for fun and games, one would think that trick or treating would be safe, not no more. Evil is afoot and he could strike at anytime, his disguise a halloween prankster. This film is going to strip him of this limitation that will hopefully not leave the writers in a crutch as they try to explain away why he’s murdering his bloodline, or some death cult that cursed him. Michael Myers is simply evil incarnate, who at some point at 6 years old brutally murdered his sister. That in itself is horrifying, now he’s grown up and going at it again.

      • Boydon

        but don’t you think by bringing back laurie, they’re giving him that logical motivation again. i mean why else would he still be fixated on her. unless they plan on switching it up and have her be fixated on him.

        • John Connor

          Yea!!!
          What if….?
          What if…?
          What if Laurie isn’t Michael’s sister but Michael is Laurie’s brother????
          And she wants to kill him instead!!!!

          • Boydon

            looks like someone’s out of medication today.

          • John Connor

            You’re a genius!
            What if Laurie is on medication and she’s seeing Michael everywhere haunted by him?!
            And then he comes back and they fight to the death!
            Better than any sequel and totally original !!!!!

          • Boydon

            alright time to ban the crazy. mods!

          • John Connor

            Yea!!!
            What if everyone called Laurie crazy after she kills “Michael” so we can have another sequel because Jamie Lee needs to come back “one last time”!

          • Saturn

            Halloween : The Night She Came Home….

            (I’m not gonna take credit for that – some horror convention used it when JLC was a guest).

        • Michael Singer

          Not necessarily. For example, you could give her the Dr. Loomis role here. She’s hunting down the man who tormented her all those years ago.

          • Boydon

            that’s exactly what i meant by having her fixated on him. i really hope they go in that direction and don’t make laurie a victim of circumstances again.

        • Darren Hood

          I agree with Michael. I would add that, the evil she witnessed not only terrified her, but drove her on a career path in psychiatry or criminology. I could see her as a Homicide Detective or Criminal Psychiatrist close to retirement when their paths cross again. In order to combat evil, you must understand it. Also John could use it as social commentary on our obsession with movie slashers and the criminal mind.

      • Bloodspatta

        Exactly. The first film is still terrifying because MM has no set agenda. He randomly picks three girls to stalk and then kill, and in their homes. That’s scary as shit.

        • John Connor

          That’s like every movie ever made about killers that like to kill.

          • Michael Singer

            No not really.

      • I think randomly choosing the girl on his doorstep is a lot more generic, boring, and human.

    • Why would him wanting to specifically murder his sister make him NOT a generic boring human psychopath? I would think that does the complete opposite.

      I think making Laurie his sister was the series first and probably biggest mistake. It gave Michael decided motive which killed so much of what made it great. The possibility of that being changed in this version…’thrills me.’

  • Flu-Like Symptoms

    This just keeps getting better with every little bit of news that comes out about it. The lone exception being not having Danielle Harris play Laurie’s daughter, but I can get passed that. If they announce Nick Castle is coming back to play Michael I’m gonna have a nerdgasm.

    • Down Trodden

      Didn’t think about Harris playing the daughter. I like the selection they made, as well. Would be cool to see DH in the film in another capacity. Maybe she could be the grown version of the girl Laurie was babysitting in the first halloween.

      • Flu-Like Symptoms

        That could be cool, definitely.

    • Matty Ice 2016

      They are morons not to get him on the treadmill! !!!!!

  • RIP-REL

    What if all movies after the original (except Zombie’s two films—or possibly even them, somehow) were actually movies within the Halloweenverse that were made based on the events of the original movie? Think Stab in Scream 2. Could this be a meta situation?

    • oh_riginal

      That actually puts a new spin on those movies that makes me want to revisit them with that concept in mind! Bravo on pulling that off! Though I do actually like the director’s cut of his part 2, a lot. Brad Dourif’s small role MADE that movie for me.

  • Richard Reeves

    Why does she have to have a daughter again. Would be funny if Danielle Harris played the role again. Final confrontation after decades? The plot sounds just like H20 & I liked Josh Hartnett as the son.
    Why can’t she have 2 kids instead?

  • MadCows

    No.

  • Simon Allen

    So THIS is going to be Halloween 2 ?

    • John Connor

      They should cast Paul Rudd and call it This Is 60.

  • The Godfather

    Let’s face it. Whatever they do now will likely be better than other of the sequels anyway. H5-Resurrection sucked. H20 was just okay. H5 turned Haddonfield into farm country and had MM killing with farm tools for crying out loud. RZ’s take, while not great, was better than those sequels and brought MM back to being somewhat scary. I could have done without the back story and white trash aspect though. I hated his Laurie. I couldn’t take her constant crying and baby gibberish. I was hoping MM knocked her off unlike the original Laurie. Just give me a scary MM with an original looking mask and I’m cool.

    • SPN-86

      H20 beats the living crap out of 4 and especially godawful 2.

      It’s the only other actual great film in the entire series..

  • Matty Ice 2016

    I approve of this. I did enjoy H2 when I was a kid back in 1981. But now not so much. It was sloppy and the brother sister story,no thanks. The actor playing ” The Shape” was noticeably shorter and moved differently, bring back Nick Castle to play the role please!!!!!! This timeline will also help with explaining away Myers being burned to death. I just hope they keep Curtis in that outfit. Even after all of these years on her, I still would!!!!!

    • Darren Hood

      Nick had fluidity in his motion, he walked like a glide, Dick on the other hand, decided his shape would walk stiff and zombie like, making him more inhuman, but I feel it just ruined the pacing and tension of the chase sequences and goodness scenes went on longer than they should have.

      • Matty Ice 2016

        Exactly!!!! This guy gets it !! That would get me in the theater if they did the incredible and offer him the role. Nerdo Heaven Alert !

      • John Connor

        After getting shot six times and falling off a balcony, he moved a little different.

        I loved his style more in the second film.

    • MrTorrance

      Nick is 70.

  • Twain Speaks-Edwards

    In all honesty, I loved part 2, its the best sequel in the original series but it is the movie that messed up Michael mystique so for storyline purposes Im ok with it being ignored because the whole blood related shit did mess up alot of things and it made Michael less scary in the process as the movies went on. Michael just being some fucked up in the head guy just randomly killing people is alot scarier than him being cursed by some cult and forced to eliminate his bloodline, it really limits him and the movies……BUT him just being some fucked up in the head guy killing random people can only work for about 2 movies…..maybe a 3rd before it gets boring so something has to give, is this going to be the last Halloween movie? I dont want a “passing the torch” thing happening because Michael is the star of the series, this was proven by Halloween 3 so I dont want him to give someone else his “evil” just so he could die and the series can continue without him, Im ok with this being the last movie if this is done right, either Michael gets killed or Michael “finally” kills Laurie again for the 2nd time and just walks off in the shadows with his iconic music playing in the background, thats the only way.

    But if Micheal isnt immortal or supernatural then how are you going to explain him doing all his killings in the new film when hes in his 60’s, not saying that he cant be healthy and in shape (saw what I did there), but considering that hes a serial killer on the loose for the last 40 years, he cant buy a gym membership at Planet Fitness or get money to support a vegan lifestyle, so it seems like hes going to be somewhat supernatural or atleast meta human…..which he displayed in the original film, Im excited for this film, the original Michael is back and hopefully the original suspense, musical score (updated a little) and atmosphere from the original is coming back as well, im just hoping for this to be as grand as H20.

    • John Connor

      The original Michael was back in all the sequels (seven of them).

    • Saturn

      Well we’re assuming that it is Michael.
      Possibly the twist could be a copycat killer.
      I hope not though.

  • Weresmurf

    Part 4 ignored 3. Part 7 ignored 4 – 6. Part 8 ignored god knows what.

    Who cares, just make a good movie, go for it.

    • John Connor

      Nope, only ignorant “fans” ignored the connections.

    • Saturn

      Part 8 ignored those who said the script was shite.

      • Weresmurf

        Part 8 had a script?????

        • Saturn

          Yes.

          Interior –
          Busta Rhymes flows gracefully towards “the shape”, eventually coming to a stand-still in the crane position.
          He smiles and says “Mr Miyagi told me to tell you he’ll see you in hell – bitch” before launching into a full scale ninja attack.

          The shape falls to his knees sobbing uncontrollably as he realises it’s over.
          His white privilege is no more – in this case, a black life mattered.
          There could only be one person who could save him – Rob Zombie…..

          • Weresmurf

            Rob did well with part 1…

            Unfortunately… then came part 2…

          • Saturn

            I concur.

  • DukeStKing

    To hell with it. Just combine Halloween, Halloween 3, and Kevin Bacon’s The Following. Treat Halloween as an actual event that happened years ago, and people are now purchasing those Don Post masks around the country, attempting to recreate the same murders they saw in the original all those years ago. At first, people watching the news will think it’s a hoax ala War of the Worlds radio broadcast, until they realize it’s happening al over the states.

    • Dark Grin

      I really like this idea.

      • DukeStKing

        Thanks man!

  • Bannedscorpionape:(

    Even though part 2 is not as good as part 1, part 2 is still great and it feels like a continuation of part 1. Why erase it? Everyone knows theyre brother and sister. Its iconic at this point. I know he was burned to death in part 2 but who cares. Bring him back without a scratch on him. He is unstoppable and cant be explained. I dont like this idea cause H2 was awesome and felt like H1. You can watch those films back to back.

    • Nicolas Caiveau

      I absolutely agree. H1 and 2 are one single movie for me. To ignore the half of it is disrespectful.

    • drew

      So it’s okay to forget that he was burned to death and shot in both eyes but god forbid we forget that they are brother and sister. lol

      • Nicolas Caiveau

        It’s not forgotten. You’re just supposed to accept that he’s supernatural. So he healed.

  • Jim Stafford

    Awesome idea – i love this. Doesn’t remove the others from continuity, just offers an alternate possibility – so many franchises could consider this.

  • Christian

    It’s those damn evil leaves from the trees in Fall. They gather and regenerate into a physical being called Michael!

  • The Godfather

    I’ve been busting my head trying to figure how they get around the fact that Michael’s aged (61 now), Laurie as well. And how do they ignore part II? Do they somewhat bounce around the timeline? If not, what the heck has been going on in those 40 years? Carpenter did use the term “alternative reality”. Is the movie taking place in the 70’s as was previously assumed or is it really 40 years later? It’d better be one hell of an explanation. “Lucy, you’ve got some splaning to do!” Also, have you ever seen a movie a few weeks out from filming that hasn’t even announced a cast? I hope they’re just playing things close to the vest.

    • King Jordyn

      I agree, there hasn’t been any casting besides 1 definite person (Jamie Lee) and 1 maybe (Judy Greer). But they did say filming wont take place till the end of October/Beginning of November so I guess more will coming within the next two weeks.

    • Evil doesn’t age. Simple as that.

      • Necro

        Thank You!

      • That would be great if he still maintained his supernatural “evil” essence from the original film, but Danny McBride already stated on at least two occasions that the new film will retcon him as being a normal human being… Which is a bit of a problem when it comes to continuity and characterisation.

    • JeffMc2000

      Stephen Lang did pretty well as an over-60 serial killer in Don’t Breath, and he couldn’t even see!

  • drew

    Remember, John Carpenter always hated the idea that they were brother and sister. He wrote that drinking one night just to finish the story he was required to write. He never wanted to do a sequel. I love H2 as much as the next guy but since Carpenter is involved again, this isn’t that surprising.

    • John Connor

      So he never wanted to do a sequel?
      So to exemplify that want, he’s making another sequel?

      I’m pretty sure he just likes money and he’ll say anything the majority wants to hear so they’ll give him (the movie) money.

      • oh_riginal

        Originally he wanted the Halloween franchise to be a new story with each entry, and ended up having to make another Michael Myers story. THAT’S why Halloween 3 has nothing to do with the other movies. When people got mad that Myers didn’t show up in 3, they went back to him and that was that.

        • John Connor

          I know.
          So why are they doing another Michael Myers sequel and pretending like the existing sequels don’t exist ?
          They put down the sequels for being sequels and expanding the story.
          And yet they’re making a sequel which sounds just like the premise of some of those existing sequels.

          The whole thing reeks of arrogant disrespect to the whole series.
          They clearly don’t like the series so why are they bothering with a sequel?

          • Stan

            Money. The only reason why their doing it

  • King Jordyn

    This is going to be weird anyway considering they arent filming in the same location as the original from what I read. Hope they really can pull this off.

  • Not sure what the big deal is that Michael is related to Laurie. He has to be related to someone…

    • Darnell

      Yeah..I never understood protest about them being related. It’s not that them being related harmed the franchise. The franchise just made terrible films.

      Also we got Michael with zero motivations in Resurrection. Laurie was killed off in the first ten minutes. The rest of the film was Michael killing people pointlessly. It sucked.

      The original Halloween is amazing but everyone who watches that film now knows his motivation. He might not have had any real motivation in the first film but because of the structure of H2 it’s forever changed the franchise.

      The only way to make them not related is to start over completely. The first film is way too linked to the second film for this new angle to work.

      I think they are setting themselves up for failure.

  • Halloween_Vic

    AS excited as I am and finally happy to see it’s finally happening, I am a bit confused. I really was hoping for a brand new film to start fresh and take on a new story, I’m beyond excited to see the queen of horror herself Jamie Lee Curtis return as laurie I mean duhhhh! But I just don’t like the fact that H2 and H20 will be ignored. I feel as if it will confuse the general public and seems a bit messy. But to say the least I’m pumped being that this is my favorite franchise ever and to see The king of Halloween return to the big screen is one hell of a treat. But wait so does that mean Michael and Laurie are no longer related?

    • BreeBennett

      They are no longer related in this alternate reality. And I agree with everything you said.

      • Halloween_Vic

        Oh Man I wonder how it will play out, I’m so used to the brother vs sister vibe it’s what kind of made Michael and Laurie’s encounters special. I’m just so happy a new Halloween film is coming out!! I just really want this to be good and to not flop!

        • BreeBennett

          I also want this to be good, but erasing H2 is a big mistake. Parts 1 and 2 feel like just one movie and they are erasing half of it. I also wanted a new fresh start with new characters and stuff. It’s amazing JLC is back, but this way they are limited to just one story. And will be hard to continue it after this movie.

          • Halloween_Vic

            Yea if there going back to the basics of the original story they should continue after H2 because they do feel like one movie together and being H2 takes place the same night they should pick it up after. I’m just confused how this will turn out but so excitedddddd because I get to have Michael Myers and the original Laurie Strode back on screen together.

          • BreeBennett

            And we are watching this battle in the big screen for the first time!!

    • Andy Williamson

      Works ok with comic book movies. Worked great with Evil Dead reboot. It should be fine.

    • Keyhonna Mink

      you pic is the coolest

      • Halloween_Vic

        Thanks man!

  • Abz Productions

    but Michael Myers was a supernatural being, so he could have survived that explosion in some way. Anyway, i think its for the best that they are ignoring it as it was supposed to end at part II anyway.

    • Lard

      No he wasn’t, that was never implied- like at all.

  • Jeff

    I ignore all movies in the franchise where Michael’s mask is notably different than it was in 1978. Makes it so much easier.

    • Adam Clifton

      Well, his mask melted in Halloween 2 so he HAD to get a new one

  • Kristoffer Groves

    Meh

  • sliceanddice

    would be so cool if they referred to him as the shape in the next movie.

  • BreeBennett

    Of course, just forget everything we know in the past 40 years and also forget Laurie is Michael’s sister. It’s gonna be so confusing for the general public and maddenig for the fans.

    • Adam Clifton

      Exactly! If only we had those Men In Black mind-wipe devices, we can use that on ourselves to watch this movie with surprise and innocence

      • BreeBennett

        That would be great LOL

    • Michael51202800

      Is it going to take place at Haddenfield Retirement Home?

  • SPN-86

    Incredible H20 being pointlessly retconned is the only tragic loss here.

    Halloween 2 was a terrible sequel and it makes perfect sense to get rid of it since he was burned to death with both of his eyes shot out by the end.

    Just hoping for a decent Halloween movie at this point, it will have been literally 20 years since the last great film by the time this new one releases.

    • Michael51202800

      Carpenter destroyed part 2! There are 3 versions of the original. Rick’s version is not the TV version. There are many more scenes cut out due to John Carpenter. More kills, and explains, the car parked behind ambulance, press at the clinic, reporter murdered, Lauries drunk mother and pissed father, Michael flipping out on a clown mask, how the power came back on and then off again. The nurse complaining about the old man patient, and the shot of addreline that woke Laurie up.

      • Michael51202800

        Also read the credits for my proof.

  • Anthony

    Perfectly fine with this. When I heard Green had a “back to basics approach” to Halloween, I was hoping they’d ditch the whole sister angle. Never made sense for the character.

    • Michael51202800

      Too late for that. Halloween 1 was remastered with the extra scene of Michael having two sisters. The Tv version brought that to life.

      • Anthony

        Han shot first. I don’t care about crappy scenes shot for the TV edit that are edited onto some home releases.

        • Michael51202800

          I respect that Halloween 2018 will work for you, but Halloween 2 is my favorite. To hear your favorite movie never existed, just pisses me off! I just hate that if he was a genius, why didn’t he take control before part II, IV, VII, or Zombie. Halloween 1 is amazing, and Jamie Lee Curtis would back you up too, but part II was my childhood.

  • This is very exciting news.

  • Lord Elric

    Wait…wasn’t that pretty much the plot of HALLOWEEN H20?

    Hmmm.

    • Michael51202800

      That’s what I said

  • Darnell

    This movie is going to be shit like all the other sequels.

    #1 Michael not being supernatural is going to suck. I don’t understand the “taking him back to his roots where he can be hurt”…

    When the fuck could he be hurt in the first movie? The most iconic scene of the first film is when Laurie is sitting and have sent the kids to get help and Michael rise up after having been stabbed in the chest. It was so terrifying because it was like “what is going to stop this guy”.. He then gets shot six times and gets up and vanished.

    The unexplained indestructible nature of him is one of the things that made him scary. It’s one of his most defining features. If I wanted to watch a normal human killer I would watch Seven.

    #2. Changing Michael and Laurie being siblings is a huge mistake. It’s way too apart of the legacy of the franchise. Also what the fuck is the point of Jamie Lee Curtis being in the movie if she isn’t his sister? If Michael is coming after her again what is the point of the change? Seems like change for the sake of.

    #3. Ignoring the second film is also a mistake. The first two movies feel like one long film and I normally watch them together. It will be confusing for most and cause the film to fail.

    #4. They should have just started over. I love the Laurie character but bringing her back is a mistake. It seems like they are doing a one off film. They don’t plan to do more films it seems. Starting over could have allowed us to get more films and a fresh start. It’s looking like we won’t get that.

    • oh_riginal

      He was never said to be her brother in the first movie. At all. If no sequel was ever made, we’d never know if they were meant to be related or not. The way the original movie plays out, she comes off as one of three girls he chooses to target for the rest of the movie. From part 2 onward, and especially in H20, we’ve been beaten over the head with them being brother and sister for so long that we keep it in the back of our mind when watching the first movie, forgetting that it was added later.

      I get what you’re saying about him being hurt though. Though technically he DID get hurt, as when he was stabbed in the eye and he pulled his mask off, his eye was clearly injured. In fact, people often forget that he takes off his mask for a brief moment in the first movie.

      • Michael51202800

        They reedited the sister angle in the TV version…. When Halloween 2 was shooting, they also shot the Made for TV version. They added the extra sister in the background.

        • Michael51202800

          Sorry for Halloween 1

        • oh_riginal

          So yeah, he was never her brother in the original movie as it was filmed and released in theaters. My point still stands.

          • Michael51202800

            Oh ya you are 100% right! The tombstone for Judith would have been for Laurie. I’m not arguing that point at all. I’m just pissed that people say that Halloween 1, would still be big today! It is not true! Halloween 2 finished the story, and made Michael an icon. Halloween III made him even bigger! His absence made us want more!!! I just hate when people say all the other Halloweens suck! Jamie Lee Curtis stated that Laurie didn’t need to be related to Michael in an interview too! It’s just to late. Let’s go back and change the Darth Vader and Luke story in Star Wars. Too many years, and too many timeline changes…..

            Thank you for talking and not arguing!

          • oh_riginal

            The original was a huge hit with or without the sequel. I’m pretty sure that if no sequels were ever made, we’d still be talking about that movie anyway. It’s a classic horror film, a classic John Carpenter film, and just a classic FILM all around. It wasn’t the first slasher film, but it was the one that spawned a thousand imitations like Friday the 13th and the like.

            I’ve said many times before that I’m not against the retcon, but only because this franchise has already started over once before with H20 erasing the other sequels after part 2.

            It makes it a choose-your-path franchise, and I find that fun in a way. Every Halloween holiday you can marathon a different continuity and make it fresh again each year!

          • Michael51202800

            I’m a Halloween 2 guy! So it’s like my heart was ripped out! The fact that box sets for years would never include it, and tv would play all sequels except 2. It would be parts 1, 3-10. I even have Dick Warlock tattooed on my arm as Michael myers.

    • Joshua Martyniouk

      Remember the last time they tried to start over?
      Yeah we got the Rob Zombie films!

      • Tan Shearer

        The problem was giving the job to Rob Zombie.

    • Michael51202800

      That’s why Carpenter needs to stay far away from this project! Just add fucking Jar Jar Binks to this!

      • Darnell

        I don’t mind him being involved I mean he did create this perfect horror film that every other slasher since has borrowed from. I just don’t think you need to destroy everything that many of the the fan base know and love about the franchise.

        I just strongly believe we are way to deep into the lot of this franchise to change the defining feature of this franchise and that is the sister/brother angle of the franchise.

        What made H20 so special was not that Laurie was facing off against some random guy. She had to face off against her brother. The impact of the beheading at the end was because she killed her brother.

        The sibling relationship is what makes Halloween so different than the”wrong place, wrong time” killfess in slashers like Friday The 13th, Hatchet, and See No Evil.

  • Baxter

    Can we at least have a scene of one of the Halloween sequels playing on a TV, the way the original was playing during Halloween III. Explain all those sequels as movies. Just movies.

  • jlenoconel

    Feel like it’s a bad idea to discard the second movie too. Everyone knows Laurie is Michael’s sister. Why change that now?

    • Tan Shearer

      Plus hasn’t this franchise got enough alternate timelines already?
      H1 + H2 + H4 + H5 + H6
      H3
      H1 + H2 + H20 + HR
      H1 remake + H2 remake
      Now H1 + H2017

      • Michael51202800

        Dude you totally nailed it!

    • Michael51202800

      I KNOW!!!!!! Part II is the only bridge I will go with! No o e cares about a babysitter killer in 2017! We know Jamie Lee Curtis’s daughter will be babysitting! That’s why we are going to lose Michael forever! Michael has to be 80 years old by now. He’ll be in his wheel chair if he’s mortal.

      • Eric Murphy

        Actually Michael would be 61. Because that’s how math works. 21 + 40 = 61. But yeah, sure, 80 years old, let’s go with that.

        • Michael51202800

          Oh I know, actually I though 62. I just full of doom and gloom! Hallolee Curtis part 2 is my favorite, so I am so negative. If it picked up after part 2, then I’d be defending him even if he was 100 years old!!!!!!

  • John Connor

    Please let this be in the same reality as Silver Shamrock.

    • biff

      There is that connection in the second movie, where Loomis brings up Samhain, when the gate to the Otherworld opens — something any descendant of Conal Cochran would be well aware of ;D

      • John Connor

        I know.
        The Curse Of Michael Myers emphasizes that possible connection.

        But since this new film supposedly erases all sequels, you can run with the interpretation that Season Of The Witch takes place in “reality” where John Carpenter made a film based on real-life events that happened in 1978. Hollywood ran with that movie and disrespectfully made a slasher movie franchise out of it.

        So this new film would be the real life continuation of that situation.

        It really sucks though because they could have easily had Laurie survive that fall in Resurrection and simply continue from there and do pretty much whatever they were going to do in this film.

        • biff

          Oh yeah — forgot that Halloween was simply a movie in III. Ouch. Guess that was a then-attempt by Carpenter and Hill to distance themselves from the Michael Myers story.

          • John Connor

            Probably trying to make it seem scarier by appearing to take place in our world/reality.

        • Michael51202800

          It’s that stupid rule that Mustapha made! Michael can’t die! That’s why Jamie Lee had to come back to do part 8. She was a slave to 8. They could have made 8, without Jamie Lee, and make it a prequel before H20!

          • John Connor

            Is that rule still in play?
            Who owns Halloween now?

          • Michael51202800

            Sorry I don’t know, but I’m sure the rule is still in place. I don’t think the movie company would agree to just one Halloween movie.

    • Michael51202800

      Imagine if he lied, and did a sequel to III.

  • Pan

    Nice but a 3rd Escape From movie with Snake would make me happier.

    • biff

      I second that — Escape From Earth would’ve made a much better flick than Lockout

  • Stan

    I’m just gonna ignore the whole fuckin franchise and pretend they never existed to begin with just like the terminator movies. There all bad dreams

    • Tan Shearer

      This film is clearly thinking too highly of itself. It’s probably going to suck anyway let’s be honest. Only the first 4 and H20 are any good.

      • Stan

        They’re just ruining these franchise’s for me. I’m to the point where I may start throwing movies out of my library because of it. Starting with the terminator movies and Halloween. Their taking classics and ripping them apart and shoving garbage in between the pages. Far as I’m concerned these movie franchise’s are dead and are just a bad dream.

        • Stan

          No one knows how to write a decent sequel or follow up anymore. Just throw words on a page whether it makes any sense at all and wait for the masses to devour it up.

        • Michael51202800

          I want to take Carpenter and dip his head in the hot tub for ruining our last chance on getting Michael back!!!!

          • Stan

            Hollywood is again out to ruin classic movies. Whore them out and fuck them up beyond repair. My message to you . I think their doing it to piss us now. Just stop buying tickets.

      • Michael51202800

        Totally agree Michael Myers in a Wheelchair is not scary!

    • Michael51202800

      Ya, because Carpenter had sand in his vagina all these years! I hope it fails! Don’t erase the Michael we love! Pick it up after part 2. Make a 3!

      • Stan

        H20 was supposed to be the part 3.

  • Joshua Martyniouk

    This seems like an intresting idea!
    Hope it pays off and this film is a great return to the Halloween franchise!
    Should of been after Halloween 3 if you ask me since Jamie Lee Curtis is older!

  • biff

    The major loss here will be the late, great Donald Pleasence as Loomis. He was always my fave part of the movies (and made the latter sequels tolerable), making everything creepily mythic.

  • Michael51202800

    You can’t keep on erasing the timeline!s Also the generation that you are catering to are younger and find a Halloween 1-3 boring! (They think zombie made part 1!) Part 4-Zombie are the only sequel that they know of. Just look online, the highest a teen gave it was a 5 out of a scale 1-10. This is the ADHD generation! Erasing 2 is the worst thing that can be done! I’m sure Laurie Strode’s daughter will be babysitting. Almost sounds like a movie called H20 to me! We know Michael’s can never die, because it’s written in as a rule, or there wouldn’t have been a part 8. I like unstoppable Michael Myers, not serial killer Michael Myers. It’s just like George Lucas doing the Star Wars prequel. Maybe they will put Jar Jar binks in this movie too! Don’t insult the fans! Michael being mortal sucks! Laurie makes no sense to the story if she is not related. Pick it up from part 2! Make it a part 3. Stop screwing with the fans that kept Michael alive! Right to DVD! Where was Carpenter 10-20 years ago? Instead of him crying how everyone ruined his movie, why didn’t he take the project on years ago? Once again the Michael Myer’s fans get screwed! There is no rule that Micahel can’t kill anyone, but family!

  • Michael51202800

    Why not erase all the Friday the 13th’s, because Sean Cunningham said there never was a Jason. Jason died! Alice is now alive and Crazy Ralph is trying to kill her!!!!

  • Michael51202800

    Michael in a Wheelchair!

  • Michael51202800

    This Halloween takes place in the Haddenfield Retirement home!

  • Eric Murphy

    Probably the first time I’m actually worried about this movie. I’ve been optimistic ever since John Carpenter was part of the project, and Jamie was coming back, and of course, under the assumption that this was a sequel to the second film. Of all things to take issue with, Laurie being revealed as Michael’s sister? Really? What other reason would he have to stalk her? Not to mention there is a scene in the first movie of that office Michael tore apart and wrote “sister” all over. Them being siblings is one of the most important aspects of their characters and so to remove that seems really strange to me. I’m still going to try being as hopeful as I can, but I’m starting to get a little hesitant.

More in Movies