Every Michael Meyers Halloween Movie Ranked!

 

Ranking of the Halloween Franchise from Worst to Best!

(WARNING SPOILERS AHEAD FOR ALL 12 FILMS!)

 

As time draws closer to the holidays, horror fans will be presented another entry in the bloody slasher series of the William Shatner masked killer Michael Myers, opening in theaters and streaming on Peacock, October 14th. David Gordon Green’s upcoming entry “Halloween Ends'' is the 13th installment in the long running franchise and will be his 3rd entry overall after the 2018 and 2021’s entries. The Halloween franchise has one of the biggest cult followings in the horror genre, for many years fans have wanted a proper ending to this ongoing series and hopefully Ends can finally bring the closure that fans have been waiting for. Every installment after the first has divided the fanbase, but overall the majority of fans can agree we’ve been eagerly hopeful for this series to get a proper finale. Every attempt at a closing chapter that we ever got close to in past installments only led to another halfwitted decision to keep making more movies that never came or did and that nobody asked for. Now on the bright side of the horizon, this is also a lot of people's favorite time of the year (including myself), it's the best time to throw costume parties, carve or paint pumpkins, cuddle up in a blanket and watch scary movies. Nothing truly beats the coziness of the Fall, the beginning of Fall is a sincere blessing of what's to come for the rest of the year. But before we get ahead and look at what's ahead for the rest of the year, let's sit back and appreciate the rest of the month as we take a look into the iconic franchise that is Halloween, created by one of the masters of horror John Carpenter and that has made an everlasting impact for four decades. Let’s dissect this series' greatest strengths and weaknesses and rank them from Worst to Best. 

#12. Halloween: Resurrection (2002)

Yes this movie exists, the most unforgivable entry in the entire series. This is the bottom of the barrel, this is how far down anyone can go when it comes to the Halloween movies, which really isn’t even remotely close to being a Halloween movie. Filled with the most unlikeable characters in any horror picture, every character is essentially a peeping tom and a molester of women. Right from the beginning the film decides to dissent itself from any attraction that brought fans to this series in the first place and turn it into dumpster fire. This came out in 2002, so this definitely comes off as those late 90’s early 2000’s MTV like horror movies with rappers and models at its center, riddled with techo themed technology horror since they believed they were being so experimental with movies and computers (the days before youtube and social media). 

The whole premise is very soulless and careless, all these unlikeable characters are doing a very substandard based reality show exploring the childhood house of Michael Myers and think that by doing this it will make them rich with they’re according to the character of Busta Rhymes “1,000 people watching”, anybody who has a youtube account can tell you that’s a whole lot of nothing that will amount to. Every chance a guy has in this movie with a camera they will constantly shove it down a girl's blouse touching them aggressively and even the female characters do nothing, just walk around and talk like imbeciles (this was also produced by Harvey Weinstein so hopefully that explains enough). 

The entire film just screams bad ideas, even when this first came out nobody found it to be a worthy entry or even average in the slightest. The film's previous installment (H20) was met with a lukewarm response at the time, but has since developed a cult following shortly after and many felt that a sequel was unnecessary as the film brought closure to the character of Laurie Strode, instead Resurrection decided to “retire” her character. Jamie Lee Curits was finished portraying Laurie at the time, but then the studios decided to milk it out even further now that she was out of the picture. It just really makes you wonder if there was anybody on set asking or telling the cast and crew that these are horrendous decisions and say maybe we don’t go forward with all this? But hey, it was a different time back then and thankfully we’ve moven past these unfathomable choices in film. The series has faced some questionable decision making throughout its course, but this film takes the crown. 

#11. Halloween 2 (2009) 

Rob Zombie definitely has his fan base, in music and in movies. However his style, writing, and treatment of characters has gained a tremendous amount of backlash throughout his career. One can say this follow-up to his 2007 remake is not entirely his fault (after a huge dispute with the Weinstein company) and the possibility that there really is a good movie buried deep beneath the surface in this troubled production. In my eyes that’s not the case, while I’m aware that the production and finale outing of the film didn’t turn out the way he intended, this film was doomed from the start. While there are enjoyers who found Zombie’s so-called “Reimaging” a fresh take from the start back in 2007, I found it to be a bleak and heartless product, as for this follow up somehow it's even more monotonous. 

Once again we follow this film's futile version of Laurie Strode (Scout Taylor-Compton) as she suffers PTSD from the previous events of the first. While there is an attempt to make Laurie more of a troubled victim after traumatic events here the whole thing just turns out pathetic and makes Laurie an unlikable protagonist to follow. Everybody deals with stress and trauma in their own way, but it’s really hard to get behind her when she's given so much support from the community and her close friends when all she wants to do is sit around, scream, and curse at everybody that wants to help her and just makes her feel too easy for Michael to get to in the end. When Laurie lashes out at her best friend Annie for trying to be a supportive friend it just makes us feel detached from her. Annie takes her into her own home after the loss of her foster parents and Laurie just becomes an ungrateful brat. Annie suffered an even more brutal experience with permanent deeper gashes/scars representing what happened that Halloween night. She only tries to say something nice, be supportive, and encouraging towards her. Yet Laurie constantly goes off on her throughout the film's runtime. Even if someone said something to me that wasn’t helping but they were truly trying and they went through such a similar experience to the one I went through I would just be thankful. Laurie can just look at Annie’s face to see what she has to live with everyday. They’re trauma was literally intertwined and Laurie still couldn’t see that. Which makes this out to be one of the most empty swallowed entries in this series. In case any longtime fans didn’t know it is Danielle Harris who portrayed Annie in both this and Zombie’s first film. Harris also portrayed the daughter of Laurie, Jamie from Halloween 4-5, at least bringing her back to this series. It does leave a sense of familiarity and comfort for longtime fans and doing so there’s one thing to commend Zombie for doing. 

Aside from only making more questionable decisions on characters such as turning fan favorite Dr. Loomis into an egomaniac driven by only money, fame, and greed he also decides to introduce an even deeper supernatural aspect to the canon by having Michael experience voices/visions of white horses and his dead mother. This attempt to make a psychic connection between Laurie and Michael just conveys the idea of Zombie repeating the series' past mistakes, with the psychic connection between Jamie and Michael in what has been later titled “The Thorn Trilogy”, all controlled by a druid-like cult. Zombie has stated that he meant no deeper intent with this plotline rather than just for visual style. Yet fans have tried to analyze the meaning behind it all since it was never shown or brought up in Zombie’s first film, but many have settled on the idea that it was just to show Michael’s innocence from when he was a child and just to give more reasoning for Laurie losing her marbles. Could’ve been an interesting concept and execution, but in the end it all just came off as more of a Friday the 13th film than a Halloween film. 

#10. Halloween (2007)

Reimagings, requels, retellings, of any reiteration I can get behind most of the time. Whenever people hear that a favorite film of theirs is getting remade or retooled, the first thing that usually is intended to happen is for fans/audiences to become outraged at the sound of it or ramble out to the internet on how their feeling towards it. In this case for Rob Zombie’s Halloween, it most certainly was given the same treatment when it was initially announced. When a remake is being handled two things must occur when first helming it, number 1 make your own interpretation and number 2 showcase why the film needs to be explored once again, this time through a different lens. Zombie’s attempted approach was a psychological twist inside the mind of Michael Myers rather than having him be evil personified as he was depicted in the original. Instead Zombie tries to give insight on why he became the way he was. Most fans can agree that John Carpenter’s 1978 classic is the superior film, but this one for sure has its own little following, some applauded the changes and updates that believe Zombie’s take to stand on its own feet. Others found the film gratuitously pointless and just another cash grab since other iconic horror franchises like Friday the 13th and Nightmare on Elm Street received remakes around the same time as this. The question still remains: did Halloween need to be remade in the first place?

After many attempts at sequels, a requel, and even an anthology film with Michael Myers’s absence, change was definitely coming whether we wanted it or not. With how iconic the character of Michael Myers had become and whether that was or wasn’t Carpenter’s intent, the icon wasn’t going anywhere anytime soon. I’m certain that anyone who is a fan of horror not only likes these kinds of movies, but can appreciate a worldwide variety of different horror, especially ones that take a deep dive into the dark side of the human psyche. Some of the best of all time such as Psycho, The Shining, Carrie have set great examples on how tournament can lead to one lashing out and discovering things about themselves they didn’t know they had in them in the first place. For somebody like Rob Zombie who usually tackles exploitation horror that is intended to be exploitative and extremely unpleasant this could all lead to new and interesting ways to reveal a lot of the uncanniness of Myers’s backstory. Instead audiences are treated to 40 minutes of backstory all to showcases Michael growing up in a redneck family screaming over pointless fights, torturing animals as a hobby, being bullied by kids who are just as bad as him, and having him and his alocholic stepfather take sexual deviance toward their sister/step daughter. One can argue this could make anyone lose their mind or turn out like a maniac from years to come, yet the film portrays everybody as irredeemable amateurs to the point where any slim chance of sympathy we may have for Michael or anybody for that matter is thrown out the window in the first few minutes. Exploring Michael’s backstory isn’t the issue here, it's the fact that it's done so poorly that it just comes off as a half baked attempt at a tragic upbringing filled with unnecessary character choices.

 Many shun this movie for wiping away the mystery of what made Michael the way he is in the original film, while I do agree that’s one of the intriguing aspects of the first film, the reason it works so well is because of the minimal backstory that was even given in the first place. The first person point of view tracking shot of Myers lets us experience Michael through his eyes while he butchers his sister’s body, as the great Roger Ebert has stated “ It’s a visceral experience—we aren't seeing the movie, we're having it happen to us. It's frightening. Maybe you don't like movies that are really scary: Then don't see this one." That’s the most honest statement that can be said about the original, the fact that Michael looked like a doe-eyed innocent child living in a middle class suburban household with parents who actually looked concerned for his well being is all the more tension filled. To me those small amounts of details made the film more nerve racking in all the best ways. As for this film sadly the same can’t be said, even when Zombie tries to honor the main protagonists Laurie and Dr. Loomis (before being completely demolished in 2) the film just doesn’t have the heart and charm of the first because it’s really difficult to get invested in anybody else after the backstory. Once Michael is fully grown the film just becomes a shot-for-shot remake, almost in the same as Gus Van Sant's remake of Psycho from 1998. The film is better shot than Zombie’s second run by shooting everything in 35mm giving the film the wider look that Halloween is known for. Don’t really understand why he chose not to keep it that way in his second movie, instead shooting everything in 16mm and decided to film it mostly handheld, but at least this film looks better from a technical standpoint than the second remake. So again, what was the point of this remake?

#9. Halloween 5: The Revenge of Michael Myers (1989)

Halloween 4 solely existed to bring Michael Myers back into this franchise since his departure in Halloween 3: Season of the Witch, Halloween 5 solely exists to keep making more movies. After Halloween 4’s success at bringing Michael back from the dead in a fun way, at least for younger audiences, and all without John Carpenter or Jamie Lee Curtis, Halloween 5 came out a year later to tarnish all that. This was the beginning of a now very familiar trend with this series. There really isn’t much of a reason for Halloween 5 to exist rather than the fact that every slasher franchise in this time period was booming with cash and Hollywood just kept making them no matter the quality. While Halloween 5 may not be the worst in the lore, it’s easily one of the most dull and boring installments. 

The last movie ended with a puzzling cliffhanger, as sweet little Jamie Lloyd (Danielle Harris) had been possessed by the evil spirit of Michael Myers since her Uncle Michael was presumed dead. This film jumps ahead one year after 4, wipes away all of that was left hanging by revealing that Jamie was just being precocious when stabbing her foster mother and is now a mute being treated in a mental hospital. While being treated there Jamie starts to have strange visions of Michael and help Dr. Loomis as he tracks down to put a stop to the masked killer and prevent him from slaughtering useless teenagers. The filmmakers and studio really decided to not give any effort with the story this time around, this installment is one of the most plotless films in a big budget franchise to ever exist. There’s no stakes, driving force, or even a sense of urgency throughout the runtime. The film also makes a strange choice of killing off the previous protagonist Rachel (Ellie Cornell) in the first 20 minutes. Rachel had been Jamie’s older foster sister and protector in the last movie, and a convincing enough stand-in for the absence of Jamie Lee Curtis. As an adult, it’s easier to understand these franchises need new surprises, yet the film fails to create an interesting protagonist to replace Rachel, it instead settles for the paper-thin Tina (Wendy Kaplan) to kind of just be there. Sadly the great Donald Pleasence turns in his weakest performance as Dr. Looms, but he can only give what this purposeless script is expected from him to give. This one really turns Loomis into the biggest creep and awkward man by having him constantly yell and close in on Jamie throughout the majority of the film as he tries to get information out of her. He really goes full wacko in front of nurses and other children that makes him come off completely senile. Anybody that saw an old man with a burnt face close-in on a small child while screaming at her I think would make anyone feel uncomfortable. Definitely wouldn't make for a compelling scene in a horror picture either since it doesn’t move this plotless film along anyways. 

This is probably the weakest mask to be donned by Michael as well, I wonder why after Halloween 2 it's as if they forgot how to make Michael look scary. The mask’s worked so well in the first two because of how real they looked as if it were his actual face, it felt as if it were actual skin. In 4 the mask looks way too polished with his shoulders tucked all the way up to his head, the mask is constantly hanging out of his shirt collars through the whole film as well. Some may shrug this off as no big deal, but it is a big deal since Carpenter has stated multiple times how cheap it was to create the look for Myers for his film, so it shouldn’t be this difficult to get the look of Myers right. This whole entry just came off as one long trailer for Halloween 6, another installment that nobody asked for, but they just kept on and on going anyways. 

#8. Halloween 6: The Curse of Michael Myers (1995)

Certainly everyone is aware at this point after all these years that there are two versions of Halloween 6 that exist, the theatrical cut and the producer’s cut. Many fans have deemed the producer’s cut superior. After many years of speculation of its existence the studios decided to cave in and release a blu ray to it and has had a warmer reception with critics and fans alike, compared to its theatrical run. Ever since it’s release on blu ray both cuts have been compared endlessly, and the producer’s cut definitely has better color grading, a better music score, and an ending that’s still bad, but flows a little bit linear and makes more sense at least. Won’t go into every little difference with both versions since they have been covered to death at this point. So how does the film overall hold up after all these years? Well no surprise, it’s still a jumbled incoherent mess overall. There are Halloween movies that are slightly more inept than Halloween 6. There are also Halloween movies that are visually nastier and more unpleasant than Halloween 6. Yet there isn’t another Halloween movie as idiodic as Halloween 6. This incompetent mess of slasher clichés and uneeded attempt to explain why Michael Myers is evil is laughably preposterous.

In this film no longer is Myers the embodiment of evil or a lunatic that broke out of an asylum, he’s now part of a ritualistic cult that’s been summoning him to kill throughout his entire life. Halloween 6 is the cinematic equivalent of what not to do with your franchise. Picking up years after Halloween 5’s jail-break cliffhanger, Halloween 6 really bends over backward to explain that Michael Myers is not just a random man who could show up at your house any time and stab you with a knife but instead, be a puppet of an anicent cult of immortality and the urge to murder on Halloween night with astronomy. Yes, you heard that correctly. The film’s treatment of Myers basically has him contractually obligated to only show up here in use of committing an overeduant of unnecessary violence by making him more sadistic for his killings that aren’t as reasonable as past installments.

Halloween 6 also decided unceremoniously to slaughter the new franchise protagonist, Jamie Lloyd, in the first 10 minutes while refusing to bring back Danielle Harris to the role didn’t do this movie any favor with the fans. The film introduces two protagonists to this story Kara Strode (Marianne Hagan), a relative of Laurie and Tommy Doyle (Paul Rudd in his first role), one of the kids Laurie babysat in the original. Donald Pleasence once again returns as Dr. Loomis, only to be giving repetitive speeches and long monologues throughout the runtime, while Kara and Tommy's story are so random because they're both off doing their own thing for a while before they're both eventually brought together by Loomis. Once again this series just forgot how to introduce new compelling characters and how to make Michael Myers scary again. This film is only tolerable for so little because of Donald’s presents, and as great as Paul Rudd is regarded in today’s youth, here he just comes off as Peeping Tom since he spends the whole first act watching his neighbor Kara through his 6ft tall window. On top of all this we have Kara’s son Danny (Devin Gardner) who for no explanation gets voices calling to him to make way towards the cult everytime the camera cuts to him. If that wasn’t enough we are also introduced to an incest baby that Jamie had unwillingly in the beginning in the film with her Uncle, that everybody is trying to get they’re hands on to prevent the cult from from summoning more people as their brainwashed minions. I mean really c’mon, does anybody seriously like any of this? Because the cast and crew over the years have basically disowned this film. Think it's safe to say that Halloween 6 is one of the most absurd movies in the franchise. Even though this cult storyline is reluctant and has now been wiped away from the canon, the fact it still exists goes beyond mind-boggling. 

#7. Halloween 3: Season of the Witch (1982)

There is a tiny bit of admiration to be had with this one. Whether or not you’re a fan of Halloween 3, you’ll agree that it stands out like a sore thumb. When it was decided that the Halloween series going forward should become an anthology series, each new installment becoming a separate halloween-themed adventure without the famous Michael Myers. This all could’ve made for a really interesting idea moving forward, if the movie was actually good from the start. 

Halloween 3 just like some of the other Halloween sequels that are lower regarded, do have some admirers. Some have felt that the film is really underappreciated and looked down upon because of the absence of Michael Myers. While it can seem that way for some and if you're a fan of this one really happy for you, unfortunately can’t say the same. While shifting focus away from Myers is a risk, one should appreciate for at least trying to expand upon the mythology, this new direction the film decided to take is unfortunately very tedious and dreadful. Halloween 3’s protagonist is Dr. Dan Challis (Tom Atkins) who’s career never really comes into a useful scenario here because he constantly needs help from every other character in the film. Besides wanting to get laid, his character has no real motivation for being here at all, and he’s supposed to be the one that’s supposed to put a stop to this evil company. Who we later find out are planning to murder a bunch of kids with microchiped masks, all to perform a whitchcraft sacrifce. The character of Challis is the blueprint of everything that was wrong with poorly written male characters from the 80’s. He spends half the movie inappropriately groping, flirting, and having sex with everyone of his female collueges, all makes him come off way creepier than anything and anybody in any Halloween film ever. Yet this is the movie’s lead hero. 

All the deaths and gore only come off as comical and effortless, it seems most studios felt that every slasher sequel needed to up the gore and death factor. I guess nobody working on the film remembered how impactful the deaths in the first film were because of how subtle it all was, while this is all a pure laughing stock. Makes you wonder why this was even called Halloween 3 in the first place because there is this heavy meta awareness aspect to the film that Halloween exists as a movie in this universe, comes on people’s tv screens to acknowledge the fact that this isn’t even in the same universe, so why couldn’t they simply title this “Season of the witch” instead of the sequel Halloween 3. Such an odd choice and they’re are so many odd choices similar that the film has that going for and just completely wipes away anything else that film tries to convey. The creepy protagonist, the uncomfortable relationships he has with his staff, the over-the-top laughable gore, and that it references Halloween existing as a movie, but it's also a sequel. This is definitely the kinda a movie you would find in the DVD bin of your local Walmart for like $5. Who was this movie really made for?

#6. Halloween (2018) 

2018’s Halloween is probably the one that the majority of fans place in higher standards than all of the other franchises sequel attempts. In this new established and current timeline we have a combination of reboot-and-sequel, in other words “requel” to the 1978 original. Retconning all the plot elements from Halloween 2 (1981) onward including the revelation that Laurie is the sister of Michael Myers. Myers in this film looks fierce and the mask looks menacing once again after nearly 40 years of ridiculous changes. Jamie Lee Curtis’s return to the franchise is a major plus and provides all of the best elements to this installment, her portrayal of Laurie now is more secure and brave than past appearances. The film's decisions to have her more self conscious and over prepared after her traumatic encounter makes her all the more rootful as a character. This film also introduces Laurie's new daughter (Judy Greer) and granddaughter (Andi Matichak) to the saga and presents the relationship dynamic between Laurie and her daughter as very conflicted of each other fairly well, as there’s a lot of baggage between them the film acknowledges. She had a difficult upbringing, by having her mother prepare for the return of the Boogeyman (Myers), these aspects work really within the film. Which is why the rest of it is completely infuriating. 

It’s easy to say that this is the best follow-up we’ve gotten since the original because of everything that was listed off and the fact that the aesthetic of it all actually looks like the money was put into it once again. This is by no means a god-awful film overall, no wear near as bad as Resurrection or the Rob Zombie remakes, it’s just a disappointing film because there are moments of greatness inside here that are completely overshadowed by despicable plot points and some of the most needless characters to any Halloween film. I’m definitely a lot more critical of this one because of how many attempts this franchise has had to restart and it seemed like they had all the right tools for this project and unfortunately it didn’t come together the way I believe it could have. This is more frustrating then it is unsettling, the film really has no atmosphere, John Carpenter always understands atmosphere even in some of his not so great films, as a viewer you always felt like you were dropped in the environment that he was always presenting. In here you never really get the feeling of the actual holiday while watching, even some of the weaker installments actually feel as if you yourself are within the holiday setting. Tonally this version is all over the place, one scene will be drawn to tensional building, the next scene will be diffused from that tension with some random misplaced comedy. And there are unfortunately a handful of scenes like that. As a result it all just feels unfocused, for one it’s trying to pay tribute to the original excessively by some shot-for-shot recreations, (which some work and some don’t) but then it's trying set itself as its own film with some contentious plot points and then at other times a comedy, to the point where characters feel like they're performing improve on an SNL skit. There are just A LOT of characters in this film that feel as if they only exist to run away from Michael Myers and add nothing else to the story, particularly the granddaughter of Laurie. The setup for Laurie is great in the film, but then it feels as if she’s missing throughout most of the runtime and almost feels as if she’s secondary to the plot. The film’s attention is mostly focused on her granddaughter and her high school dance with romantic drama between her and a boy, by having them endlessly discuss getting high, drunk, sex, or to dump expostion to us that were already aware of. This is all happening only to reveal that she will lose her cell phone later on, for when it comes time for Michael to show up and nobody can call her. This all comes off blatantly lazy from a screenwriting perspective in the long run. The entirety of it all felt like a demographic choice by Blumhouse. It’s like they felt as if putting all this focus on these teenagers discussing pointless nonsense was going to appeal to fans even though it's been done a thousand times, and was gonna seem to have some payoff in the long run. Halloween is rated R for god’s sake, who the heck do you need to talk down too in this movie? The original Halloween is no masterpiece in regards to its writing, but that film overall never once wastes your time as a viewer and has everything that’s it’s building up get straight to the point. 

Sadly, the granddaughter and her friends are not the only disposable characters here. Right from the beginning were presented two podcasters or journalists or both I guess, that are so inept. Their purpose is for only two things to occur, to present the exposition dump, by stating the information the majority of the audience already knows about and giving Michael his mask for later on. Nothing else to add, the reasoning for them even having access to that mask in the first place is preposterous. The male podcaster/journalist explains how he has a friend at the attorney general's office that gave him access for his creative content. So your telling us this guy who works for the government decides to go down to the evidence room, pull out a mask that was used in the killing of one of the most famous murders in America all for the sake for his buddy’s podcast? I’m certain anybody who has a podcast or who has friends working in government aren’t allowed evidence from serial killers for their own personal gain. As stated before, their only existence is for exposition/recap of the events from the first film and for Michael to take back his mask, which all could’ve been wiped out and done more efficiently. The film could have really benefited a lot by having these two characters wiped out completely and having the mask already present at the mental hospital where he’s being kept in. Have his psychiatrist (who'll get to in a second) be the one who’s studying/experimenting on the boundaries of evil and see if can learn more about his state of mind, that would’ve made at least a little bit more sense for the mask to be there and easier for Michael to snag. All in which would’ve saved this film a lot more screen time dedicated to Laurie and her preparation for the inevitable return of Michael. It would’ve been able to exit the psychiatrist after the bus crash, but that’s not what happened so let’s discuss what did happen.  

Michael’s psychiatrist (rip-off Dr. Loomis) has got to be one of the most useless characters presented in a horror film. Throughout the runtime I kept asking myself, how the heck is this guy a doctor? Even Laurie goes out and says “you’re the new Loomis” to him in a scene, which was one of the most complete eye-rolling meta moments in a Halloween film, but we all know that’s not the entirety of the case here. This character is the most pointless aspect of the whole movie. For this character's entire existence in the film is to reveal a big plot twist in the later middle act, that lasts for only 3 minutes and is then thrown away. This guy has been a Doctor for forty years and yet he decided one day I’m going to try and kill a cop with my pen knife (which is hilariously dumb) and allow Michael to go on his murders rampage so I can observe him in his natural habitat. The film does give you some hints on how this occurrence was all leading up this unneeded twist. Being the only survivor of the bus crash (probably the one who provoked it), allowing the podcasters to taunt Michael by screaming at him while showing him his mask, and even showing concern for Michael when he’s run over by the lead cop in here (Will Patton).  This character came off creepy even before the twist, because really what was the whole point of this in the first place, rather than just to show the granddaughter getting to her grandmother's house quicker and showing more misplaced comedy of cops guarding Laurie’s house talking about nutrition and sandwiches before decapitation? It’s really hard to believe that after forty years of medical practice this guy was having this evil plan along, so really what was the end goal with this, study evil then go back to work tomorrow? The film is so fluctuating because a twist as big as this is completely forgotten about and the rest of the film just ignores these events. It’s actually quite insane that these scenes were approved. 

Choices like this is what makes this film the most infuriating, because the best scenes in this film are the actual callbacks to the first film in reverse. The granddaughter looking outside her classroom window and seeing her grandmother instead of Michael, callback to when Laurie was looking out her classroom window and saw Michael. Laurie falls off the roof and Michael sees she’s vanished, callback to when Michael fell off the roof and Loomis sees he’s disappeared. And finally Michael becoming the prey and Laurie the predator towards the end of their fight. All really cool scenes, but everything else the film tries to do on its own is underwhelming. Not saying they shouldn't have tried anything new and just have copied everything again, I’m simply stating it’s a shame that the best aspects of this film are the rehash parts and that’s unfortunate and painful to say. This was one of the most anticipated films a Halloween fan could’ve hoped for at the time of its release, the definitive sequel that fans have been waiting for, the one that was gonna slash every horror sequel out of the way and come out on top. Sadly, it did not. 

This is like the fourth attempt at revitalizing the franchise that has been gone for so long and it should’ve been more than just a bunch of baffling choices built upon cliches that were so use to seeing by now, yet they managed to get all these pieces together to make a sequel to one of the best horror pictures ever made then say the rest of the films don’t matter and yet they basically do the same thing again while only shuffling a few things around and have a handful amount of characters that don’t really need to be here. I’m aware there are fans who really enjoy this, truly happy for anyone who gets a kick out of this one, but for a horror sequel that’s a direct continuation of the 1978 classic this should've been better. Also why is this called Halloween? Now we have three movies that exist called Halloween. 

#5. Halloween 4: The Return of Michael Myers (1988)

As its title suggests, the film marks the return of Michael Myers after the studios decided to move past him in Halloween 3. It is a direct sequel to Halloween 2, ignoring the events of Season of the Witch. The fans were very outspoken of his departure in 3 since they view Halloween as synonymous with the character of Michael Myers as it should be. Picking up ten years after the events of Halloween 2, Michael has been kept away in a comatose state, now all covered in bandages since surviving the fire from the previous film. As to be expected after two films with the character he eventually escapes to make his way back home, along with the return of Dr. Loomis, who also suffered some burnt tissue after the fire from ten years ago and tries to once again warn the town of Haddonfield. This film decided to kill off the character of Laurie, since Jamie Lee Curtis decided not to return, stating that a car crash occurred years before the beginning of this story. Here we are introduced to a new protagonist in the family and that is Laurie's daughter Jamie Lloyd (Danielle Harris). 

Anybody who saw the first Halloween at a very young age like myself, certainly the film had an impact on your overall viewpoint of the horror genre, as for Halloween 4 it had the same impact on me as a child. Now as a grown adult, it definitely does not leave the same impact as it did from childhood. It isn’t to say that this film is a complete let down for that reason because it’s really not. For as silly and blustering this film can be at times, Halloween 4 is definitely one of the better sequels in the canon, especially to revisit once the holiday comes along. From the very beginning the film decitches the opening pumpkin head slowly revealing itself as the previous films opened up, instead opening up to soothing and yet dreadful imagery shots of the town Haddonfield, setting up on what’s to later conquer. Some may feel detached from the pumpkin head missing, yet the film still manages to feel all the more damp, chilly, and breezy as October should feel, it's so engrossing you can almost smell it. There’s some good direction this film takes and it always felt as if more effort was being pushed into new boundaries rather than just a copy of John Carpenter's style. It doesn’t always come off as strong as it could because this was shot entirely in 1:85 aspect ratio rather than the previous 2:35 for its predecessors, there’s a tiny noticeable dip in the quality here where everything seems tighter and up close rather than in long wide shots where the environment feels grander in scale. The film really does try its best and make up for it in certain areas and try to have some fun with the material it's given, it also has an embraceful self-aware presence to it surprisingly, which makes it all the more enjoyable. Once Michael makes his unannounced return and starts murdering the civilians, a group of beer belly hunters hear about this and gather around to form a town militia an try to put in end to Michael, quite the camp this film as going for it. Loomis being tossed around half the runtime by Michael or even getting thrown away by gas explosions is quite the mayhem circus. Even the kills itself from Michael are definitely over-the-top purposely like shoving a shotgun barrel through a girl's chest, making for a real dumbfound and campy chapter in the Halloween saga. 

Halloween 4 is one of the better slashers from the 80s, standing out in an era when the subgenre was in steep decline. The best thing that this installment has going for it and it easily could’ve been one of the worst aspects, is having a young kid as your lead in a big film yet they pulled it off fairly well. Danielle Harris plays the character of Jamie really well. I was Jamie’s age here when I first saw the film and that made it all the more relatable and fearsome, giving me similar nightmares she had of her own Uncle at the time. The film manages to get us to really feel for Jamie here, she has been dealt a difficult hand by life, orphaned at a young age, outcast at school while wanting to fit in and have a normal childhood, all while petrified of her own Uncle coming to end her life. She’s easily one of the most likable protagonist’s in the franchise and it's a shame they decided not develop her all that well after this installment. We are also giving the same amount of screen time to Jamie’s step sister Rachel (Ellie Cornell) who for the most part is just an average character at best, she’s not a total distracting in the film, she most certainly would’ve fit in just fine with Laurie and her friends if she was of age at the time. There’s just not that much merit with her, when she usually appears on screen it’s usually only when seeing her be on-and-off again with this boy she’s into that doesn’t really go into a whole lot of areas later on. Halfway through the film her only goal is being the protective step sister she’s said to be so at least there is more hope to be had in her survival, which is serviceable enough overall. Like Jamie, the next installment had no further interest in developing Rachel further so they instead replaced her with an even less compelling protagonist.

 The film’s ending has been an interesting discussion amongst viewers as Jamie’s been weirdly taken over by Michael after they both linked hands together, as Jamie’s been having surreal nightmares/visions throughout the whole film. Looking back upon it after everything else that came after this, it probably could have developed further into new territories (whether it would’ve been good or not is up for debate), visually it’s quite striking and even funny seeing Loomis lose is freaking my mind. It still had opportunities to explore Jamie and the characters furthermore, but just like most of the movies in this franchise, constant rewrites, reshoots, and canceled developments that never fell through. Halloween 4 is one of the more liked amongst the rest of the series, personally if they at least got the mask/look of Michael Myers correct, the over redundant of kills dialed back a notch, go for more wider shots in certain scenes, and shift more focus on Jamie and Rachel this definitely would've been higher received than it already is. This is still one of the more entertaining ones, but there is always room for improvement. In my eyes this is the best one to watch during a gathering with friends on Halloween night. If you're looking for campy humor and mindless pure entertainment, then it’s Halloween 4. 

#4. Halloween H20: 20 Years Later (1998)

H20, man what a great title! In this continuity we have a direct sequel to Halloween 2, retconning the events of the thorn trilogy and welcoming back fan favorite Laurie Strode. This was the franchise's first attempt at a requel before it became admirable all these years later. Michael Myers suddenly reappears after being presumed dead, he has burglarized Dr. Loomis’s retirement house in Illinois. Loomis’s former nurse, who looked after him until his passing, arrives and discovers that a file on Laurie, who was also presumed dead in an automobile accident has vanished. She has faked her death to avoid anymore encounters with her brother while living under a new identity by the name of Keri Tate, having a career as the headmistress of Hillcrest Academy, a private boarding school in Summer Glen, California. 

H20 may not be as scary as other installments or as dark, but this one has such a high energy to it that we never got to see much in this franchise for the longest time, even some horror films today don’t have the likeability this one brings to the table. You can tell this came out around post-Scream and it definitely shows, at times it really helps this film by making it more fun and exciting to watch and at other times by having tension filled sequences with gratuitous hard rock blasting its way through the scenery. Also the fact that there's two composers on this film, John Ottman and Scream’s Marco Beltrami makes the film’s score out to be a bit undercooked, whenever there’s a chase sequence they play the exact score from the first scream film, goes to show you how heavily the Weinstein company was involved in the process of horror movies from the 90’s. This is still much better than the majority of horror flicks from the post-scream era such as “I know what you did last summer'' and “Urban Legend”. In this film we get to see how Laurie has been dealing with the pain all these years since her encounterments with Michael. Knowingly the 2018 film dealt with a similar concept of Laurie dealing with PTSD, in here it's just easier to buy into, you can really see how hard she’s worked for so many years to try and move on with her life. She gave marriage a try while not lasting very long, she still decides to go out and continue dating without giving up, and now has a son named John (Josh Harrnett) with a difficult yet blissful dynamic. The relationship between them is very tender to see how they are always there for each other no matter what and yet while doing all this, she’s still trying to cope with all the amount of trauma that’s escalated over two decades, so when it comes time for a reunion between her and her brother things start to build up rapidly. 

This was also one of the very first on screen appearances from both Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Michelle Willams. It’s really joyful to see both of these big time actors now in a film like this, similar to Paul Rudd in Halloween 6 (except here none of them come off as stalkery) all having made their way into horror before they rose to fame and seeing them being utilized here fairly well is applauding. There really is a lot of enjoyment to be had with H20, even without the town of Haddonfield this film still feels like a very atmospheric Halloween film. Sadly some of the entertainment value of all this is brought down a few notches by the poor utilization of Michael Myers, which really wasn’t a surprise anymore to anyone at the time of the release. Michael is definitely a bit more agile and thorough than certain installments, but the face mask change throughout the film is one the most distracting aspects to any Halloween film. The mask is one of the cheapest prompts to use in a film, it really shouldn’t need like five changes throughout its entirety or even a cgi’d shot of it upfront. Michael gets a couple interesting kills in the film, especially in the beginning with Goron-Levitt, but the film’s violence feels so taimed to the point where it almost feels PG-13. H20 is by no means a great film, yet it is still a welcoming chapter in this universe, and the film's climax is mildly satisfying. Halloween, Halloween 2, and Halloween H20 are a genuine completed trilogy (Yes I’m pretending Resurrection doesn’t exist). 

#3. Halloween 2 (1981)

Before all the requels, remakes, and reimaginings, this was the logical continuation of John Carpenter’s masterpiece, the companion piece that is Halloween 2. Picking up seconds after the first film (Rocky 2 style) where Michael Myers was shot by his psychiatrist and assumed dead. He survives and meanders into the night. Meanwhile, Laurie Strode, who graciously was able to avoid being killed, is taken to the nearest Hospital while Loomis and the police continue their pursuit in finding the boogeyman. This was helmed by first time director Rick Rosenthal, this is clearly its predecessor’s offspring. Its narrative is as simple as ever, and Rosenthal is actually able to elicit quite a bit of suspense and terror out of large stretches of the film’s running time. 

What really works about this installment is that even though they were given more money to work with, they still managed to make it feel small-scale like the previous film. While there are more kills, blood, makeup, and people in this follow up it still manages to feel like a smaller film to what Carpenter initially set up originally. First-person camera tracking shots with a voyeuristic Michael staking out his prey, reminiscent of what was shown in the 1978 film. Long corridors and moody dark lighting as seen before, this time with the majority of the setting taking place in this small town destered hospital in the middle of the night, really making the atmosphere feel all the more alluring. The biggest complaints critics and fans had with this one is that fact that the body count and gore feels more excessive than it needs to be. Rosenthal has stated himself that he filmed this out to be more subtle to what Carpenter originally gave us, it's been stated for years that the reasons for the increased level of violence compared to the first is because Carpenter actually came in and underwent reshoots to up the gore factor. Possibly believing it was necessary because every slasher film that was inspired by his Halloween was portraying it more gory and would be considered not as frightening. Have to say they are absolutely right because this film definitely comes off as more of a splatter film than a slasher film, which is not what Halloween was intended to be in the first place. As masterful and brilliant as Carpenter is, this was probably one of his biggest missteps as an artist because it does make the majority of characters (minus Laurie and Loomis) come off as walking mannequins waiting to be disposed, which is one of the biggest criticisms one could have with a slasher film. There were a lot of deaths in the original, but the gore was kept at a minal and mostly off screen. Here there’s way too many close ups of needles plunged through eyelids and nurses getting boiled to death, to the point where it all feels like overkill. Halloween 2 is possibly the film that started all these over the top kills in the slasher genre because in today’s youth there's a lot that has come out that has surpassed this drastically, but it’s definitely an understood criticism of the time it came out. One might see this today who’s never seen it before, that is so used to modern slashers and think this is really nothing to fuss about which is reasonable. However as stated before, this was a valid critique of its time that still holds some value because it still is a sequel to one of the most subtle films of all time. 

Michael Myers is handled pretty strong for the most part, the masked looks different due to the paint fading out and collecting dust ever since the first film ended production years prior and its poor treatment of the cast and crew. Michael comes off as stockier here since Nick Castle decided to not return as the character. This was also the first time (that would last for decades) the series had made an attempt to introduce a backstory for Michael and try to give reasons for him continuously being able to get up and keep coming back. This is the plot twist of Laurie being Michael's sister that was initially never planned by Carpenter, but was conceived according to him, "Purely as a function of having decided to become involved in the sequel to the movie where I didn't think there was really much of a story left." This all does feel like a last minute addition of sorts as it does nothing to really develop the character of Laure since she spends most of the film's runtime lying unconscious while having dreams of her childhood that she vaguely remembers about Michael. One of the themes of the first film was Michael being evil personified, an unstoppable force that you can’t escape and it was believable enough to the point where you actually felt terrified of his presence. In here it’s almost as if they were trying to make him out to be something that he wasn’t, almost an actual supernatural being without actually going out and stating it, yet it still came off as inessential. It’s easy to be forgiving of this film for trying to  go into different directions and not come off as too pretentious, since there have been so many attempts for years at making Michael something more than he was intentionally set out to be. At least they tried to put an end to this story once in for all, before bringing him back for years and years.  

All in all, Halloween 2 still works well as a follow up. Michael still works really well as an evil presence, Donald Pleasance is terrific once again (before he lost his mind in the further entries), and Carpenter was nice enough to come back and compose the music score once again and it’s a real powerhouse. This is for sure one of the better slasher sequels in a big elongated franchise, definitely better than Nightmare on Elm street part 2 or Friday the 13th part 2. The script for this entry is certainly a downgrade, but kudos to the creative team for at least attempting to actually end this story and not just have more set up for other movies. They did try and move on from the Michael Myers story and they did (for a while at least). Really the best way to experience Halloween 2 is when you watch them both back-to-back as a companion piece. In doing so this makes for some fun entertainment to be had on Halloween night. 

#2. Halloween Kills (2021)

The title in Halloween Kills is one hundred percent completely warranted. Picking up right after the events of the 2018 film, we follow once again Jamie Lee Curtis as Laurie Strode along with her daughter and granddaughter from before, as firefighters are called to put out the fire that Michael Myers was shown to be burning in at the end of the previous film. Accidentally unleashing Myers, causing him to wreak havoc on the town of Haddonfield once more. When this was first announced there was no anticipation to be had in almost the slightest for myself as a longtime fan of this series because of my disappointment for the last entry. Even though the series overall has had a tough run throughout its time and most of the sequels have been subpar, there was still some entertainment to be had with some of them. While there are many viewers who are very attached to the 2018 film and found it a solid entry to the original while introducing new and compelling characters, for myself I wasn’t able to share that interest and found the film overall to be lackluster. Now as for Halloween Kills, this is the film we should’ve gotten back in 2018. 

When it comes to Kills it all comes down to what you as a viewer watch Halloween for. For big time franchises with a huge following, Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, or Harry Potter there always seems to be a variety of fans who watch the movies for different reasons. For the Halloween series some wanna watch these for deeper lore/mythology and stronger characterization while some simply just wanna watch Michael Myers kill people on Halloween night. If you go back and examine John Carpenter’s original film, it is really just a well-made horror film, with a creepy atmosphere and some interesting kills. When it comes to that film’s characterization it’s not looked upon as the film's strongpoint and it doesn’t seem as if that was anybody’s favorite aspect about the first film. The original doesn’t for one minute waste any time and Kills is more like that, this is constantly always moving and never feels as if we have time to breathe. This delivers on why Halloween is so good in the first place, by showcasing Michael as the pure embodiment of evil while strongly putting the emphasis on that. There is also a real focus on the kills here, as should be expected with a slasher-murder movie, but it’s almost as if every installments after the first never knew how to balance any of it out and try to go beyond everything from the original, luckily they finally deliver on the carnage that Michael is able to bring in the most welcoming way possible. 

As for the rest of the film it’s understandable to view it as only filler, it’s definitely building up to a final confrontation between Laurie and Michael for another installment, Halloween Ends. Here Laurie does spend most of the runtime in hospital, similar to in Halloween 2 (1981). It feels more believable this time around since she was way more wounded in her last confirmation with Michael and she does get a lot to do, rather than just lay around unconscious having vivid dreams. A lot of these complaints will probably be put to rest once Ends comes around and viewers get to see the whole picture painted. This film really worked. It was atmospheric, the comedy was dialed back conseriably, and it portrays Michael as he was always meant to be. The film also manages to present things differently that were only briefly ever explored and it was genuinely unexpected. You really get a bigger sense of urgency in this one with the entire town of Haddonfield coming together to stop Michael, which was only ever explored in Halloween 4 slightly with only a few hunters forming a small militia. In here the entire down with everyday people come together, giving the film a lot more stakes. It also makes a bold decision on showcasing how chaotic it can be forming an angry mob when misinformation is spread, causing the people of Haddonfield to reflect on themselves by allowing Michael to create a monster within themselves. This made it all the more impactful and kudos to everyone who worked on the film for really fleshing that part out.  

Lastly, there is a very interesting development this film unravels by having flashbacks going back to Halloween night 1978. These flashbacks were actually quite impressive and great additions to the lore of Halloween. Won’t go into too many details upon them, but just the filmic look to it all really did come off as a late 70’s movie. The costumes, dark tinted environment, and fan favorite characters, that is always a plus to see. Thankfully this film succeeded my expectations, it was simple, creepy, and atmospheric which felt all the more endearing of what Halloween is. 

#1. Halloween (1978)

Well this should come as no surprise to anyone who’s been reading for  this long. What Halloween did to the suburbs is what Jaws did to the ocean. This film’s budget was a mere 300,000 dollars which even back then was viewed as extremely low, and yet managed to become one of the most profitable horror films at the time. The film is impactful for many reasons and has been talked about to death for decades, but it really can’t be overstated how much of Halloween’s genius stems from its simplicity. Michael Myers is simply a madman with a knife in a William Shatner mask, returning to a town that looks so welcoming, murders a bunch of people who could be just about anybody, and offers no rhyme or reason. As Dr. Loomis says “The blackest eyes… the devil’s eyes. I spent eight years trying to reach him. And then another seven trying to keep him locked up because I realized what was living behind that boy’s eyes was purely and simply…evil”. One of the most spine-chilling moments in any horror film. John Carpenter probably knew very little how much of an everlasting impact this film would have on film goers.  

 

Many viewers have discussed the setting, the kills, and the season of Halloween itself within the film are all valuable reasons. The main reason why this remains timeless and a cultural significance is because of the way Carpenter examines evil. How evil can have an impact on someone and infect their life, that alone is a timeless subject that humans have been studying and discussing for years and years before and after this film. This just has a coziness and alarming feel to it all that makes this out to be the number one pick around the holiday season when it comes time to pop in a horror flick.

There isn’t much else that hasn't been said already. The framing, the music score, the impact everything is just so engrossing and it’s surely remarkable the amount of substance this film has had and will continue on to for new generations. Something that’s been astray in the age of the internet is that when discussing anything regarding pop culture, there are very few examples of objective truths. We’re just slinging opinions at each other, neither right nor wrong, but a matter of pure belief. When it comes to Carpenter’s Halloween being discussed, everybody in their right mind can drop any argument, slander, or debate directed towards each other and coalesce for this John Carpenter’s magnum opus. The film that has shaped the remainder of many lives and will continue to do so. 

Happy Halloween Everyone! 🎃

 

For more... Check out our Nerdthusiast Movie Podcast monthly:

 

Make sure to check out our Nerdthusiast Movie Audio Podcast

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/nerdthusiast-movie-podcast/id1599731947

By Danny Manna Twitter: @Cinemanna24 - Nerdthusiast Content Creator