Go Back   Horror.com Forums - Talk about horror. > Horror.com Lobby > Horror.com General Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #1  
Old 07-22-2018, 12:42 PM
Sculpt's Avatar
Sculpt Sculpt is offline
ventricle


 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: USA, IL
Posts: 6,141
Can Anyone Explain this about Halloween2?

Can anyone explain this to me?

I read this in wiki about Halloween 2:

Quote:
Quote:
The plot twist of Laurie being Michael's sister required a retcon of the timeline between Judith's murder and the events depicted in the first Halloween; while Michael Myers is said to have committed the crime fifteen years ago and to be twenty-one. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hallow..._film)#Writing
"Retroactive continuity, or retcon for short, is a literary device in which established facts in a fictional work are adjusted, ignored, or contradicted by a subsequently published work which breaks continuity with the former."

I don't get what they're talking about. So Michael was 6 when he kills his older sister (Judith) in the opening of Halloween, then he comes back 15 years later, he's 21, and Laurie is his younger sister. So what had to be changed?
__________________
.
.
.
.

Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 07-24-2018, 06:14 AM
fudgetusk's Avatar
fudgetusk fudgetusk is offline
Evil Dead
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 263
NOTHING.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 07-24-2018, 10:50 PM
ImmortalSlasher's Avatar
ImmortalSlasher ImmortalSlasher is offline
Immortal horror fan
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: In a dark moonlit forest.
Posts: 1,623
Wiki says "citation needed" but if I was guessing they mean that the story of the timeline was changed in Halloween 2 to make things work. I recall Carpenter didn't like doing the whole relation thing. I guess we'll see in the new movie. I haven't been watching the trailer or anything much since the announcement.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 07-25-2018, 07:36 PM
Sculpt's Avatar
Sculpt Sculpt is offline
ventricle


 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: USA, IL
Posts: 6,141
Quote:
Originally Posted by ImmortalSlasher View Post
Wiki says "citation needed" but if I was guessing they mean that the story of the timeline was changed in Halloween 2 to make things work. I recall Carpenter didn't like doing the whole relation thing. I guess we'll see in the new movie. I haven't been watching the trailer or anything much since the announcement.
So in Halloween (1978) they never said Laurie was Michael's sister? Was it even insinuated in some way?

I just reviewed the plot in wiki... a few of related issues:

1. Laurie's last name is Strode, not Myers, the last name of Michael.

2. Michael follows Laurie because Bobby and Laurie dropped off a key at Michael's old house, where Michael observed them.

3. After Laurie gets a strange call from the Wallace house across the street, where Laurie's friend Lynda is babysitting, Laurie goes over to the house where she finds 3 dead bodies, including Lynda on a bed; at the head of the bed is the gravestone of Michael's older sister, Judith Myers, who Michael killed as a child 15 years earlier.

In all cases, there's no direct information that Laurie is Michael's sister...

But still, the film opens with Michael killing his sister; Michael "waits" for a specified time and then goes back home to Haddonfield days before Halloween, the day he killed his sister Judith; Michael follows Laurie around, but not Bobby; Laurie is about the age of Judith when she was killed. I think there is an indirect insinuation that Laurie is a sister or sister-figure of Michael.
__________________
.
.
.
.


Last edited by Sculpt; 07-25-2018 at 07:39 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 07-26-2018, 09:59 AM
Morningriser Morningriser is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 2,014
If you ask me this whole fucking thing is dumber than hell. Its like they're copying Texas Chainsaw but I somehow see this being even worse than that. There's no reason they couldn't have just made this part 9. Money you say? I know I would be so much more likely to dish out money to go see a public hate rape of my favorite horror series long before I would pay to watch a continuation of a series I grew up with. Aint logic a myth...
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 07-26-2018, 10:00 AM
LuvablePsycho's Avatar
LuvablePsycho LuvablePsycho is offline
Rotten Stinky Zombie
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: In a dark, dark place.
Posts: 1,048
I never understood a lot of things about the Halloween films. The plotline pretty much gets made up with every new movie that comes out.

They never even explained WHY he murdered his sister when he was a little boy. Did watching her have sex with her boyfriend and being naked cause him to get his first boner and so he felt he had to kill his sister out of shame and guilt?
__________________
We R Going 2 Eat U!
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 07-26-2018, 03:51 PM
Sculpt's Avatar
Sculpt Sculpt is offline
ventricle


 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: USA, IL
Posts: 6,141
Quote:
Originally Posted by Morningriser View Post
If you ask me this whole fucking thing is dumber than hell.
What horror film topic could we talk about that isn't relatively dumber than hell?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Morningriser View Post
Its like they're copying Texas Chainsaw but I somehow see this being even worse than that. There's no reason they couldn't have just made this part 9. Money you say? I know I would be so much more likely to dish out money to go see a public hate rape of my favorite horror series long before I would pay to watch a continuation of a series I grew up with. Aint logic a myth...
Reading your post here, I'm not sure you read my original post... that is to say, I don't know if you know what we're talking about...

We're not talking about the new 2019 Halloween film. (Which I think you're talking about. ???) I was talking about something someone wrote in Wikipedia about Halloween II (1982) (see original post).
__________________
.
.
.
.

Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 07-26-2018, 04:17 PM
Sculpt's Avatar
Sculpt Sculpt is offline
ventricle


 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: USA, IL
Posts: 6,141
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuvablePsycho View Post
I never understood a lot of things about the Halloween films. The plotline pretty much gets made up with every new movie that comes out.
Yep, only Halloween (1978) and Halloween II (1982) are one story, both scripts written by Carpenter and Debra Hill, and they ended the story. I personally wouldn't even bother thinking about the rest of "the series" which are written by other people. But in the original story I think the "sister thing" is very interesting. I mean, this little independent film, Halloween (1978), sure grabbed the attention of the USA in 1979... seemed to strike a nerve. Most film critics give it 4/4 stars. It has some distinction.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LuvablePsycho View Post
They never even explained WHY he murdered his sister when he was a little boy. Did watching her have sex with her boyfriend and being naked cause him to get his first boner and so he felt he had to kill his sister out of shame and guilt?
No, I don't think the film ever explains why he killed his sister in the first place. I don't know if Carpenter or Hill have ever explained it.

Sometimes someone makes an art piece, and then people try to figure it out afterward, often looking for subconscious reasoning.

Towards that end, since you asked, I'd go out on a limb and say the 60's-70's brought a "free-love sexual revolution", and there seems to be an instinctive protective nature in fathers and brothers to protect their daughters/sisters in this area... protect them from harm, unmarried pregnancy, their reputation, the family reputation, etc. Maybe "the Shape", as Carpenter artfully calls the murderous supernatural being inhabiting Michael, is a symbol of this male-family protective/punitive instinct against premarital sex of the daughter/sister. I'm sure I'm not the first to suggest this.
__________________
.
.
.
.

Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 07-26-2018, 04:34 PM
LuvablePsycho's Avatar
LuvablePsycho LuvablePsycho is offline
Rotten Stinky Zombie
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: In a dark, dark place.
Posts: 1,048
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sculpt View Post
Yep, only Halloween (1978) and Halloween II (1982) are one story, both scripts written by Carpenter and Debra Hill, and they ended the story. I personally wouldn't even bother thinking about the rest of "the series" which are written by other people. But in the original story I think the "sister thing" is very interesting. I mean, this little independent film, Halloween (1978), sure grabbed the attention of the USA in 1979... seemed to strike a nerve. Most film critics give it 4/4 stars. It has some distinction.

No, I don't think the film ever explains why he killed his sister in the first place. I don't know if Carpenter or Hill have ever explained it.

Sometimes someone makes an art piece, and then people try to figure it out afterward, often looking for subconscious reasoning.

Towards that end, since you asked, I'd go out on a limb and say the 60's-70's brought a "free-love sexual revolution", and there seems to be an instinctive protective nature in fathers and brothers to protect their daughters/sisters in this area... protect them from harm, unmarried pregnancy, their reputation, the family reputation, etc. Maybe "the Shape", as Carpenter artfully calls the murderous supernatural being inhabiting Michael, is a symbol of this male-family protective/punitive instinct against premarital sex of the daughter/sister. I'm sure I'm not the first to suggest this.
I was being half-sarcastic about what I said but I think I might have some kind of point. He was a little boy and it was his own sister he was witnessing having sex, so maybe it was traumatic for him to see his own sister in that situation? Of course I doubt most normal kids would ever murder their own sister just for that so he may have had some kind of underlying psychological problem and the trauma of seeing his own sister in that situation caused him to snap.
__________________
We R Going 2 Eat U!
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 07-26-2018, 04:40 PM
Sculpt's Avatar
Sculpt Sculpt is offline
ventricle


 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: USA, IL
Posts: 6,141
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuvablePsycho View Post
I was being half-sarcastic about what I said but I think I might have some kind of point. He was a little boy and it was his own sister he was witnessing having sex, so maybe it was traumatic for him to see his own sister in that situation? Of course I doubt most normal kids would ever murder their own sister just for that so he may have had some kind of underlying psychological problem and the trauma of seeing his own sister in that situation caused him to snap.
Nah Brothers don't want to see that, it's repulsive, no reason to feel guilty about an accidental walk in. I just don't see it.
__________________
.
.
.
.

Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:26 PM.