an explanation


So a common complaint about the sequels is the forced backstory and sibling connection, done in part to give a reason as to why Michael does what he does. I admit this has never bothered me. But I was born in 85. So I've never known the story any other way. For me it's one of those things where you can't even remember when/how you initially found out, it's just something ingrained as common pop culture knowledge, like Vader being Luke's father or that Romeo and Juliet die at the end. So I figure that's why it doesn't bug me.

But anyway. I wonder if they'll make it through these next two sequels with managing to keep him as just a random madman, or if they'll feel compelled to try for a backstory/reason again. If so, I wonder what, and if it would be satisfying.

reply

I'm hoping the next film will let Laurie and Michael be separate for at least most of it. I liked H18 not having a specific target for Michael, but the film uses the Sartain character to throw them back together.

reply

A random madman does not work, the premise of Halloween Kills will be the 3 trio of Laurie and company hunt Michael along side Doyle and survivors. The sequel basically puts together a lynch mob from Halloween 4, Earl's group. So technically Laurie is Dr Loomis. Halloween 2018 should have never went and continued without a motive.

reply