13 Controversial Hot Takes From The Halloween Movie Franchise

Here are very hot takes on the Halloween franchise.


RZH2 is insanely underrated and doesn’t deserve near as much shit as it gets. I will not understand how people could consider this movie worse than Resurrection. The zombie universe/Michael was already very different from the get-go. However, Resurrection is supposed to be the original Michael Myers, and is only two films separated from the original.



Halloween 4 is the most overrated movie of the franchise.



the michael and laurie being siblings thing kinda sucks



The original H2 is a slog. Laurie spends the entire film bedridden, Michael spends the entire film wandering aimlessly down empty corridors and Loomis spends the entire film reiterating the same monologues from the first film. John Carpenter had to get wasted to finish the script and frankly it shows :/ The ending is the only part worth watching, imo. Also, RZ’s H2 is superior.



2018 and HK I do think are entertaining movies but Michael is much more of an action movie killer or something. In 1978, he spent a whole day stalking a girl and everyone she was close with that day then didn’t kill them until the end of the night… now it seems like he’s in a rush, he just walks into someone’s home and kills them right away. What happened to the stalker and the suspense, now it’s jumpscares and almost no stalking. Laurie did more stalking than Michael did. 😂 I’m being serious. Am I wrong?



Resurrection had a /mostly/ decent premise. At the very least it was something different from the rest of the franchise. It’s the execution that really kills it.



The Curse of Thorn is an awesome addition to the lore, and explaining Michael doesn’t make him less scary The idea of Michael being not only another victim, but a Samhain sacrifice doomed to walk the earth until he murders his family is far more compelling to me than “random crazy guy with a knife” and 100% thematically in line with a movie series called “Halloween” that focuses on brutal, ritualistic killings



Resurrection didn’t have to be the franchise killer that it became. There could have easily been a 5th movie for that timeline. Those were supposedly Michael’s first murders in Haddonfield since 1978. A movie after Resurrection could have explored the town’s reaction to his return and its effect on the following years Halloween, now knowing that the boogeyman is back.



Remove or add a few pieces of dialogue and H20 could easily be set in the same timeline as the previous films – minus 3. And yes, it would mean Laurie actually left Jamie behind.



2018’s score is better or equal to 1978’s score



Everyone goes on about how simple the original film is but half of them think Michael was human, many of them fail to pick up on the fate theme and probably the majority of them don’t understand how Myers’ story is allegoric to traditional Samhain or how that and the fatalism and Looms’ perspective on Myers make it all but confirmed the allegory is literal. Sure it might not be literal, but 2-6 weren’t “wrong” for assuming it was. At all. I think It’s pretty clear the point was that it’s really probably literal (cue Carpenter saying for the a billionth time that Myers is supernatural).



The dialogue in most films is very cheesy and people only dislike it in Kills because it’s a modern film and comes after the most drama-esque film of the franchise.



The H5 mask was better than the H4 mask, at the very least. I really don’t know what they were thinking in H4. They did so many things right, but made Michael the least scary looking up to that point. The mask is also better in H6. Makes no sense that they keep changing and losing the masks in between every movie.