What is the obsession with Michael Myers??

DarkHelmet

Master Member
I just don't get it. Went to B&N to look at some monster mags and everything is Michael Myers. Even my IG feed is MM.

I accept that the original Halloween broke serious ground and it scare the **** out of me when it first came out but come on, its a guy in a Shat mask.

What am I missing? What is the appeal after 42 years and countless sequels and a remake??
 

PoopaPapaPalps

Master Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
Coming from a big Halloween fan, beyond just marketing, I think it's mostly a macabre power fantasy that appeals mostly to men; that ability to do without being stopped. It's like how real-life figures can be both great and terrible at the same time. I think it's one of the reasons why villains are as popular as they are, even if they aren't particularly relatable or sympathetic.

Unlike other slashers, who are either just creeps or tortured creeps of circumstance, "The Shape" just is. He is named "Michael Myers" but he is something else, he only takes the shape of a man (hence his namesake). He's almost mythic in that regard. He is flesh and blood but he does inhuman things. Like a shark, he hunts instinctively and that's something that cannot be reasoned with, and certainly cannot be stopped. He can be impeded but he exists to do solely what he does, and in his case, it's killing people. The first film is the only one that works under those circumstances and that later ones never understood, could replicate, or even get right.

Also, it's a Shat mask and coveralls---and it looks f'n sick.
 
Last edited:

ScourgiousJinx

Sr Member
I think the music (as repetitive as it is), atmosphere and lighting really contributes to the menace of Michael Myers in the first two films. As the series moves forward the films get campy and pretty much turn into parody of the original. The mystery and creepiness surrounding him unfortunately fades. Anything after Halloween 3 is not even worth watching IMO. If they had stopped early on his reputation would likely be a lot different. Better yet if they dropped Michael Myers after Halloween 2 and made it into an Anthology series that would've been great. Even the best of the best gets boring or silly if it's overplayed and copied ad nauseam.

The abrupt jerky way he moves in the later films reminds me of the old animatronic Disneyland statues lol, not too scary. But I still maintain that Michael Myers of Halloween 1 &2 is terrifying.
 
Last edited:

Moviefreak

Master Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
I just don't get it….

I accept that the original Halloween broke serious ground and it scare the **** out of me when it first came out but come on, its a guy in a Shat mask.

What am I missing? What is the appeal after 42 years and countless sequels and a remake??
I can ask the same thing for Star Wars with all the countless sequels. Or Doctor Who. Or Harry Potter. And the list goes on. Every movie franchise has a fan base and just because you don’t personally follow a particular franchise, there are people with same support and reverence as you have to your favorite films.
 

batguy

Sr Member
I read an observation once, that horror movies are more dependent on the filmmaker's skills than almost any other genre. People don't read a horror movie screenplay (or worse, a plot summary) and get scared. The director & editor have to make it scary with their contributions.

John Carpenter was very young & hungry when he did 'Halloween.' He's not a showy director. He's all business and good at wringing the most out of limited budgets. Perfect guy at the perfect time.


I think the first few Halloween movies looked so utterly un-Hollywood (the actors, the settings, it all looked so midwest-normal) that it lent the whole thing a rare amount of realism.

Who seriously worries about Freddy Krueger? He's designer-scary. Whereas, the overalls & Shat mask outfit . . . MM isn't even trying to scare anybody. He's all business.
 

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. Your new thread title is very short, and likely is unhelpful.
  2. Your reply is very short and likely does not add anything to the thread.
  3. Your reply is very long and likely does not add anything to the thread.
  4. It is very likely that it does not need any further discussion and thus bumping it serves no purpose.
  5. Your message is mostly quotes or spoilers.
  6. Your reply has occurred very quickly after a previous reply and likely does not add anything to the thread.
  7. This thread is locked.
Top