OldBoy

With the boots, that got off the bus, freed Michael in either 4 or 5...
I've seen all the movies, but never remember if they discuss who this guy is.

So who is he and what is his relationship to Michael?

cactusoly

watch Halloween 6 if you dare and you will see.

AnonomusBob15

One of the worst things to happen to the series. Maybe even worse than Halloween III.

Matthew Chmiel

Not as bad as say:

Seantn

I don't get the hate for Halloween 3. It doesn't have Myers, but on its own I like it as a horror movie. Not having Myers is a good thing, in my opinion, because the fact that parts 5,6,7,and 8 all suck, more than likely it would have sucked with Myers as well.

OldBoy

can you just tell me, please?

Mr. Cinema

I would tell you if I could remember, but it's been a while since I watched it. BTW, someone tell him who it is, because I wouldn't want anyone to have to watch Halloween 6.

MartinBlank

I'm confused...you say it sucks, yet the poster implies that it's good, who should I believe?

Mr. Cinema

Trust me, Halloween: Resurrection is really, really bad. I mean...Busta vs. Michael Myers?

L Chabert Lover

AnonomusBob15

The man in black wants Michael's DNA or something to make clones or something. I don't know. It wasn't explained well and totally trainwrecked the series. Halloween 6, IMO, was not as bad as some people say. It actually has scenes in it that scare me more than the original. Try it out, but scrap that shitty subplot.

Yeah, Halloween III wasn't bad, but honestly, has something like that ever happened before? Com'on. They should have made a standard Halloween film and made that as another non-Halloween film.

Never saw Resurrection, I stopped being a fan of the series before it came out, but it seems to be standard with most of the crap released these days dealing with old franchises such as Jason X.

Digigeek06

after Halloween 2,the rest blow chunks

Seantn

I don't quite understand what you're getting at. The movie is about robots and stonehenge and the death of children via cursed masks. Of course it has never happened, but so what. Neither has Nightmare on Elm Street.

Seantn

I do really respect what they were trying to do. They wanted to make the "Halloween" series into a series of movies in which every year a new film would come out, but with a totally new plot, and it will always take place during Halloween. After people shitted themselves when Halloween 3 came out, they ditched it. And thanks to that, we have the winners that are Halloween 5-8 (blech). I like part 1, 3, and 4. Part 2 is...okay.

hapgilmore

Halloween 3 is one of the worst movies i've ever seen....Halloween 6 is a lot better than Resurrection in my opinion, the worst in the series besides 3

AnonomusBob15

I respect what they were trying to do as well, and I am not bashing the movie in no way. Halloween 3 was an enjoyable film but it has no place in the series.

They scrapped the villian and all the main characters and calling it Halloween 3 was totally pointless, almost as if they were just trying to get people to see it.

I wasn't talking about if it could happen or not, that would be absurd since the fact of the boogeyman walking around invincible isn't exactly conceivable.

Filmmaker

It was Jon from "The Real World: Los Angeles"...

Rogue588

I guess i'm in the minority. I enjoyed Halloween 3. It was almost like an X-Files episode before the X-Files existed.

I also thought the way Halloween 5 ended was pretty badass (if that's the one that ended with Michael being broken out of jail by the man with no name).

Rubix

i love halloween 3. both for the wacky silver shamrock song and for the strange evil factory with robots and witches. halloween 3 is how the series was supposed to be. each halloween was supposed to a unique unrelated story all under the halloween name, but since part 1 did so well it changed that plan.

just imagine if they stuck with that plan. we could potentially have 10 other halloween movies each with the possibility of being a really great idea or concept for a horror movie in it's own right, instead of the pathetic michael myers sequels that do no justice to the original.

and by the way, just because it would have been cool to make each halloween different (to me) doesn't mean they can't have sequels... just make spin-offs. the halloween part 1 sequels could just be called michael myers or halloween: michael myers and then the main series could go onwards. halloween 4 and onwards are pathetic. 2 doesn't compare to 1 but it's ok, and 3 is strange but had serious potential (not compared to the original of course) and is interesting.

halloween could have been like the twilight zone of horror movies and go on forever even if the last movie failed there'd be hope for the next. different directors could have a shot at their own horror ideads too. now there is no hope, halloween just plain sucks.

DVD maniac

I kind of agree with Rubix. They should have made the Halloween movies a series of horror of events happening on Halloween.

Of course you can start with the original being Michael Myers. Like the trailer says " THE NIGHT HE CAME HOME". Maybe have pt 2 with Michael coming back again. Then by lets say pt 6, have the story contiune. The other parts could have had different horror stories happening on Halloween.

Supermallet

Takashi Miike is apparently directing the new Halloween film, so even though I have disliked every single Halloween film ever made, I will see the new one.

Legolas

The quotes could be misleading. For all you know, the critic said, "This could be one hell of a fun movie if it had anything going for its miserable excuse for being made." If you look at the back of the Batman & Robin DVD (original edition), that's actually a negative review with a lot of "..." to make it look like the little bits and pieces being praised were actually the whole movie being praised.

Plus, whenever they quote a TV network and not a specific name, it's because some nobody said it. Or maybe they quoted some random person on the TV network's message board.

AnonomusBob15

Who said Halloween was supposed to be multiple stories, with each sequel happening on Halloween? I have never heard of that and if confirmed, would make sense of the inclusion of Halloween 3.

And by the way, I never said Halloween 3 was a bad film. It is fine in its own right, but compared to the rest of the series, it is THE sore thumb, no doubt.

Josh-da-man

The "man in black" from Halloween V was (ostensibly) part of a Druidic cult that wanted Michael Myers for its own purposes. It ties in with the "thorn" rune -- looks like a triangle or banner -- that popped up a couple of times in Halloween 5.

Halloween 6: The Curse of Michael Myers sort of expands on this, but the movie is a royal clusterfuck. (Not that Halloween 5 was much better.)

Southside

I read about this somewhere too. It was either an interview with John Carpenter or Debra Hill, probably Carpenter. They never had intentions on doing more than one Halloween; they thought of just re-releasing it every year, but one made a ton of money so Akkad wanted a second. To them, they "killed" off Myers and then wanted to make each subsequent movie take place on halloween, but different stories. That obviously didn't work out, so Myers was reintroduced.