|
Well, given the slew of nonsense plot devices, rebooting, rewriting, turning Michael into Jason-ing, and Busta Rhyming that came after, I consider Halloween 2’s sibling plotline the least of offenses committed by the sequels. As for the reasoning behind “ why “ Michael killed his sister, it’s not boner shame or because he snapped ( that’s Rob Zombie’s garbage plot, y’know, the one where he made almost every character some kind of rapist/sex pervert, and all of them less likable than a hulking serial killer ).
The idea of the original film is based around Samhain, and that evil cannot be stopped. The senseless slaughter of innocent people as a sort of blood offering on a night when demons and ghosts roam free.
Michael Myers is not a person, the name and who he was or what he was like before killing his sister is irrelevant, because he doesn’t exist anymore ( maybe never did ). This is why he is referred to as “ The Shape “. He is pure evil in human form, the outline of a man with nothing inside but the urge to repeat the one act that defines him, a soulless husk capable of neither empathy nor remorse. He can’t be reasoned with, can’t be killed, and the only hint of possibly more going on back there, is a slight head tilt at the aftermath of his deeds. We can’t understand his motivations, because he’s not a human being. That’s part of the mystique of the character, and why it’s still speculated on, been retold so many times, and why he endures as a horror icon. There was never a reason, it’s just what he is.
As for your original question Sculpt,
I think it’s referring to the fact that they added the subplot of Michael and Laurie being related and she had repressed it ( hence the flashback of her seeing him in the hospital ), whereas it was before assumed that he simply chose her because she reminded him of his sister, was the first girl around that age he encountered, or for some more abstract reason, like evil wanting to destroy good and she personified that to him, etc. I think they just worded it strangely.
|