That this movie was made to symbolize Michael Myers as "White Rage" but it backfired spectacularly
Kills cross dresser kid
Kills annoying black couple
Kills gays living in his house
You gonna cry now that I'm here Kuat?
You better grow eyes in the back of your head, you horned piece of ****, because I'm not gonna sleep until worms are crawling up your foam-rubber ass! I'm goin' on safari motherfucker! SAH-FAR-I!
[rhino noise]

Halloween III
. That's it.
Grade "A" Fully Loaded
"Sexy as Hell"

One of the reasons I disliked Kills so much is because of how much it reminded me of Halloween Busta Rhymes. They both feel cheap and amateurish.

He died before the first movie. Do you think he was alive roaming in the woods and never went home and just sat around watching his mom get killed? He came back from the dead when his mom died.

I guess you don't know what a corpse looks like then.

I don't think he was corpse until part 6. In 2-4 he was human. He survived the drowning as a boy.
Never lose your desire.

And in II, we last see Jason crashing through the window to attack Ginny, not knowing where Paul is. Why didn't III pick up from this moment instead of introducing all new characters? WHERE'S PAUL? WHERE'S GINNY?
Because the entire concept of Friday the 13th is about a demonic spirit taking revenge on selfish sex crazed teens. It resurrected Jason Voorhees corpse and uses it.
And that's it. As Jason,'s corpse complete with hockey mask- it tries to eliminate as many as sexually active people as possible at that camp in the woods and then other places like in cities and in space.
Why didn't they ring the telekineses girl in the Final Friday to assist them in killing Jason? It's almost like she never existed. Why keep starting over with new characters!?
See explanation above.

The Jason movies have by far more continuity errors than anything in Halloween franchise.
I see the Friday movies as more feasible in the sense that they just changed Jason's appearance due to make-up technologies, (they did the same to Klingons in Star Trek), and they killed Jason off in part 4. It was a Jason imposter in part 5 and Jason then became a zombie resurrected in part 6. Anything goes with this fantasy scenario.
They didn't go down this track with Myers, he was still in human realm, although part 5 and 6 had some convoluted plot line that I can't really recall.
Norman! What did you put in my tea?

The Jason movies have by far more continuity errors than anything in Halloween franchise.
In Jason Takes Manhattan, Jason melted in toxic waste. In the next movie, he's fully formed in the opening scene, with no mention of this.
You can't accept Michael surviving a fire, but can accept Jason surviving a melting to nothing? At least Halloween addressed this saying Michael survived it, but Friday the 13th doesn't even address it. They ignore it.
Jason X came out before Freddy vs. Jason, but chronologically, it came after. There's no mention of his fight with Freddy, or him escaping Hell. The last movie before this, we saw Jason sent to hell.
Jason had long hair in II and had the mountain-man look. He's bald in III and wearing different clothes. Apparently Jason got a spiffy haircut and went shopping at Carhart from gift cards he found in the pocket of one of his victims.
And in II, we last see Jason crashing through the window to attack Ginny, not knowing where Paul is. Why didn't III pick up from this moment instead of introducing all new characters? WHERE'S PAUL? WHERE'S GINNY?
Why didn't they ring the telekineses girl in the Final Friday to assist them in killing Jason? It's almost like she never existed. Why keep starting over with new characters!?
Never lose your desire.

I forgot all about resurrection….
It's very much worth forgetting.
Even
Jason X
which came out around the same I found more enjoyable and made more sense.
Norman! What did you put in my tea?

I forgot all about resurrection lol Is it the one where they are in the house with cameras, etc?

1, 2, 4, H20, and 2018 for me. 3 is actually a really good movie, but I meant just Myers movies.

That is why 4,5,H20, Resurrection and the new **** are all pointless Myers films, because he died at the end of part II. H20 only gets the kudos is does from me because of its excellent presentation.
Norman! What did you put in my tea?

He died at the end of 4, 5, 6, H20, Resurrection, and 2018 too. You're still wrong.

It's just a movie and Myers died at the end of part 2. Didn't you watch it properly?
Norman! What did you put in my tea?

I don't care if it "works for you", you're wrong. That's not a copycat in H20. It's simply not true.

I may attempt again to watch the whole thing. The first time was painful enough to sit through all the way and I wasn't scared once.
And what was with the inflating pumpkin in the opening credits sequence? If it was supposed to signify a re-emergence of Halloween films, it was preposterous….
Norman! What did you put in my tea?

I attempted to watch Halloween - '18 again the other day and got 10mins in and had to shut it off. I hated the start, (what is with the close up of the reporter's eyes?), the asylum scene was all bright, presented dull and unscary, and as soon as JLC appears like a grey haired and wacky granny, I rolled my eyes and gave up.
I gave it a second watch last month too and that line the father said about the peanut butter was so f'n cringey.
Tell you what…When I send my ex-wife her money…you can lick the stamps.

What in the hell? It was not a copycat in H20.
If you read my other comments, I have commented that is what works for me. I just can't buy into Myers as being alive, not after that inferno and his burning corpse at the end of part II.
The timelines messing is what has made this series a convoluted mess. I attempted to watch
Halloween - '18
again the other day and got 10mins in and had to shut it off. I hated the start, (what is with the close up of the reporter's eyes?), the asylum scene was all bright, presented dull and unscary, and as soon as JLC appears like a grey haired and wacky granny, I rolled my eyes and gave up.
It went through the motions of a stupid script, it made reference to other Halloween films when it was supposed to ignore what had gone before, the characters were ****e and at least
Halloween Kills - '21
opened with a Halloween vibe and atmosphere.
Even Zombie's
Halloween - '07
reboot that I am not fond of was better.
The Laurie connection thing may get more of push in the next installment, but the sister thing in part 2 worked just fine and made more sense to me.
Norman! What did you put in my tea?

"H20 works in well with a distressed and disturbed Laurie actually materializing Michael back into her life due to obsession. We know its not really Myers, (he died at the end of II burnt to a crisp), just some psycho Myers wannabe, yet I find it all works in well as a psychosomatic mind trip of Laurie's."
What in the hell? It was not a copycat in H20.
They're "messing with the timeline" because almost everyone doesn't give a **** about "The Thorn Trilogy". It's been ignored twice now: H20's continuity and 2018's.
I agree about your gore comment in H20. It's not super bloody or cartoony. It's a solid approach.
2018 is convoluted? I'm sorry, what? You said you saw Kills. I cannot comprehend your comment given that fact. Kills is a mess. Poorly acted, convoluted, and just plain 2nd rate. And another strike against Kills is it eliminates the connection to Laurie. I have no idea why they were so obsessed with adamantly stating he didn't care about killing laurie.

Well Marion Chambers says in H20 that she's been caring for Loomis until his death.
Yes, that does throw a spanner in the works. However, we do see Myers walking out in an inferno of flames at the end of part 2 and then he collapses and there are close up shots of his mask and face going all crispy.
It could be feasible Loomis survived over Myers as we didn't see him again, but that was one big massive explosion.
As I said though, what I perceive is only my interpretation to assist in making the events of H20 appear more logical within the scenario of the first 2 instalments.
Norman! What did you put in my tea?

Well Marion Chambers says in H20 that she's been caring for Loomis until his death. So even in H20, it's stated that Loomis didn't die in the fire.
Never lose your desire.

No, that was definitely Michael there.
For myself and the demise of Myers and Loomis at the end of part 2, I personally just can't go there and accept that Myers is still alive in H20. That is why I can't buy into part 4 and the rest either.
Toward the end, Michael switched clothes (off screen) with an EMT and crushed his vocal chords.
We don't know about this though until the next instalment
Resurrection
.
As a complete film on its own within H20, I see Myers as being some other psycho dude who is an obsessed Myers clone and fear manifested due to Laurie's past trauma and her own obsession.
This is only my own interpretation, because I ignore all the other sequels and take the ending of part II as matter of fact in the filmdom world. That was Carpenter's original intention at the time to kill him off. Otherwise narrative wise, H20 is then just another
Halloween 4
fallacious scenario with him still being alive.
No way he would have survived the roasting him and Loomis got.
Norman! What did you put in my tea?

I also can't buy Laurie being the vengeful crazed old lady she's become just based on the original film's scenario. It would have been II which tipped her over the edge, yet that is supposedly ignored and it makes more sense that Laurie is Myer's sister, giving him more of a bond/connection with her.
Yes, exactly. I've said this so many times. Laurie here is more crazed than H20, and she's had 40 more years to move on. If H20 happened, Laurie's trauma here would make sense. Michael kept coming back in her life.
If they kept the sibling relationship giving Michael a motivation to kill specifically her, it would make sense that she rigged her house with traps and had gun training. But to do all this based on a random serial killer from 40 years ago isn't plausible enough.
H20 works in well with a distressed and disturbed Laurie actually materializing Michael back into her life due to obsession. We know its not really Myers, (he died at the end of II burnt to a crisp), just some psycho Myers wannabe, yet I find it all works in well as a psychosomatic mind trip of Laurie's.
No, that was definitely Michael there. Toward the end, Michael switched clothes (off screen) with an EMT and crushed his vocal chords. So when Laurie cuts off his head, it's an innocent man. This was an excuse made up to have Michael back in Resurrection.
Never lose your desire.