Kevin Lockard
08-30-2007, 04:40 AM
I'm not sure how many others on this board are fans of H20, but me being one with them, and H20 being a direct sequel to Halloween 2, skipping over Parts 4, 5, and 6 (more's the thankful for that), I would like to pose a theory - what if it had been a direct sequel to only the first movie instead?
Let's consider some things here;
Laurie Strode is still haunted by the fact that she believes Michael Myers is coming for her 20 years after she apparently watched him burn in the conclusion of Halloween 2. How is that plausible? Being haunted by hellish memories of Myers that she would no doubt suffer from because of that horrible Halloween night two decades before is perfectly fine, but actually believing he is coming for you? We are never actually given a reason as to why this is, though the obvious one would have to be because Myers is nowhere to be found, his body not even claimed, coma or otherwise, as in Part 4, especially since Dr. Loomis was also concnered with tracking Myers down for those near 20 years as well (which is kind of icky as well, because wouldn't it have been better just to write him off as dead in the explosion anyhow, since he's not in Part 7?)
I think a better alternative, in the event that H20 is a direct sequel to the original instead of the second one, is that it all makes more sense when Myers is shot and then vanishes. Afterwards, you have Dr. Loomis (minus the explosion) spending those 20 years waiting for Myers to reappear or whatnot, eventually dying with Myers probably as his last thought, and you have Laurie having a reasonable explanation for her being paranoid for Myers seeking revenge. And you, again, don't need a gapping reason for Myers being "missing" either, like you would have had he been burnt as in the end of the second one.
I like that better.
On top of that, when H20 was promoted, it was in a way that it was billed as almost a sequel to the first anyhow. Yes, "20 years" refers to both 1&2, having took place on the same night, but that doesn't change the fact that it was treated, more or less, almost as a sequel to the original regardless.
Basically, the only hiccup is that it was only revealed in Part 2 that Myer's motivation for going after Laurie is that she is his sister. However, we as an audince know this is already the case so, when it is said simply in passing in H20 as if we are already supposed to know anyhow, it's not really a big deal.
All in all, that's my take on that one. I suppose it doesn't matter, but it was just something I wanted to bring to the table for opinions. (It should also be noted I'm taking into account that H20 had also been the last one as well, which I think would have been just sweet.)
Let's consider some things here;
Laurie Strode is still haunted by the fact that she believes Michael Myers is coming for her 20 years after she apparently watched him burn in the conclusion of Halloween 2. How is that plausible? Being haunted by hellish memories of Myers that she would no doubt suffer from because of that horrible Halloween night two decades before is perfectly fine, but actually believing he is coming for you? We are never actually given a reason as to why this is, though the obvious one would have to be because Myers is nowhere to be found, his body not even claimed, coma or otherwise, as in Part 4, especially since Dr. Loomis was also concnered with tracking Myers down for those near 20 years as well (which is kind of icky as well, because wouldn't it have been better just to write him off as dead in the explosion anyhow, since he's not in Part 7?)
I think a better alternative, in the event that H20 is a direct sequel to the original instead of the second one, is that it all makes more sense when Myers is shot and then vanishes. Afterwards, you have Dr. Loomis (minus the explosion) spending those 20 years waiting for Myers to reappear or whatnot, eventually dying with Myers probably as his last thought, and you have Laurie having a reasonable explanation for her being paranoid for Myers seeking revenge. And you, again, don't need a gapping reason for Myers being "missing" either, like you would have had he been burnt as in the end of the second one.
I like that better.
On top of that, when H20 was promoted, it was in a way that it was billed as almost a sequel to the first anyhow. Yes, "20 years" refers to both 1&2, having took place on the same night, but that doesn't change the fact that it was treated, more or less, almost as a sequel to the original regardless.
Basically, the only hiccup is that it was only revealed in Part 2 that Myer's motivation for going after Laurie is that she is his sister. However, we as an audince know this is already the case so, when it is said simply in passing in H20 as if we are already supposed to know anyhow, it's not really a big deal.
All in all, that's my take on that one. I suppose it doesn't matter, but it was just something I wanted to bring to the table for opinions. (It should also be noted I'm taking into account that H20 had also been the last one as well, which I think would have been just sweet.)