The New 'Halloween' Almost Kept 'Halloween II' Canon – Here's How It Would've Been Different

By now, you likely know that David Gordon Green's Halloween ignores every single sequel in the Halloween franchise, and serves as a direct follow-up to the first film. But that wasn't always the case! In a new interview, Green revealed that for a long period of time, he considered keeping Halloween II as part of the cannon. If so, it would've changed the events of Halloween 2018 considerably. Spoilers follow.

Some hardcore Halloween fans might not take kindly to the fact that the 2018 Halloween film ignores the canon of the entire franchise save for the first film, but the end results speak for themselves. As a direct sequel to John Carpenter's Halloween, the new movie works exceedingly well, and does an excellent job of bringing the story full circle.

Yet things could've been very different. In an interview with CinemaBlend, director David Gordon Green confirmed that at one point, he was going to keep the events of Halloween II in canon as well:

"I hung on tight to Halloween II for a while, and [co-writer Danny] McBride was always trying to get me to let it go...And then when we were talking kind of ultimately about the path, and once we got actually into the writing itself, we were just thinking it's scarier if it's random."

Halloween II is the film that introduced the twist that Laurie Strode (Jamie Lee Curtis) was actually the long-lost sister of Michael Myers. It's a twist that writer John Carpenter later admitted was a mistake, because it changed the entire Michael Myers dynamic. He was no longer a killer with no motive – he was someone hunting down his bloodline. The twist changed the franchise forever.

Ultimately, what convinced Green to abandon it in the new film was the sequence when Michael Myers stalks through Haddonfield killing random strangers.  "I read that I was like, 'Okay, but that only works if he's not just trying to kill his sister, you know?'" Green said. "And so that, that was a pivotal scene for me, not only just in the effort that we had in production trying to rehearse it and get it right, but also in terms of accepting that I was going to have to say goodbye to a movie that really liked."

I think Green made the right choice. Removing the sibling angle makes Michael Myers much scarier – he has no real motive for killing, he just kills.

What Would Have Changed?

But how would the new Halloween differ if Halloween II remained in canon? For one thing, Michael Myers would be blind. At the end of Halloween II, Laurie shoots both of his eyes out. Then again, in subsequent Halloween sequels that follow Halloween II, this was completely ignored, so perhaps it could've been ignored here as well. Michael would also have burns all over his body, as the sequel concluded with the Shape going up in flames.

Halloween 2018 has Michael in an insane asylum, where he's been for the last 40 years. If the events of Halloween II remained intact, the character might be presumed dead, or in a hospital from his burns. Having him appear in good health, but remain silent and still, waiting for his chance to strike again, works much better.

And of course, the biggest difference would be that Michael and Laurie would still be related. Michael comes after Laurie in the new film regardless, but his arrival at Laurie's house almost feels like an accident. When he escapes, he's not really looking for her, specifically. He's simply wandering Haddonfield, slicing and dicing anyone he sees. He only ends up in a confrontation with Laurie because his new psychiatrist, Dr. Sartain, drives him to her house.

In short, removing Halloween II works in Halloween 2018's favor. The movie is stronger because of it, and scarier, too. That doesn't mean you can't go back and enjoy Halloween II whenever you want, though.