Ecto-1A's discussion of Halloween

R197890mHorror, Thriller

7.797%89%7.6

Fifteen years after murdering his sister on Halloween night 1963, Michael Myers escapes from a mental hospital and returns to the small town of Haddonfield, Illinois, to kill again.

Ecto-1A wrote about

Halloween

August 13, 2026

Halloween

Prove Me Wrong

Halloween (1978) is highly overrated. Its atmosphere, music and influence on the slasher genre are undeniable, but the movie itself is slow, thinly plotted and packed with questionable character decisions and convenient logic. Michael Myers is treated as terrifying largely because he has no explanation, which can feel less mysterious than simply underwritten. The film deserves credit for what it inspired, but its reputation as an untouchable horror masterpiece often exceeds what is actually on the screen.

Ecto-1A wrote about

Halloween

August 13, 2026

Halloween

Prove Me Wrong

Comments (18)

liamcla36

September 3, 2026

Shit bait.

Ecto-1A

September 3, 2026

So you don’t have a counterargument. Got it! 👍

liamcla36

September 3, 2026

He's not an underwritten character. He's a force of nature. Laurie is the main character, she drives the plot. The fact we know nothing about The Shape makes him terrifying. Anytime they try to add backstory to him, it's crap.

Ecto-1A

September 3, 2026

People confuse “intentionally mysterious” with “incapable of being underwritten.” Michael works as a force of nature in the original Halloween, but that doesn’t mean giving him more dimension automatically ruins him. We already know plenty about him: he killed his sister, was institutionalized, escaped, returned to Haddonfield, stalked Laurie and her friends, and developed distinct patterns and obsessions. That’s characterization, just delivered indirectly. Laurie is the protagonist, but Michael drives the conflict. Bad backstory is the problem, not backstory itself. You can preserve his mystery while still giving him behavior, motives, personality, and depth. Carpenter already did that through the way Michael stalks, toys with victims, stages bodies, and deliberately creates fear. He’s terrifying because we can’t fully understand him, not because there’s nothing there to understand. There’s a difference between leaving something unexplained and having nothing to explain.

Ecto-1A

September 3, 2026

And don’t even get me started on character logic. Laurie disarms Michael twice, then throws his knife within arm’s reach both times, effectively rearming the man who just tried to murder her. That isn’t just careless, it’s absurdly self-defeating. Especially after she already knows exactly what he’s capable of.

Mark Boettcher

September 5, 2026

Did you see it at the movies when it came out. What is on the DVD, or on TV is not what was originally on the big screen.

jamesl227

September 13, 2026

The old campy nature of the film is what I love so much about it. I agree with alotnof your critiques but most of what you mentioned is what gives the movie its charm for me

mamadou fall

3d ago

Ok je veux aller au commentaire merci

rebecca9193

2d ago

The

Lee M

1d ago

I think this is a fair and incredibly sharp critique. It accurately diagnoses the gap between Halloween’s monumental historical legacy and how it actually plays as a standalone viewing experience today. Though, I have to disagree. While you describe it as thinly plotted, I would describe it as primal. I think explaining Myers' backstory like Rob Zombie did in the remake actually shrinks the character. As for pacing, I think that is a plus, not a bug. Your character decisions point really depends on which characters you are referring to, in order for me to make a counter. If we're talking about teenagers, then we're talking about that. Not survivalists or geniuses. I cannot prove you wrong - and I'm not trying to. I just feel like that you highlighted why this movie is so highly rated yourself when you talked about the atmosphere, music, influence on the genre. So, there's nothing to really argue. If it's not for you, it's not for you.

Ecto-1A

1d ago

I get what you’re saying, but calling the plot “primal” instead of thin doesn’t change its lack of narrative development. Simplicity can work, but simplicity and depth aren’t the same thing. I agree that overexplaining Michael can diminish him, but there’s a middle ground. Jason Voorhees has a backstory without losing his mystique. The slow pacing creates atmosphere, but it can also become repetitive. What was innovative in 1978 doesn’t mean every sequence remains equally compelling today. As for the teenagers, my official review already explains the specific character decisions I’m criticizing. My point is that atmosphere, music and influence explain why Halloween is historically important, not why every aspect deserves a high rating today. I can respect its influence while still criticizing its story, pacing and characters. Historical greatness and personal viewing experience aren’t the same thing. Being influential doesn’t make a movie immune to criticism.

Lee M

20h ago

Yeah, your points are fair but also you're judging a 1978 film with 2026 eyes. As for personal enjoyment, I can't make you enjoy Halloween, so the challenge "Prove Me Wrong" doesn't really land. Taste isn't a claim that one can disprove.

Ecto-1A

17h ago

Judging Halloween in 2026 doesn’t mean I’m unfairly imposing modern standards on a 1978 film. I can recognize what it accomplished in 1978 while still evaluating how well the movie itself holds up today. Those are two separate conversations. And there’s also an assumption being made here: how do you know I wasn’t alive and watching Halloween in theaters in 1978? You can’t dismiss my criticism as “2026 eyes” without knowing what perspective I’m actually bringing to it. Historical context absolutely matters. I’m not criticizing Halloween because it lacks modern effects, faster editing, elaborate kills or contemporary storytelling conventions. I’m criticizing things like narrative development, repetition, pacing and character behavior. Those are storytelling elements that existed long before 1978.

Ecto-1A

17h ago

And if the argument is that I have to view the movie primarily through the standards of its original era, then that creates an interesting problem: why are we still giving it a modern rating at all? If we’re discussing whether Halloween deserves a 9/10 or 10/10 today, then how it plays to an audience today is necessarily part of that evaluation. Otherwise, we’re rating historical importance rather than the actual viewing experience. Also, “you’re judging it with 2026 eyes” can become an easy way of insulating older classics from criticism. Plenty of films from the same period, and much earlier, still have strong characterization, narrative depth and pacing that holds up remarkably well. Age alone doesn’t explain away weaknesses.

Ecto-1A

17h ago

As for “Prove Me Wrong,” I agree that nobody can mathematically disprove personal taste. That isn’t what I mean by it. I’m inviting people to challenge the reasoning behind my opinion. If I say Halloween is overrated because its reputation rests more heavily on atmosphere, influence and technical innovation than on its plot and characters, someone can absolutely argue against that premise. You don’t have to prove that I secretly enjoy the movie. You’d have to convince me that I’m undervaluing something about it, misunderstanding what it’s trying to accomplish or applying the wrong weight to its strengths and weaknesses.

Ecto-1A

17h ago

And that’s why the I don’t think “if it’s not for you, it’s not for you” completely settles the discussion. That works for pure preference, like saying I don’t enjoy a certain flavor of ice cream. Film criticism goes further than that. We can discuss construction, characterization, pacing, cinematography, suspense, originality and execution even when the final rating remains subjective. I give Halloween enormous credit for what it changed. I just don’t believe historical influence automatically translates into a near-perfect movie. A film can be revolutionary, iconic and hugely important while still having weaknesses that become more noticeable once you separate the movie itself from the legacy surrounding it.

Lee M

15h ago

Ok man 👍🏻

nagarpoe

11h ago

As someone who only recently watched the original Halloween movies, I found that I enjoyed the second Halloween movie more than the first one

Explore

Learn More

Categories

Explore

Featured Channels

Categories

Company

Watch Free on Plex

Discover

My Media

Resources

Categories

Featured Channels

Categories

Prove Me Wrong

Prove Me Wrong

Comments (18)