Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
tyrant666

Halloween 666 AKA Producers Cut: Michael Myers A Tragic Figure Or Unredeemable Mastermind Psychopath?

22 posts in this topic

One of the most debated and talked about films in the horror genre was Halloween 666: The Producers Cut version.

 

While the theatrical cut was a more straight forward Halloween affair. The Producers Cut attempted to piece together Parts 4 and 5 together.

 

Michael Impregnated Jamie with his child. He was allegedly under the influence of Thorn, which drove him to kill. Dr. Wynn is revealed to be the head of this thorn culture and he intended on using Danny for thorn. Relieving Michael of his killer instinct.

 

Once Jamie delivers the baby. She's later killed in the hospital by Wynn, instead of by Michael like seen in the theatrical cut. Later on, during the Thorn transformation to Danny via Jamie and Michael's baby. Kara begs and pleads with Michael to stop the transformation. Michael flinches a little. Later on, when Wynn confronts Michael after Tommy uses stones to stop Michael. Michael knocked out Wynn and switched clothes with him and Wynn passes the Thorn off to Loomis, leaving him in a rage as we see Michael leave them both behind.

 

Now obviously, this was one big clusterfuck ending. In the theatrical cut, its more cut and dry. Loomis was killed by Myers when he went back inside. This was done because Donald Pleasance died during filming. So they couldn't go on with him being cursed with Thorn obviously for Halloween 7. So a large majority of the film was reshot. The connection between Michael and Thorn wasn't as strong as it was in the Producers Cut.

 

Now on the surface. A lot of people don't like the Producers Cut or the Thorn storyline, as it gave Michael an excuse/reason to kill, other than the unknown, which a lot of people liked. But that isn't what this is about.

 

More food for thought. Originally in Halloween H20. Kevin Williamson was going to tie Halloween 4, 5 and 6 into the story along with 1 and 2. One of the students at the private school was going to be doing a school project and it was here that Laurie Strode would've found out about the death of Jamie, tying together that little trilogy of films to H20. But Steve Miner and apparently Jamie Lee Curtis overruled Williamson and felt 4-5-6 should be left out.

 

The question I ask is....Was Michael simply a tragic figure in all this? Doing the bidding of the Thorn? Including impregnating his niece to be used for Thorn? Or was Michael an irredeemable psychopath, simply using Wynn, Jamie and Dr. Loomis as pawns to rid himself of Thorn and go about his business as seen in the end of the producers cut?

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's pretty obvious, that with the Thorn involved, Mike's a victim. 

 

You know with a clear vision for the arc from the start, a tighter script, and the balls to release something cohesive, the Thorn arc may have been halfway decent. 

 

Still the mystery of intangible evil is what made Myers "The Shape." Trying to explain everything took away the fear of the unknown and thus this was likely a doomed enterprise from the start. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's been a while but from what I remember Michael was definitely painted as the victim. I remember in H5 he sheds a tear as Loomis talks of the rage inside him. It seemed that whole Thorn storyline was about painting Michael as an accessory to a greater, darker <insert Darrin Howard joke here> evil. 

 

Also...I remember they reference "Samhain" in the second film. It's been about ten years since I've seen H5 and H6/H6PC...I was wondering were there any others ties between H2 and the Thorn movies or was it just that single "Samhain" reference in H2. I remember thinking back in the 90's what a clever link H6 to H2 was. These days I prefer the cold, motiveless killer angle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember buying a shitty bootleg vhs of the producers cut in a random head shop,YEARS AGO. The fact that it's been remastered and commercially produced still blows my mind.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I go with the first choice, he is being used.  I seem to remember the Halloween Chaos Comics that came out before Resurrection state that Michael was stillborn, but the Curse was given to him and gave him life.

 

Perhaps, maybe it's not best to go into origins, it does take out the mystery of things kind of like Jason's father.

 

It sucks that 4-6 were ignored because that was my first exposure to the Halloween series, but they had to in order to tell the story of Laurie in H20.

 

In regards to the Producer's Cut, it feels a lot like the first Halloween in terms of mood and especially the soundtrack. I could see where they got the idea of Michael surviving H20 based on the Producer's Cut ending. It was also Donald Pleasance's last film before he died.

 

I've read some interviews with Daniel Farrands, the script writer for Halloween 6. He seem to have done a lot of research of the supernatural from Halloween 5 to prepare for it. But, the test screening went bad and they had to make it gorier to please the executives. He also had plans for Halloween 7 which involved a chase after part 6 that took all night. It also seems the town is involved with the cult as well.

 

Part 6 had to be one of the darkest and brutal films in the franchise, I still prefer it over Resurrection.

 

There was another interview where he pitched his idea for Halloween 8 that involved Tommy Doyle being blamed for the murders in H20, locked in Smith's Grove and gets out. He meets up with Lindsey Wallace and they go through Dr. Loomis' diary. It's a long flashback sequence and then they get attacked by Michael. Michael is revealed to be Laurie, she went crazy after killing him in California and became him. That made more sense than Michael switching outfits with a guy who was half his size.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Part 6 had to be one of the darkest and brutal films in the franchise, I still prefer it over Resurrection.

 

 

I'd prefer being mauled by a bear to Resurrection. That bar isn't exactly set high.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having seen both cuts, I think the Producer's Cut is the overall better version (though neither are what I'd call good films, sadly), and so Michael would be a victim in that. I'd like to think he has at least some agency in everything that happens - so he's not a total puppet - but yes. His actions at the end of the Producer's H6 are quite ambiguous in that we don't know what he's going to do next...kill again or become a recluse.

 

As far as I can remember, the Samhain mentioned in H2 is the only thing in the older films that ares later called back to with the Thorn stuff. It's almost a bit out of place in H2 as it is but, so long as the Thorn films are in your own canon, then it's a good call-back.

 

Still feel Halloween 4 is a genuinely good slasher. The original is leagues ahead, but of the rest, it's H4 very much head and shoulders above, for me.

 

Resurrection....yeah. It's not much cop. Jason's had some bad moments, but he never got karate kicked out of a window by a rapper squawking like a chicken.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember there were crazy fan theories that tied Cochran to Myers in Halloween 3 with his cultish community. Except of course, they showed Halloween on one of the tvs, so that's out.

 

I know Halloween 3 is pretty hated, but I enjoy it as a standalone film. Cochran was arguably more evil than Myers and the ending was pretty dark. I'm not sure Carpenter's idea of anthology would've worked long term though. If he was given the chance to keep it going.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember there were crazy fan theories that tied Cochran to Myers in Halloween 3 with his cultish community. Except of course, they showed Halloween on one of the tvs, so that's out.

 

I know Halloween 3 is pretty hated, but I enjoy it as a standalone film. Cochran was arguably more evil than Myers and the ending was pretty dark. I'm not sure Carpenter's idea of anthology would've worked long term though. If he was given the chance to keep it going.

 

I enjoy it too as a stand-alone. If you really try to see that the Halloween series was going to be an anthology of stories, it works well. Plus, it's got the dark ending we see in Carpenter's films but we don't know what happens. I do admit the film made a point about the commercialization of Halloween and Cochrane was trying to make people remember the real purpose even if it involved getting people get killed with killer masks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's pretty obvious, that with the Thorn involved, Mike's a victim. 

 

You know with a clear vision for the arc from the start, a tighter script, and the balls to release something cohesive, the Thorn arc may have been halfway decent. 

 

Still the mystery of intangible evil is what made Myers "The Shape." Trying to explain everything took away the fear of the unknown and thus this was likely a doomed enterprise from the start.

 

This. Especially the last paragraph. However, if you are a Halloween purist...none of this is tangible, except in a very small way. The thorn thing came waaaay after the original already had Michaels legacy written down in paperback in '78. The writers just didn't seem to read it or care about, other than ripping it off using "Samhain" as a tool.

 

Of ALL the slashers thought of, none deserve their anonymity more than Michael, it literally IS his spooky trademark. A 'force of nature' with pure evil flowing through his veins. If you want to know...read on.

 

1. Michael wasn't the only victim of this demonic possession, his Grandfather was also, only not as pure(he was an abusive drunk) and was therefore shot and killed by police, after he murdered someone at a carnival I believe.

 

2. The origin goes back thousands of years ago, in Celtic lands. A small village that was populated by druids, a disfigured man in his late teens, early twenties, had a huge crush on the village princess (think hunchback of Notre Dame). They also may have been related, albeit distant (I can't remember). Anyway, she absolutely despised his advances toward her.

 

3. During the village festival of "Samhain" (Halloween), the disfigured man caught her showing affection to another, and he took a knife and killed them both, the princess and her lover. The villagers collapsed on top of him, literally ripping him to pieces, as she was basically royalty, and he was the village idiot.

 

4. Since then, mysterious things happened on All Hallows Eve, farmers cows were found slaughtered on top of roofs, things were stolen, windows broken, chickens eaten alive, doors ripped off the hinges, etc.

Thus prompting stories of 'The Boogeyman' and the placing of carved jack-o-lanterns to scare him away, offerings of wine and cheese in baskets on the porches, kids in bed lest "the boogeyman will get you!", etc

This seemed to work, and the homes that didn't partake in the ritual, got vandalized, and their livestock slaughtered.

 

5. Little Michael would have consistant night terrors about the boogeyman telling him to do bad things. He told his Grandmother, "Grandma....what is 'The Boogeyman?'. She asked "Why?", and he told her that it tells him to kill his sister and do bad things. That is when Grandma told him the stories, and later warned his Mom, her daughter that "He hears the voices, just like his Grandfather did!", The mother sort of brushed it off as silly superstition, and told Grandma not to 'encourage him!'

 

6. Grandma promptly told her, "You aren't safe behind locked doors or windows, the boogeyman scoffs at them, and he IS REAL! She also wanted Michael to get help, and try to quiet his mind, and not listen to the voices.

However, the spirit had already taken hold, and little Michael stopped talking as much, and grew pale and distant.

 

7. Michael loved clowns, he wanted and got a clown costume for Halloween, and since his sister Judith was babysitting him that night, she also had a date coming over and had to get rid of her little brother, so she sent him out Trick or treating with the neighborhood kids. She figured she would be alright, and Michael would be home before their parents got back from dinner, and she would indulge her boyfriend, and have him gone as well.

 

8. While waiting for her boyfriend to come over, the doorbell rang. "Trick Or Treat!" said the little witches, and goblins at her door. She replied, "Oh yeah, well what if I play a Trick, and not give you guys anything?!"

The kids looked at each other in bewilderment, as they never heard that before, and didn't know how to reply.

After a short silence, a little voice said "Then we're going to kill you!" Judith and the kids looked of the porch where the voice came from, it was a little blonde boy in a clown costume. "Michael!!!" said Judith, "Is that you!?, Mom's going to hear about this one buddy!" The children scrambled off, and Judith shut the door, and Michael didn't follow the kids trick or treating, the rest you know.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is some badass background, Mark. I've heard good things about the Halloween novelization. One of these years, I really need to track it down. 

 

I'm not gonna lie, while Jason may be my favorite, the Shape is the scariest of the slashers. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is some badass background, Mark. I've heard good things about the Halloween novelization. One of these years, I really need to track it down. 

 

I'm not gonna lie, while Jason may be my favorite, the Shape is the scariest of the slashers.

 

Completely agree. The first novel is the shit, the second not so much, it reads EXACTLY like the movie script. But the first is a masterpiece, I also believe John Carpenter wrote it, using a fake name. The author is not a real person, and John hinted back in the 70's this is the story behind the film. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Completely agree. The first novel is the shit, the second not so much, it reads EXACTLY like the movie script. But the first is a masterpiece, I also believe John Carpenter wrote it, using a fake name. The author is not a real person, and John hinted back in the 70's this is the story behind the film. ;)

Interesting. Sounds like the second book had the same issue the novelization for F13 IN 3-D!!! had. It was more or less a by the numbers slog. Though if memory serves they did go with the Chris getting decapitated dream instead of Pam pulling Chris from the canoe. 

 

Also this author mystery sounds interesting too. He doesn't exist? Hm. Sounds like something Carpenter would do. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting. Sounds like the second book had the same issue the novelization for F13 IN 3-D!!! had. It was more or less a by the numbers slog. Though if memory serves they did go with the Chris getting decapitated dream instead of Pam pulling Chris from the canoe. 

 

Also this author mystery sounds interesting too. He doesn't exist? Hm. Sounds like something Carpenter would do.

 

Yep. Probably an under the table cash recovery back up plan. He didn't think he would work again after the initial reviews.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Awesome! Such talent, sold and then scrapped. Typical, that's why all the greats left, ahem John Carpenter.

Great find!

 

If anyone is interested in reading the draft,send me a message

 

;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If anyone is interested in reading the draft,send me a message

 

;)

It would probably only break my heart, but the next one has the master (Carpenter) return in an executive position!

The canon is sticking with the originals too! Could be the return of TRUE FEAR!!! ;)

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the T-Cut he is more true to the rest of the series..... an uncontrollable, irredeemable monster. But in the P-Cut, he's more of a tragic figure because he's essentially just being controlled. Which is total nonsense. I enjoy Halloween 6, both cuts, and I greatly appreciate the P-Cut, but I greatly prefer the T-Cut overall because you can't control Michael. He's evil to the core. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/20/2017 at 0:34 AM, Risinggrave said:

Interesting. Sounds like the second book had the same issue the novelization for F13 IN 3-D!!! had.

Michael laughs maniacally and gets decapitated by a scythe at the end?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, RKSDooM said:

Michael laughs maniacally and gets decapitated by a scythe at the end?

I meant it to mean that it was an uninspired chore to read. 

Though the book had the better ending, with Jason decapping Chris rather then Pam jumping from the lake during the dream sequence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I forgot that the book had the Chris decap. I just remember that reading it was like being unable to turn away from a particularly gruesome car accident.

The Simon Hawke novelizations, on the other hand, I remember quite enjoying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0