Apologies if this has either been discussed before, or is obvious to everyone but me.
Everyone knows the “sister angle” was introduced in the second Halloween film as a means to explain Michael’s obsession with Laurie. He’s trying to recreate the act of killing his sister Judith, right?
Something was recently brought to my attention, and I watched the film again to verify, but are we completely sure that Judith and Michael are brother and sister, in the context of ONLY the first film? The Shape is never referred to as “Michael Myers,” not even in the credits. There are (as far as I could tell) no references to Michael having killed his sister, only to Michael having killed Judith Myers. There is only one piece of evidence I could find in support of him being her brother. Before Michael goes into Judith’s room, he passes through what appears to be a child’s room. We could infer that is his bedroom. (Did I miss something?)
In the script, however, Judith’s character in the opening pages is only labelled “Sister,” so the idea was obviously there from the beginning. The family relationship is in Curtis Richards’ novelization as well. (As is, “I’ve been trick or treated to death tonight!” “You don’t know what death is!”)
Maybe I’m crazy, but I saw a handful of the sequels before the first film (I was born in 1990), and always just accepted it as fundamental that Halloween’s killer is named Michael Myers, and that his original kill is his sister. When watching the first film in the past, my brain just plugged in that information, despite it never being stated explicitly.
So what do you guys think? Does this blow anyone else’s mind? I’ve seen this movie twenty times and never considered this. Or, am I way off and embarrassing myself here by either being wrong or dense?
Despite what Tommy Lee Wallace says, it’s extremely clear that The Shape’s name is Michael Myers in the first film.
His father calls him “Michael” when he takes off his clown mask at the end of the fist scene.
He is also named “Michael Myers” in the end credits twice - once as an adult (23 - Tony Moran, and once as a child (6 - Will Sandin).
He is ALSO listed as “The Shape”, being played by Nick Castle.
Barring the end credits, I don’t think anyone actually calls him “Michael Myers” in the movie, so you’re not crazy for asking your question.
I’m not disputing that his name is definitely “Michael,” just the “Myers” part. On my blu-ray copy, there are not credits for a “Michael Myers,” only for “Michael.” Sorry about the quality, stole this from a Youtube video.
I noticed these things myself only within the last ten years or less, it made me look at the film with even more respect due to the vagueness of things we took as fact after Halloween 2. It also made me think of how the film would be viewed without the sequels to color our opinions.
Judith says "My parent’s won’t ne home until 10:00.
A man and woman (Judith’s parents) pull-up in a car and the man says “Michael” when he takes off his clown mask at the end of the first scene.
Laurie’s Dad says to her “Don’t forget to drop off the key at the Myers house”.
So with this I guess we are to assume (and put two and two togehter) that the kid who killed the gilr is called Michael Myers, and the girl was his sister, Judith. But you are right, it is never stated in the original movie that Michael’s last name was/is Myers.
Those are fair points, as babysitters don’t usually do the sitting at their own home.
However, it’s not completely out of the realm of possibility to think she was babysitting and that Judith’s parents merely recognize him as a kid from the neighborhood whom Judith was babysitting/took trick or treating.
That said, I’m not gonna argue that it’s not heavily implied they are siblings, and that we are supposed to make that connection, or that it’s even not obvious. After all, it took me twenty years to realize they never explicitly state any of this.
And yes it totally adds a new dimension to this film, for me! As much as I’m a fan of the series and feel great respect for some of the entries (and mere nostalgia or even disdain for others), it’s just another piece of evidence in support of the first film as a masterpiece, a true classic.
I have always felt that movie made it a point to convey that Judith was Michael’s sister. Why would Michael steal Judith’s headstone from her grave site? That would be pretty random if there was no family relationship involved. I will admit I haven’t watched the movie, in its entirety in about 2 years, but doesn’t Loomis also call him Michael Myers during the movie multiple times?
I thought for sure he did, at first, but I couldn’t find a single instance.
Stealing the headstone is still significant, as it’s his first kill. He relives this kill by murdering Annie, Linda, and attempting to murder Laurie. You could say it’s random that he chose Laurie at all, but he’s a psychopath and to a certain extent I like that we may not understand his motives.
Great post! I think it’s fair to say, while inferred, the film doesn’t clarify! It goes so far as to seemingly intentionally leave “Myers” out of the credits. If observing the film by only what the original gives us, the killer is just “Michael”, an ominous psychotic.
The truth is: Michael is never definitively a “Myers” in the 1978 film. I know Carpenter’s intention was to simply make The Shape a babysitter stalker. This would explain why he specifically targets babysitters for the rest of the film. After all, the original film title that Carpenter gave it was The Babysitter Murders.
On a side note, I always thought the Halloween II explanation that Laurie is his sister was never compelling enough. Seemed like too much exposition; an attempt to keep the storyline interesting.
It doesn’t rule out Judith as his sister, but it’s a fun theory. Thanks for sharing.
Michael is enigmatic. Ominous. A lunatic. The boogeyman.
Looking at the original film alone, he stalks both Laurie and Tommy (doesn’t just focus on Laurie like in part 2, though she gets more screen time), and the only reason he seems to do this is because they were the first people he saw up close in his return to Haddonfield as they came to the Myers house. It’s a case of terrible luck (or ‘fate’) for Laurie and Tommy, instead of the deliberate seeking out of Laurie that part 2 implied.
Great observation. I always wondered what happened to the person Laurie left the keys for. Assumably either they never showed up or had the great luck of looking at the house while Michael was out driving around.
Ha! I never considered that. I’m guessing Michael left just after he saw Laurie, and that the house was vacant until Loomis and Brackett showed up later that night.
Yep, he stepped out onto the sidewalk when Laurie was walking away.
It’s also implied that he came back before Loomis and Brackett get there that night.
The people checking the place out must have done so in a very narrow window of time!
I think that the only way for the franchise to ever continue is going to be if they look at the first film, and completely ignore the others that follow. Like what youre doing. It raises questions, it gives leeway’s, and at the end of the day, we aren’t stuck with a blood line story. I do feel like the point of it all was for us to infer, instead of mapping everything out for us, but I love the questions. Perhaps John didn’t know if he actually wanted Michael to be a Myers. Who knows what John was thinking when he made the film and then thought of sequels. It could have gone so many different ways. Which only furthers my point, lets JUST remake the 1978 film for what it was back in 1978, not what a 40 year old franchise turned it into.
Good point! I think it would be impossible to extricate Judith and Michael as siblings from any future film, but that could be made coincidental. Whoever is “Laurie” in the next film, in whatever form that character takes, does not need to be his sister!
Excellent observation! Can’t believe I never noticed before to be honest. The biggest potential hole in the theory is Judith’s headstone but I have a thought on that…
As it pertains to Judith’s headstone; I’ve always thought it had less to do with it being his Sister and more about it being a symbolic commemoration of his first victim to put in his shrine along with his other victims up until that point.
Although it probably isn’t the case canonically speaking, to omit the Myers name in the credits and not overtly reference it in the film does seem deliberate.
Although not explicitly stated, in the film, The Shape’s name is Michael Myers, same last name as Judith. Judith is also referred to as the daughter of the Myers.
Judith was combing her hair in a woman’s bedroom when Michael killed her. So, unless Michael has a sister other than Judith, Judith would be combing her hair topless in another woman’s bedroom.
