We’ve all asked ourselves that question at least once in our lives at some point!
Some other questions you’ve probably thought…
What is the best way to depict “The Shape” ?
What have past movies done to make him “less” scary?
And…What can future Halloween films do to make Michael scary again?
LETS HEAR WHAT YOU GUYS THINK!!! 
Jayme, your picture itself sums up what Myers is and always should be; a mystery, an enigma shrouded in shadows. But that’s exactly where studios have wronged us fans in recent past. Especially Mr. Zombie. To me, he committed the ultimate travesty in his Halloween II: he showed Michael’s face. What made The Shape so creepy and scary when I was a kid was the sheer mystery about the way he was shot in the first few films.
Exactly! I also believe that past sequels have shown too much of Michael, if ya know what I mean. In H1, you didn’t see him that much throughout the film and that made him creepy and scary. Halloween II did a decent job in that respect, and just brought up the intensity…which is good for a sequel! lol…I always think of how JAWS was done when it comes to less being better. 
If showing Michael’s face is a travesty, then John Carpenter and Dominique Othenin-Girard are also guilty. Let’s not pretend that this was the first time we saw his face, even if we saw it longer than we did in those other films. You can argue that it’s different, but it’s really not. To be honest, I enjoyed the scenes where he had the mask on MORE in Zombie’s H2 precisely because he didn’t have it on all the time. The mask is creepy, but when you see it all the time, it loses some of its potency. When Michael puts it on in the field right before he goes in for the kill, it makes a clear connection between the mask and what it represents for Michael. It represents his loss of humanity and the things he has to do to satisfy his bloodlust.
I don’t consider Michael Myers to be scary anymore, mainly because I’ve grown up with the films and find it hard to be afraid of something I’m so familiar with. However, I do find him, let’s say, unsettling, because no matter what incarnation you’re watching, you’re watching a man who has no respect for humanity. You’re watching someone who loves to kill. It’s in his blood for whatever reason, and it’ll never leave. He’s a cold-blooded killer.
True, though Rob had Michael’s face exposed for almost the whole movie. In that sense, he took away what had made Michael creepy and only putting the mask on when he killed someone. When John and Dom did it, his face was briefly shown or silhouetted . But yeah, in terms of the incarnations…I totally agree. Each of them have their one creep factor, but mildly suffered through the direction that the films were going . I actually find that Michael is even more scary in person. I have dressed in my full costume the past two halloweens, everyone runs away and freaks out! haha
That blank stare and ‘the blackest eyes, the devil’s eyes’.
Nothing will ever come close to the original '78, '81 film. But I’d say continue from pt. 8 and keep the Akkad legacy alive.
The fear of not known who or what The Boogeyman is. When you start to show him too much and give us a reason why he became evil in the first place, then it takes away the fear factor.
After HII 1981, none of the other masks do anything for me. I’m not a Halloween fanboy. I really don’t care for the series after HII. I do like HIII, but that’s off topic here. I’ll watch the rest of the series. I don’t own the movies though. The masks are just boring to me, as the characters playing Myers are. The robotic, bigger, Myers doesn’t do it for me.
In the 78 movie though, for me, it’s about the character behind the mask. There’s hints in the movie of what type of maniac Myers is. However, when Myers kills the dog, that left me thinking of what kind of lunatic is this really? I think the mask itself, isn’t that scary in light. The lighting used made it scary. The shadowy filming made the mask into a legend as much as the character playing the role did. The character in the 78 film made the mask come to life by the way he stalks the night, looking to kill without explanation. Looking to dethrone them teenage girls. No prom, cheerleading, or any more dances for you girls. No more. I want your soul type of attitude. That’s what makes the hero mask what it is. Without the good casting of the boogeyman, the mask is nothing.
Clive Barker said it best on the HALLOWEEN: 25 Years of Terror release:
To me this is the ESSENCE of Myers and every attempt at “explaining” the madness or showing emotion was a departure from that which is THE SHAPE.
For me the story of the Shape is that it could be real and very believable, in real life. That’s my connection to the first two films. That’s what makes the 78 and 81 films so special. They’re connected, anyways. It’s same night. Nick Castle played the Shape to perfection and Dick Warlock kinda more defined the Character. The Shape in 78 and 81 films isn’t some over sized guy, the body builder type, or some huge/tall dude, who is either dumb, or some comic book fairy tale type. The Shape is a man that simply was on a mission to kill. IMO He didn’t even lose his mind a long the way. It’s just who he is. A killer. A smart killer. The other movies in the series tried too hard for justification of this or that of what the Michael Myers character is or should be. For me it’s what Myers was, and Dr. Loomis, and he died in that explosion that night. That’s what makes the hero mask so special. The characters who played the man in he first two films. They defined the boogeyman. They could’ve been wearing an ape mask, clown mask, or even a girls mask and the results would be the same. Castle and Warlock made the mask what it is today.
I think the original two movies had such an amazing atmosphere that worked on so many levels, that the later sequels just couldnt replicate. I dont particularly find the first movie super scary, but almost more exciting! The music, the chases, Loomis running around town…the first movie is so enjoyable, to me its just as good as watching a block buster like LOTR. Everything worked.
Crimson Ghost has touched on it too, Haddonfield seems so believable, as do all the characters…it makes for a great film…mix that in with a silent mysterious killer and you had lightening in a bottle.
Really, i think the reason Myers was scary, was the result of the combination of great directing, cinematography, character development, acting and music.
I think that even if they go back and reboot the series for example, and make Myers a silent mysterious shape, that they still are going to have to focus on those other elements like creating likeable characters, and working with lighening and cinematography in order to make a scary movie again.
Well said Crimson Ghost. 4 me the MUSIC put the fear of what the mask is in my head then it builds from there all in ur mind.The sack on Jason,s head was creepy as hell 2.it,s the eyes behind it.or eye 
It,s removed a bit of the terror living with the masks honestly. but it,s just a SAD 
mask and I read so much pain in it and his story being locked away is depressing then he wants to KILL 
and the music
Interesting thread with good questions.
What is the best way to depict “The Shape” ?
The best way for me is showing the shape as being a soul less killing machine with no back story on why he does what he does. While I appreciate h6 ( its one of my fav. shape looks of the series) I prefer the image that Michael was a normal kid in a normal upbringing who one day just picked up the knife with no reason and started killing. Oh and I love the John Carpenter score of the first two movies.
What have past movies done to make him “less” scary?
RZ Halloween trying to show why Michael became evil by living in a white trash family with a stripper mom, killing animals, and being bullied in school. That is such a stereotypical explanation for driving someone to be evil and heartless. Me I prefer the unknown. I also dont like how Michaels face is seen in half of RZ H2, and the fact he talks as well.
And…What can future Halloween films do to make Michael scary again?
Go back to the original style of the first two movies, less blood/gore, and more in the shadow/darkness kills.
You could show his face for 3 seconds or 30 minutes. The second you can identify what scares you, you become less afraid because you can overcome the unknown fear factor because you now know it’s a person underneath at the end of the day. The thing most scariest was the lack of any type of human connection. It’s always things you can’t see or can’t rationalize that scare people the most. Add a very odd human-ish pale white face with no emotion & no sound, knowing it’s/his intent is to kill you & move on is what makes it scary. The fact you don’t know, the fact that you can’t read his eyes, no expression & not knowing what’s underneath…
The unknown is what makes your imagination run wild without him even saying one word. He allows you to put what scares you the most as your first thought because he gives you nothing else to think about… The minute you can identify it/see it as a person like yourself, you are able to overcome the fear of the unknown because you now know… The more you find out about him the less scary he becomes to put it quickly.
Oh, yeah. The music goes a long, long way, too. It’s quite clear who influenced John Carpenter’s making of Halloween 1978. That’d be GIALLO films from the late 60’s into the mid 70’s. Where the soundtracks/music was just as good as the films. Even the way the 1978 film was filmed. It was filmed straight up GIALLO style, from the lighting to the imagery. The way Myers stalks. I get the same vibe from the killer in some of the scenes from the movie “The Iguana with the Tongue of Fire.”
Music from the likes of Ennio Morricone, Goblin, and Stelvio Cipriani.
GIALLO Music.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vNrSQUA-Te0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVlPez5LYuE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZfazAvfs61A
They just don’t make em like this anymore.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LpwKgKnuMQY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hradX7q5-4k
To me the Myers mask isn’t as scary as the man behind the mask.
As far as Jason’s sack mask. They robbed that idea here.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Town_That_Dreaded_Sundown
While I do agree with you though. It was creepy, I actually think Part ones killer was creepier. A woman killer. That was insane. None was thinking that. 
Revealing Michael’s face for split-second in Halloween is a world of difference to blatant close-ups in Rob’s Halloween II. First of all, Carpenter’s film was supposed to be a one-and-done. His reveal was to satisfy the audience’s question of “what’s behind that mask?” through the film’s entirety. Rob’s facial reveal was in a sequel and done more than once throughout the film. Although realistic, because no man would constantly wear a mask, but it could have been done with more mystery. Like using over the shoulder shots or distance shots, like in the original Halloween.
Carpenter himself has said that The Shape is made up of many elements throughout the film. During the length of the franchise, however, those elements have been gradually taken from us and we have been left strictly with an obscure vision of what the character is. Because Michael has been characterized. In Zombie adding the prequel element of his remake, he defined the character for us, instead of letting the elements and our own minds define The Shape.
Well said Matt.
Broswell, you also say that when you see the mask all of the time, it loses its potency. That’s very true, and Carpenter knew it as well - which is why he is billed as The Shape. We don’t consider this as much because we are obsessed with the mask and with stills from the film, but until the final 15-20 minutes of the film, we don’t see the mask that much at all.
Halloween is very similar to Jaws in that the shark was almost entirely unseen until the third act to build a sense of terror. In the following sequels, the shark is all over the place. Much like the Halloween sequels.
For me, both the original series AND Rob Zombie’s H1 made him scary for two very different, and obvious reasons. While Michael is scary in every movie, because of what he is and how he shows it, i do feel that the 6’9 Michael is a bit scarier than the 5’10 version. However, that Michael doesnt have the creepy, shadow stalker, dont know where the fuck he is effect either.
For me, what ruined him originally was the thorn story line. While i LOVE 6, i feel that certain plot line made his actions seem sad in a way. He wasnt really scary, because the “pure evil” aspect was gone. He was basically forced to kill his family, and felt sad about it (H5 attic scene). I understand why it was done, however, they could have just went with the simple, “He really wanted to kill laurie, but her daughter will do just fine i guess” story line LoL
In the original movie, it was how smart he was that played a big role in how scary he ended up being. He was always watching, but not to the extent that you would notice (unless youre a young boy who cant stop looking out of the blinds). He planned, and then executed perfectly, besides Laurie of course. It was also the little things, like the head tilt as he admires his dirty work, or sitting up like a friggin robot in the background. His deep, raspy breaths also played a big part. Its one of the main things that stick out in my head right now about H1.
In Robs, he was unstoppable, and beast like. He was huge and intimidating to ANYONE who got in his way. There was basically no chance to fight him, and it made it a little more intense. Unless you had a gun, or a monster truck, you were basically screwed. Yeah, the backstory pissed a lot of people off…but i dont think Rob wanted it to act as the reason of why he snapped. I believe Michael was going to snap in the remake regardless of what his home life was like, evidence lies in killing the animals. I think Rob wanted you to feel a little sympathy because of where he took the story, and how Michael wanted to reunite with his sister…however, again, i dont think his shitty life was every supposed to be the cause.
I have shared with all of you where i think they should take the sequel to H2, so i wont comment on that.
I have even shared an idea of what they could do to reboot it, so i wont say much on that either.
However, if they do a clean remake, they need to think and focus solely on the original Halloween. It needs to have that vibe, like The Strangers. It can have gore, and even some brutality, but it should focus on the suspense and terror more than how people will die. More than once, it has been proven that an old school horror film can do great thing, (INSIDIOUS/Conjuring for example). We really dont need a Laurie or Loomis, just a scary, and suspense fueled film that really showcases the evil/stalker/silent side of Michael. Something that makes us question whether or not he is standing in our dark doorways at night ya know? Its something that was lost along the way as the story evolved. With basically almost 40 years of the same plot line, its time to step away from it and make something new again. Familiar, but new.
But it was made clear in the remake that this ISN’T The Shape, so when people get up in arms about seeing Michael’s face in Zombie’s H2, I don’t understand it. It’s not the same phantom-esque creature that Carpenter created. In fact, Zombie already tried to mimic what Carpenter did in the original in the remake, and it came across as a sad imitation. At least with the sequel Zombie isn’t pretending to be Carpenter. He finally lets his own take on the material shine through, so much so that comparing it to the original or trying to apply the “rules” of the original to it is a futile effort in my opinion. It’s a completely different beast that plays by its own rules. Some people can’t accept that, but having been through sequel after sequel of roughly the same movie, I welcome that sort of thing. I love Carpenter’s movie, but I also love it enough to know that you are better off NOT trying to recreate it. Carpenter said it best in his original commentary for the film: “It works, and we should all leave it alone.”
I really don’t look at RZ’s remake as a “sad imitation.” I didn’t like the mask choice, nor the size of Myers. But, I got it. RZ’s influences showed in his remake in 2007, as much as Carpenter’s did in his 78 film.
Unlike the other movies in this series, 4-8, or whatever, RZ’s remake captured and brought to life more of what the 78 film could’ve been on a bigger budget. It felt like Halloween night, and again, I found myself caring for the characters in the RZ movie, as much as I did Carpenter’s 78 film.
As far as showing Myers face or this or that. It’s no biggie. Hollywood had been trying to define the Character of Michael Myers for decades now. Carpenter was right to say “leave it alone.” However, Hollywood and money changes that game quite quickly. In the end, JMO take it for what it’s worth. No need to try and define or justify what RZ made. Carpenter’s classic will always reign supreme. However, RZ’s two movies aren’t as bad as many think.