How does Michael Myers choose his victims

Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP

up vote
3
down vote

favorite

I'd like to keep this question specific to Halloween (2018) as I know other installments of the film have somewhat changed the lore and ideas behind Michael Myers, and I haven't seen them all so I'm unsure if this might have been described or explained in some way in another.

My question is that, though Michael Myers is described as pure evil which through study, has been concluded to deserve death and incineration, why did Michael Myers decide against killing a crying baby in the same house where he murdered a woman moments earlier?

For a man considered to be pure evil, what consideration went into this decision?

We know he makes decisions because he chooses to hide and obscure bodies in relevant and interesting ways. We see that he becomes fixated on those he intends to kill too, and if they don't die, he will try to finish the job, so to speak. Under the impressions the film (and I loved this film, though it was a fantastic sequel to the original), I suspected the baby would be the next victim. Or in fact is the consideration that the baby might not survive without the mother and thus is a waste of his energy?

Is there anything canon to suggest he has a line of who he will or won't kill?

plot-explanation halloween-2018

share|improve this question

edited 2 hours ago

Paulie_D

77.8k15275263

asked 2 hours ago

Gray Roberts

1,2631618

add a comment | 

up vote
3
down vote

favorite

I'd like to keep this question specific to Halloween (2018) as I know other installments of the film have somewhat changed the lore and ideas behind Michael Myers, and I haven't seen them all so I'm unsure if this might have been described or explained in some way in another.

My question is that, though Michael Myers is described as pure evil which through study, has been concluded to deserve death and incineration, why did Michael Myers decide against killing a crying baby in the same house where he murdered a woman moments earlier?

For a man considered to be pure evil, what consideration went into this decision?

We know he makes decisions because he chooses to hide and obscure bodies in relevant and interesting ways. We see that he becomes fixated on those he intends to kill too, and if they don't die, he will try to finish the job, so to speak. Under the impressions the film (and I loved this film, though it was a fantastic sequel to the original), I suspected the baby would be the next victim. Or in fact is the consideration that the baby might not survive without the mother and thus is a waste of his energy?

Is there anything canon to suggest he has a line of who he will or won't kill?

plot-explanation halloween-2018

share|improve this question

edited 2 hours ago

Paulie_D

77.8k15275263

asked 2 hours ago

Gray Roberts

1,2631618

add a comment | 

up vote
3
down vote

favorite

up vote
3
down vote

favorite

I'd like to keep this question specific to Halloween (2018) as I know other installments of the film have somewhat changed the lore and ideas behind Michael Myers, and I haven't seen them all so I'm unsure if this might have been described or explained in some way in another.

My question is that, though Michael Myers is described as pure evil which through study, has been concluded to deserve death and incineration, why did Michael Myers decide against killing a crying baby in the same house where he murdered a woman moments earlier?

For a man considered to be pure evil, what consideration went into this decision?

We know he makes decisions because he chooses to hide and obscure bodies in relevant and interesting ways. We see that he becomes fixated on those he intends to kill too, and if they don't die, he will try to finish the job, so to speak. Under the impressions the film (and I loved this film, though it was a fantastic sequel to the original), I suspected the baby would be the next victim. Or in fact is the consideration that the baby might not survive without the mother and thus is a waste of his energy?

Is there anything canon to suggest he has a line of who he will or won't kill?

plot-explanation halloween-2018

share|improve this question

edited 2 hours ago

Paulie_D

77.8k15275263

asked 2 hours ago

Gray Roberts

1,2631618

I'd like to keep this question specific to Halloween (2018) as I know other installments of the film have somewhat changed the lore and ideas behind Michael Myers, and I haven't seen them all so I'm unsure if this might have been described or explained in some way in another.

My question is that, though Michael Myers is described as pure evil which through study, has been concluded to deserve death and incineration, why did Michael Myers decide against killing a crying baby in the same house where he murdered a woman moments earlier?

For a man considered to be pure evil, what consideration went into this decision?

We know he makes decisions because he chooses to hide and obscure bodies in relevant and interesting ways. We see that he becomes fixated on those he intends to kill too, and if they don't die, he will try to finish the job, so to speak. Under the impressions the film (and I loved this film, though it was a fantastic sequel to the original), I suspected the baby would be the next victim. Or in fact is the consideration that the baby might not survive without the mother and thus is a waste of his energy?

Is there anything canon to suggest he has a line of who he will or won't kill?

plot-explanation halloween-2018

plot-explanation halloween-2018

share|improve this question

edited 2 hours ago

Paulie_D

77.8k15275263

asked 2 hours ago

Gray Roberts

1,2631618

share|improve this question

edited 2 hours ago

Paulie_D

77.8k15275263

asked 2 hours ago

Gray Roberts

1,2631618

share|improve this question

share|improve this question

edited 2 hours ago

Paulie_D

77.8k15275263

edited 2 hours ago

Paulie_D

77.8k15275263

edited 2 hours ago

Paulie_D

77.8k15275263

77.8k15275263

asked 2 hours ago

Gray Roberts

1,2631618

asked 2 hours ago

Gray Roberts

1,2631618

asked 2 hours ago

Gray Roberts

1,2631618

1,2631618

add a comment | 

add a comment | 

1 Answer
1

active

oldest

votes

up vote
3
down vote

According to Collider:

So why doesn’t he kill the baby?

That’s the question Collider’s Perri Nemiroff put to director and
co-writer David Gordon Green when she sat down with the filmmaker to
chat about the film. “Why doesn’t he? Because that would be so rude,”
Green said. But does Michael think about it as an option when he
stops? “I think it was a consideration,” he explained.

Green continued and explained the origin of the scene, which was a
quick write-around after an unexpected road bump in production. “Yes,
it’s terrifying in its own right. And it was a last minute idea — I
mean, why is there a baby crib in the living room? It was gonna be her
husband sleeping on the couch, but then he didn’t show up and we
scrambled and put a baby crib in there. And then, yeah, I thought it
was interesting to see one ethical choice that he made in the movie.
So that’s the one ethical choice he makes.”

---

Note that Green offered a slightly different story for the presence of the baby in another interview:

The baby idea happened on set. Why would a baby crib be in the living
room of the house? But the art director had that idea at the last
minute. He's like, 'There's this blank space. We need some narrative
there. What's the story?' And so we scrambled and found a little
mobile.

[...]

But that was just a last minute idea. A perfect example of something
we'd rehearsed and thought we had it all figured out, and in the last
minute we're like, 'There's this boring gap here.' It was going to be
her husband asleep on the sofa, and it's like, 'Who gives a shit about
her husband asleep on the sofa?' But a baby crying, you're like, 'Oh,
there's an ethical choice here.'

That same interview reveals that some of the sound of the baby was created by Jamie Lee Curtis.

---

The scene basically exists to fill time:

"We were looking for an interesting 15-second gap in a long sequence.
And there were 15 seconds, no tension, no new information," the
director detailed. "And the goal was, ‘How do we put something that's
15 seconds’ worth of intrigue in the sequence?’ And the production
designer and the DP came up with the idea of putting a baby crib in
the living room and then a baby. It was one of the things that was
just exciting, and it fixed the problem; it filled the gap."

The director admits that this is inconsistent with the character:

"And now we're looking at a character who I proclaim is the essence of
evil and has no motivation, no emotion, no real stimulation other than
being a predator," the director added. "And yet we've given him this
one consideration in which he does the right thing. So I'm not exactly
sure how to stand by that and justify that, although I think it's
fascinating to think of someone that is nothing but a cold-blooded,
faceless, motivation-less killer. He made one decision that we are
happy that he made."

(Note that the actual source for these two quotes is an interview with the L.A. Times, but due to GDPR blocking I cannot access that one.)

share|improve this answer

edited 1 hour ago

answered 1 hour ago

BCdotWEB

26k473114

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  Do we consider ethics when we talk about Michael :D
  – Ankit Sharma♦
  1 hour ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

1 Answer
1

active

oldest

votes

1 Answer
1

active

oldest

votes

active

oldest

votes

active

oldest

votes

up vote
3
down vote

According to Collider:

So why doesn’t he kill the baby?

That’s the question Collider’s Perri Nemiroff put to director and
co-writer David Gordon Green when she sat down with the filmmaker to
chat about the film. “Why doesn’t he? Because that would be so rude,”
Green said. But does Michael think about it as an option when he
stops? “I think it was a consideration,” he explained.

Green continued and explained the origin of the scene, which was a
quick write-around after an unexpected road bump in production. “Yes,
it’s terrifying in its own right. And it was a last minute idea — I
mean, why is there a baby crib in the living room? It was gonna be her
husband sleeping on the couch, but then he didn’t show up and we
scrambled and put a baby crib in there. And then, yeah, I thought it
was interesting to see one ethical choice that he made in the movie.
So that’s the one ethical choice he makes.”

---

Note that Green offered a slightly different story for the presence of the baby in another interview:

The baby idea happened on set. Why would a baby crib be in the living
room of the house? But the art director had that idea at the last
minute. He's like, 'There's this blank space. We need some narrative
there. What's the story?' And so we scrambled and found a little
mobile.

[...]

But that was just a last minute idea. A perfect example of something
we'd rehearsed and thought we had it all figured out, and in the last
minute we're like, 'There's this boring gap here.' It was going to be
her husband asleep on the sofa, and it's like, 'Who gives a shit about
her husband asleep on the sofa?' But a baby crying, you're like, 'Oh,
there's an ethical choice here.'

That same interview reveals that some of the sound of the baby was created by Jamie Lee Curtis.

---

The scene basically exists to fill time:

"We were looking for an interesting 15-second gap in a long sequence.
And there were 15 seconds, no tension, no new information," the
director detailed. "And the goal was, ‘How do we put something that's
15 seconds’ worth of intrigue in the sequence?’ And the production
designer and the DP came up with the idea of putting a baby crib in
the living room and then a baby. It was one of the things that was
just exciting, and it fixed the problem; it filled the gap."

The director admits that this is inconsistent with the character:

"And now we're looking at a character who I proclaim is the essence of
evil and has no motivation, no emotion, no real stimulation other than
being a predator," the director added. "And yet we've given him this
one consideration in which he does the right thing. So I'm not exactly
sure how to stand by that and justify that, although I think it's
fascinating to think of someone that is nothing but a cold-blooded,
faceless, motivation-less killer. He made one decision that we are
happy that he made."

(Note that the actual source for these two quotes is an interview with the L.A. Times, but due to GDPR blocking I cannot access that one.)

share|improve this answer

edited 1 hour ago

answered 1 hour ago

BCdotWEB

26k473114

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  Do we consider ethics when we talk about Michael :D
  – Ankit Sharma♦
  1 hour ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

up vote
3
down vote

According to Collider:

So why doesn’t he kill the baby?

That’s the question Collider’s Perri Nemiroff put to director and
co-writer David Gordon Green when she sat down with the filmmaker to
chat about the film. “Why doesn’t he? Because that would be so rude,”
Green said. But does Michael think about it as an option when he
stops? “I think it was a consideration,” he explained.

Green continued and explained the origin of the scene, which was a
quick write-around after an unexpected road bump in production. “Yes,
it’s terrifying in its own right. And it was a last minute idea — I
mean, why is there a baby crib in the living room? It was gonna be her
husband sleeping on the couch, but then he didn’t show up and we
scrambled and put a baby crib in there. And then, yeah, I thought it
was interesting to see one ethical choice that he made in the movie.
So that’s the one ethical choice he makes.”

---

Note that Green offered a slightly different story for the presence of the baby in another interview:

The baby idea happened on set. Why would a baby crib be in the living
room of the house? But the art director had that idea at the last
minute. He's like, 'There's this blank space. We need some narrative
there. What's the story?' And so we scrambled and found a little
mobile.

[...]

But that was just a last minute idea. A perfect example of something
we'd rehearsed and thought we had it all figured out, and in the last
minute we're like, 'There's this boring gap here.' It was going to be
her husband asleep on the sofa, and it's like, 'Who gives a shit about
her husband asleep on the sofa?' But a baby crying, you're like, 'Oh,
there's an ethical choice here.'

That same interview reveals that some of the sound of the baby was created by Jamie Lee Curtis.

---

The scene basically exists to fill time:

"We were looking for an interesting 15-second gap in a long sequence.
And there were 15 seconds, no tension, no new information," the
director detailed. "And the goal was, ‘How do we put something that's
15 seconds’ worth of intrigue in the sequence?’ And the production
designer and the DP came up with the idea of putting a baby crib in
the living room and then a baby. It was one of the things that was
just exciting, and it fixed the problem; it filled the gap."

The director admits that this is inconsistent with the character:

"And now we're looking at a character who I proclaim is the essence of
evil and has no motivation, no emotion, no real stimulation other than
being a predator," the director added. "And yet we've given him this
one consideration in which he does the right thing. So I'm not exactly
sure how to stand by that and justify that, although I think it's
fascinating to think of someone that is nothing but a cold-blooded,
faceless, motivation-less killer. He made one decision that we are
happy that he made."

(Note that the actual source for these two quotes is an interview with the L.A. Times, but due to GDPR blocking I cannot access that one.)

share|improve this answer

edited 1 hour ago

answered 1 hour ago

BCdotWEB

26k473114

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  Do we consider ethics when we talk about Michael :D
  – Ankit Sharma♦
  1 hour ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

up vote
3
down vote

up vote
3
down vote

According to Collider:

So why doesn’t he kill the baby?

That’s the question Collider’s Perri Nemiroff put to director and
co-writer David Gordon Green when she sat down with the filmmaker to
chat about the film. “Why doesn’t he? Because that would be so rude,”
Green said. But does Michael think about it as an option when he
stops? “I think it was a consideration,” he explained.

Green continued and explained the origin of the scene, which was a
quick write-around after an unexpected road bump in production. “Yes,
it’s terrifying in its own right. And it was a last minute idea — I
mean, why is there a baby crib in the living room? It was gonna be her
husband sleeping on the couch, but then he didn’t show up and we
scrambled and put a baby crib in there. And then, yeah, I thought it
was interesting to see one ethical choice that he made in the movie.
So that’s the one ethical choice he makes.”

---

Note that Green offered a slightly different story for the presence of the baby in another interview:

The baby idea happened on set. Why would a baby crib be in the living
room of the house? But the art director had that idea at the last
minute. He's like, 'There's this blank space. We need some narrative
there. What's the story?' And so we scrambled and found a little
mobile.

[...]

But that was just a last minute idea. A perfect example of something
we'd rehearsed and thought we had it all figured out, and in the last
minute we're like, 'There's this boring gap here.' It was going to be
her husband asleep on the sofa, and it's like, 'Who gives a shit about
her husband asleep on the sofa?' But a baby crying, you're like, 'Oh,
there's an ethical choice here.'

That same interview reveals that some of the sound of the baby was created by Jamie Lee Curtis.

---

The scene basically exists to fill time:

"We were looking for an interesting 15-second gap in a long sequence.
And there were 15 seconds, no tension, no new information," the
director detailed. "And the goal was, ‘How do we put something that's
15 seconds’ worth of intrigue in the sequence?’ And the production
designer and the DP came up with the idea of putting a baby crib in
the living room and then a baby. It was one of the things that was
just exciting, and it fixed the problem; it filled the gap."

The director admits that this is inconsistent with the character:

"And now we're looking at a character who I proclaim is the essence of
evil and has no motivation, no emotion, no real stimulation other than
being a predator," the director added. "And yet we've given him this
one consideration in which he does the right thing. So I'm not exactly
sure how to stand by that and justify that, although I think it's
fascinating to think of someone that is nothing but a cold-blooded,
faceless, motivation-less killer. He made one decision that we are
happy that he made."

(Note that the actual source for these two quotes is an interview with the L.A. Times, but due to GDPR blocking I cannot access that one.)

share|improve this answer

edited 1 hour ago

answered 1 hour ago

BCdotWEB

26k473114

According to Collider:

So why doesn’t he kill the baby?

That’s the question Collider’s Perri Nemiroff put to director and
co-writer David Gordon Green when she sat down with the filmmaker to
chat about the film. “Why doesn’t he? Because that would be so rude,”
Green said. But does Michael think about it as an option when he
stops? “I think it was a consideration,” he explained.

Green continued and explained the origin of the scene, which was a
quick write-around after an unexpected road bump in production. “Yes,
it’s terrifying in its own right. And it was a last minute idea — I
mean, why is there a baby crib in the living room? It was gonna be her
husband sleeping on the couch, but then he didn’t show up and we
scrambled and put a baby crib in there. And then, yeah, I thought it
was interesting to see one ethical choice that he made in the movie.
So that’s the one ethical choice he makes.”

---

Note that Green offered a slightly different story for the presence of the baby in another interview:

The baby idea happened on set. Why would a baby crib be in the living
room of the house? But the art director had that idea at the last
minute. He's like, 'There's this blank space. We need some narrative
there. What's the story?' And so we scrambled and found a little
mobile.

[...]

But that was just a last minute idea. A perfect example of something
we'd rehearsed and thought we had it all figured out, and in the last
minute we're like, 'There's this boring gap here.' It was going to be
her husband asleep on the sofa, and it's like, 'Who gives a shit about
her husband asleep on the sofa?' But a baby crying, you're like, 'Oh,
there's an ethical choice here.'

That same interview reveals that some of the sound of the baby was created by Jamie Lee Curtis.

---

The scene basically exists to fill time:

"We were looking for an interesting 15-second gap in a long sequence.
And there were 15 seconds, no tension, no new information," the
director detailed. "And the goal was, ‘How do we put something that's
15 seconds’ worth of intrigue in the sequence?’ And the production
designer and the DP came up with the idea of putting a baby crib in
the living room and then a baby. It was one of the things that was
just exciting, and it fixed the problem; it filled the gap."

The director admits that this is inconsistent with the character:

"And now we're looking at a character who I proclaim is the essence of
evil and has no motivation, no emotion, no real stimulation other than
being a predator," the director added. "And yet we've given him this
one consideration in which he does the right thing. So I'm not exactly
sure how to stand by that and justify that, although I think it's
fascinating to think of someone that is nothing but a cold-blooded,
faceless, motivation-less killer. He made one decision that we are
happy that he made."

(Note that the actual source for these two quotes is an interview with the L.A. Times, but due to GDPR blocking I cannot access that one.)

share|improve this answer

edited 1 hour ago

answered 1 hour ago

BCdotWEB

26k473114

share|improve this answer

share|improve this answer

edited 1 hour ago

edited 1 hour ago

edited 1 hour ago

answered 1 hour ago

BCdotWEB

26k473114

answered 1 hour ago

BCdotWEB

26k473114

answered 1 hour ago

BCdotWEB

26k473114

26k473114

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  Do we consider ethics when we talk about Michael :D
  – Ankit Sharma♦
  1 hour ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  Do we consider ethics when we talk about Michael :D
  – Ankit Sharma♦
  1 hour ago
  

  
  
  
  

Do we consider ethics when we talk about Michael :D
– Ankit Sharma♦
1 hour ago

Do we consider ethics when we talk about Michael :D
– Ankit Sharma♦
1 hour ago

add a comment |