MovieChat Forums > Halloween 4: The Return of Michael Myers (1988) Discussion > Halloween 4: Why Jamie Lloyd's Death Wou...

Halloween 4: Why Jamie Lloyd's Death Would've Made A Better Sequel


https://screenrant.com/halloween-4-jamie-lloyd-death-choice-better-sequel-reason/

Halloween 4, one of the best sequels in the franchise, introduced fan-favorite Jamie Lloyd, but killing her off would've been far more impactful. As much as horror fans enjoy watching Michael Myers slash victims over and over again, perhaps it would've been best to let Halloween rest after 1981's Halloween 2. It ended in what seemed like conclusive fashion, with Laurie Strode saved, and Michael and Dr. Loomis dead. But rest it did not, and later this year, the twelfth Halloween film will stalk theaters.

Of the Halloween follow-ups to come after Halloween 2, most were far from great, but 1988's Halloween 4: The Return of Michael Myers is a genuinely good effort, despite not nearing the heights of Carpenter. Jamie Lee Curtis didn't want to return, so Laurie was killed offscreen, and the apparent deaths of Michael and Loomis were retconned. Michael's new target would be Jamie (Danielle Harris), a daughter that Laurie had between films. Perhaps it shouldn't have worked as well as it did, but Halloween 4 is still a worthy watch today.

The Jamie Lloyd character would of course return for parts 5 and 6, only once played by Harris, but both of those proved sorely lacking. Considering the increasingly stupid plots springing out of Michael's continued pursuit of Jamie, it can be argued that her not dying in Halloween 4 was a missed opportunity.

As blasphemous as it may sound to Halloween fans, it probably would've been better if Michael killed Jamie Lloyd off in Halloween 4. While Danielle Harris was great in the role, she didn't get to do nearly as much in Halloween 5 due to being semi-catatonic for a lot of it, and Jamie was basically only around to get killed in Halloween 6. Had Halloween 5 actually followed on from Halloween 4's ambitious ending, which seemed to suggest Jamie would follow in her uncle's footsteps, things might be a different story. As it happened though, Jamie staying alive just gave producers the writing crutch of Michael chasing a relative to keep leaning on, and Halloween 2018 made clear that Michael is still just as effective without a personal vendetta driving his kills.

Plus, the Jamie storyline gave way to the disastrously awful Cult of Thorn plot, in which Michael's agency as a force of evil was entirely stripped. Additionally, both then and now, killing children in a horror movie is a huge taboo, one rarely broken by mainstream projects. Jamie dying in Halloween 4 would've been a shocking development, and establish Michael Myers as perhaps the most vile and despicable slasher this side of Freddy Krueger, although even Freddy didn't actually kill any little kids onscreen. Alas, it's doubtful killing Jamie was even considered, due to fears of upsetting the more reactionary members of the audience.


reply

Killing a child in a horror movie would've gotten them cancelled. Funny. It actually would be kind of woke in a way if the kid did die. Actually, Pet Sematary did have the child get run over and killed by the semi-truck.

reply

I dont think you can compare Pet Sematary with Halloween. Jamie was a likeable character and this storyline was so well written. It would’ve defeated the narrative had they gone there.

reply