The Shifting Shadows: Unraveling Michael Myers’ Motivations for Family Violence Across the Halloween Franchise

Michael Myers, often referred to as “The Shape,” stands as one of horror cinema’s most enduring and terrifying figures.

His silent, relentless pursuit and iconic white mask have cemented his place in popular culture.

Unlike many slasher villains, his initial appearance offered no clear motive, making him a chilling embodiment of pure, inexplicable evil.

The fundamental question “why did Michael Myers kill his family?” has plagued audiences and filmmakers alike since his debut.

The franchise, over decades, has offered a multitude of answers, often contradictory, reshaping the very nature of the character.

The Halloween series is notorious for its convoluted continuity, featuring several distinct timelines that diverge after key films.

Each timeline attempts to provide its own rationale for Michael’s actions, particularly his violence towards family members, leading to a rich but often confusing tapestry of motivations.

This report will dissect these various explanations to provide a comprehensive understanding.

To provide clarity on the various interpretations of Michael Myers’ motivations across the franchise’s complex timelines, the following table offers a comparative overview:

Table 1: Michael Myers’ Motivations Across Key Halloween Timelines

Timeline/Film Series	Key Family Members Targeted	Stated/Implied Motivation for Family Kills	Nature of Michael Myers	Key Source Snippets
Original 1978	Judith Myers	Pure, Unexplained Evil	Pure Evil/Boogeyman	1
Original Timeline (H2-H20)	Laurie Strode	Familial Vendetta (Laurie is his sister)	Human Psychopath (with supernatural resilience)	1
Thorn Timeline (H4-H6)	Jamie Lloyd, Laurie’s adoptive family	Curse of Thorn (supernatural possession)	Cursed/Possessed Puppet	1
Rob Zombie Timeline (2007-2009)	Judith Myers, Laurie Strode	Childhood Trauma/Psychopathy, Twisted Reunion	Human Psychopath (sympathetic backstory)	1
Blumhouse Trilogy (2018-2022)	Judith Myers, Karen Strode	Pure Evil, Contagion of Evil	Pure Evil/Boogeyman, Embodiment of Evil/Contagion	1

---

2. The Original Vision (1978): Pure Evil, No Reason

In John Carpenter’s seminal 1978 film, Michael Myers is introduced as a six-year-old boy who murders his teenage sister, Judith Myers, on Halloween night, 1963.¹

The film deliberately offers no psychological or supernatural explanation for this heinous act.

Dr. Sam Loomis, Michael’s psychiatrist, famously describes him as “pure and simply evil,” a “six-year-year-old child with this blank, pale, emotionless face, and…

the blackest eyes – the Devil’s eyes”.²

This portrayal emphasizes Michael as an embodiment of malevolence, often referred to as an “it” rather than a “him,” a “monstrous concept made flesh”.³

The strength of the original film lies precisely in this ambiguity; Michael is presented as a “senseless killer” ⁵, a “creature of instinct rather than want and desire”.⁶

His true motives are “not entirely filled in,” and his “personality and purpose seems oddly incomplete,” a quality explicitly reflected by his “concealing, ivory face-mask”.⁷

This deliberate lack of explanation is what establishes his terrifying nature, setting him apart from other horror icons who often have clearer backstories or defined weaknesses.⁸

The terror audiences experience is directly linked to this absence of understanding; as some analyses suggest, “From this lack of understanding grows the seeds of terror”.⁷

This approach establishes a critical standard for the franchise, where any subsequent attempt to provide a motive for Michael’s actions would inevitably be measured against this initial, terrifying ambiguity.

In the 1978 film, Laurie Strode is presented as an unfortunate victim of circumstance.

She is described as “unfortunate to be the first young woman he crossed paths with” ⁵ or simply “the one who approached his house and caught his eye”.⁵

Michael’s pursuit of Laurie and her friends is characterized as “entirely random”.⁶

There is no familial connection implied in this initial installment; she simply made the “mistake” of going onto his abandoned property and being noticed.⁵

He is depicted as a stalker who finds “fun and games” in biding his time and being calculated in his choices, much like “a cat looking for the right moment to strike”.⁵

The artistic decision by John Carpenter to avoid providing an explicit explanation for Michael’s actions ⁵ directly shaped his portrayal as a force of “pure evil” ³ and an unkillable entity.⁸

This philosophical choice resulted in Laurie being a victim of sheer chance, rather than a targeted family member, which in turn contributed to the audience’s heightened sense of fear due to the killer’s unpredictability and lack of a distinct motive.²

Michael’s portrayal as “The Shape” in the script ⁹ and his characterization as the “embodiment of evil / the boogeyman” ³ underscore a crucial aspect of his terror.

The “boogeyman” archetype, by its very definition, thrives on a “lack of definition” and the absence of “rules”.⁹

This inherent characteristic of pure, unmotivated evil creates a truly primal fear – the fear of something fundamentally wrong, without discernible cause or cure.

However, this purity presents a significant narrative challenge for ongoing franchises.

To extend the story, filmmakers often feel compelled to provide reasons for the monster’s actions, which, by their very nature, can undermine the essence of the “boogeyman” and diminish its terrifying impact.

This tension becomes a recurring theme throughout the franchise’s evolution, as attempts to explain Michael often lead to a perceived reduction in his horror.

---

3. The Familial Retcon (Original Timeline: Halloween II & H20 Timeline)

Halloween II (1981) introduced a significant retroactive continuity, establishing that Laurie Strode is Michael Myers’ younger sister.¹⁰

This revelation attempts to provide a concrete motive for Michael’s relentless pursuit of Laurie in the first film, suggesting he was “trying to kill his other sister all along but wasn’t sure which babysitter was her”.¹⁰

Michael supposedly discovers this information definitively from a police scanner in

Halloween II, which also reveals Laurie’s hospital location.¹⁰

This shift fundamentally changes Michael’s motivation from random, indiscriminate evil to a targeted, familial vendetta.

His initial murder of Judith in 1963 is now seen as the first act in a pattern of violence aimed at his bloodline.

The retcon retroactively explains Michael’s actions in Halloween (1978), transforming Laurie from a random victim into a specific, predetermined target due to their blood relation.¹⁰

This provides a more conventional, albeit less terrifying, reason for his obsession, moving away from the “pure evil” concept towards a more understandable, albeit disturbed, familial drive.

The decision to make Laurie Michael’s sister ¹⁰ was likely a pragmatic choice driven by the need to create a compelling narrative hook for sequels, particularly to facilitate the return of Jamie Lee Curtis.¹⁰

This approach illustrates a tendency within the franchise to prioritize plot continuation and character relationships over the original film’s abstract, unmotivated evil.

The inherent difficulty of sustaining a horror series based on a character whose primary terror stems from their lack of explanation is evident in this shift.

While providing a clear “why” for Michael’s pursuit of Laurie, this retcon simultaneously “undermines Halloween by changing his relationship with Laurie”.⁶

It “deflates the mystery” ⁶ and makes Michael less scary as a “pure evil” entity, transforming him into a more conventional slasher villain with a specific target.

This highlights a common pitfall in horror franchises: over-explaining the monster can make it less frightening.

The Halloween H20: 20 Years Later timeline, which ignores Halloween 4-6, maintains the sibling connection between Michael and Laurie.¹

Laurie Strode fakes her death and goes into hiding, but Michael eventually tracks her down, continuing his familial pursuit.¹

This timeline reinforces the idea that Michael’s primary target is his sister, driven by this established blood tie.

The desire for a sequel and a clear antagonist-protagonist dynamic ¹⁰ led directly to the retcon of Laurie as Michael’s sister.¹⁰

This new familial relationship then influenced Michael’s character by providing him with a specific, understandable motive – a familial vendetta.¹⁰

The consequence of this new motive was that it “undermines Myers’ arbitrary pursuit of Laurie in Halloween” ⁶, thereby diminishing the original terror derived from his unmotivated evil.²

This demonstrates how attempts to add depth can inadvertently dilute the character’s core appeal, shifting the source of horror from the unknown to a more conventional, albeit disturbing, family conflict.

---

4. The Cult of Thorn (Thorn Timeline: Halloween 4-6)

The “Thorn Timeline” (encompassing Halloween 4: The Return of Michael Myers through Halloween: The Curse of Michael Myers) introduces the most overtly supernatural explanation for Michael’s actions: the Curse of Thorn.¹

This ancient Druid curse, placed on a child from a tribe, possesses them and drives them to kill their family on Halloween night (Samhain).²

Michael Myers is revealed to be inflicted with this curse.¹

In this timeline, Michael is essentially a “puppet” controlled by the Cult of Thorn.²

This means his initial murder of Judith, and his subsequent pursuit of Laurie (and later Jamie Lloyd), are not acts of personal evil but rather the result of an external, demonic force.²

With Laurie Strode presumed dead, the Thorn timeline shifts Michael’s focus to his niece, Jamie Lloyd (Laurie’s daughter).¹

Jamie becomes the new primary target of the curse, as it compels Michael to kill his remaining family members.¹

Halloween: The Curse of Michael Myers further complicates this, revealing Jamie has been kidnapped and impregnated by the cult, and is killed by Michael after giving birth to her baby, who then becomes the next target.¹

This emphasizes the curse’s relentless pursuit of the Myers bloodline.

The Thorn storyline provides a comprehensive “how” and “why” for Michael’s actions.²

This extensive explanation, while attempting to create deeper lore, ironically “diminishes that legacy that was so carefully crafted by John Carpenter” ² and “takes all of the mystique out of his character”.²

This illustrates that explaining the unexplainable often makes it less scary, transforming a terrifying unknown into a comprehensible, albeit twisted, mechanism.

This timeline serves as a cautionary tale for horror franchises.

By providing a definitive, external cause for Michael’s evil, it strips him of his terrifying agency and inherent malevolence, making him a victim or a tool rather than the embodiment of pure evil.

This shift was widely criticized by fans and critics, leading to its eventual retcon.²

The introduction of the Cult of Thorn and the curse ² led directly to Michael being portrayed as “brainwashed” and a “puppet”.²

This portrayal removes his internal motivation and agency, making his killings, including those of his family, a result of external compulsion rather than inherent evil.

The consequence of this lack of agency is that he becomes “not scary at all anymore” to some viewers ², because the terror of “pure evil” is replaced by the horror of a manipulated being.

This demonstrates how shifting the source of evil from internal to external can fundamentally alter a character’s impact, reducing his terrifying autonomy.

---

5. Rob Zombie’s Reimagining (2007-2009): Trauma, Psychopathy, and Twisted Bonds

Rob Zombie’s 2007 Halloween remake (and its sequel) radically reinterprets Michael Myers by giving him a detailed, sympathetic backstory rooted in childhood trauma and psychopathy.¹

Michael is depicted as a victim of abuse, growing up in a “shitty environment”.¹¹

He exhibits early signs of psychopathic tendencies, torturing and killing small animals before the events of Halloween.¹¹

His initial murders on Halloween 1990—including his sister Judith, her boyfriend, and his mother’s abusive boyfriend Ronnie White—are portrayed as acts of revenge against those who “hurt or treated him/his mom badly”.¹¹

This provides a psychological, albeit disturbed, rationale for his family violence, contrasting sharply with the original’s pure evil.

Zombie’s films explicitly establish Michael and Laurie as siblings from the beginning.¹

After his institutionalization, Michael’s goal shifts to reuniting with Laurie.¹¹

In

Halloween II (2009), this motivation is further explored, with Michael being guided by hallucinatory visions of his dead mother and a younger version of himself, who instruct him to “reunite with Laurie”.⁹

He believes Laurie will welcome him with “unconditional love” like his mother once did.¹¹

His brutal killings of Laurie’s friends and parents are seen as his twisted way of “showing how far he’s willing to go for her” or removing obstacles to their reunion.¹¹

Rob Zombie’s approach represents a broader movement in horror reboots to ground supernatural or enigmatic villains in psychological realism.³

By giving Michael a “dysfunctional home backstory” and depicting him as a psychopath ³, the films attempt to make him more “human” and relatable to real-world serial killers.⁹

The underlying aim here is an exploration of the origins of evil within a human context, moving away from abstract, supernatural forces.

This shift intends to make Michael scary because he “could actually come to existence in the environment we live in”.¹¹

However, this also creates a fundamental contradiction with the original’s “pure evil” concept.

While some viewers appreciated the detailed backstory, others felt it “doesn’t work because the scary thing about the character of Michael Myers in the original movies wasn’t that he’s traumatized or has reasons to be the way he is”.¹¹

This highlights the ongoing debate about whether Michael should remain an unknowable force or become a psychologically complex character.

Michael’s “shitty environment” and “abuse” ¹¹ are presented as causal factors that “broke something inside him and triggered the latent evil”.¹¹

This breakdown led to his early psychopathic tendencies and revenge-driven killings, including Judith’s murder.¹²

Even within this psychological framework, Zombie deliberately leaves Michael’s ultimate motive for returning to Haddonfield “ambiguous” ¹², posing the question of whether he truly intends to kill Laurie or “just find her because he loves her”.¹²

This ambiguity implies a complex, twisted emotional motivation rather than purely random violence.

Thus, Michael’s abusive childhood and latent psychopathy are shown to trigger his violence, including against his family, leading to a disturbed familial obsession.

---

6. The Blumhouse Revival (2018-2022): Reverting to the “Shape” and the Contagion of Evil

The Blumhouse trilogy (Halloween 2018, Halloween Kills, Halloween Ends) establishes a new timeline that directly follows the original 1978 film, explicitly disregarding all subsequent sequels, including the sibling revelation.¹

A key reinterpretation is the complete removal of the sibling relationship between Michael Myers and Laurie Strode.¹

This decision fundamentally alters Michael’s motivation, moving away from any familial drive for his actions towards Laurie.

By eliminating the sibling motive, this trilogy aims to bring Michael Myers back to John Carpenter’s original concept of him as a force of “pure evil” and an “irrational, unstoppable” entity.¹

Michael escapes Smith’s Grove Sanitarium after forty years and immediately returns to Haddonfield for another killing spree, without a clear, personal vendetta against Laurie beyond their initial encounter.¹

He simply “wants to kill everyone in sight regardless of who they are”.¹³

This reinforces his inherent malevolence and near-invincibility.¹

His initial murder of Judith in 1963 remains an unexplained act of pure evil, as in the original.

The decision to sever the sibling connection ¹ and return Michael to “pure evil” ¹ indicates a cyclical pattern within the franchise, where there is an attempt to reset and revert to what made the original so terrifying.

This suggests a recognition that the enduring power of Michael Myers lies in his ambiguity and unexplainable nature, rather than convoluted backstories.

This highlights the enduring appeal of the “boogeyman” archetype and the creative challenge of maintaining it across multiple films.

This cycle of explanation and reversion implies that for Michael Myers, less is often more when it comes to motivation, and that attempts to humanize or rationalize him often dilute his terrifying impact.

Halloween Ends (2022) introduces a new, chilling element to the nature of Michael’s evil: the suggestion that it can be transferred or manifested in others.¹

Corey Cunningham, a troubled young man, encounters Michael in the sewer and subsequently begins helping Michael kill people, eventually manifesting “the same evil” and even stealing Michael’s mask to commit murders himself.¹

This reinterpretation suggests that Michael’s evil is not solely confined to him but can be a corrupting influence, making it a more pervasive and insidious force affecting the community.

The removal of specific familial motives ¹ necessitated a new way to explore Michael’s enduring impact and the nature of evil.

The introduction of the “contagion of evil” through Corey Cunningham ¹ provides a novel explanation: Michael’s evil is not just about direct killing, but about its ability to corrupt and spread.

This influences the narrative by showing evil as a pervasive force, not limited to one individual, and demonstrates how a narrative choice (removing a motive) can lead to the development of new, abstract causal explanations for the horror.

---

7. The Enduring Question: Why the Shifting Explanations?

The Halloween franchise’s multiple, often contradictory, explanations for Michael Myers’ motivations (or lack thereof) highlight a fundamental struggle in sustaining a horror icon.⁶

John Carpenter’s original vision of Michael as “pure evil” without reason ² was potent but inherently difficult to build sequels upon.

The need for continued narratives led to “unnecessary tether[s]” ⁶ like the familial retcon ¹⁰ and the supernatural Cult of Thorn.²

Rob Zombie’s psychological approach ¹¹ further demonstrated the desire to reinterpret the character for new audiences.

This struggle reflects a broader challenge in horror: how to evolve a character while preserving what made them terrifying.

The constant re-explanation suggests a lack of confidence in the original, simple premise to carry a multi-film series.

The consensus among many fans and critics is that providing a clear motive “diminishes” Michael’s legacy and makes him “less scary”.²

The terror of the original film stemmed from the “fear of the unknown and the unexplainable”.⁸

When Michael is a “senseless killer” ⁵ or “pure evil” ⁶, he is unpredictable and primal.

When he is cursed by a cult ² or driven by childhood trauma ¹¹, he becomes more “human” ², and thus, paradoxically, less monstrous to some.

The “mystique” is lost ², and the “how is that possible” element, which adds fear, is explained away.⁸

This suggests a direct inverse relationship between the level of explanation and the degree of terror Michael inspires.

The recurring sentiment across various discussions ² is that attempts to explain Michael’s motivations, particularly the Thorn cult, are seen as “mistakes” or as “diminish[ing] that legacy.” Conversely, the return to “pure evil” in the Blumhouse trilogy is largely welcomed.²

This highlights a strong preference among audiences: for a character like Michael Myers, the terror derived from the inexplicable, from him being a “boogeyman incarnate” ⁹, outweighs the desire for a coherent, rational backstory.

This implies that the most effective horror often taps into primal fears of the unknown and uncontrollable.

Filmmakers attempting to extend franchises with such characters must weigh the benefits of narrative expansion against the risk of demystifying their monster and alienating an audience that values the original, unexplained terror.

The demand for sequels ⁶ has consistently prompted filmmakers to seek new motivations or explanations for Michael’s actions, including his family killings.²

These explanations, however, often contradict the original “pure evil” concept and diminish the character’s terror.²

This then leads to audience dissatisfaction and calls for a return to the original vision, which in turn prompts new timelines that retcon previous explanations.¹

This creates a cyclical pattern of narrative compromise and correction within the franchise, illustrating a self-perpetuating cycle of creative decisions and audience reactions.

---

8. Conclusion: The Power of the Unexplained

From the original 1978 film’s portrayal of Michael Myers as an embodiment of pure, unmotivated evil, particularly in the murder of his sister Judith, the Halloween franchise has traversed a complex landscape of explanations.

Halloween II introduced the familial retcon, making Laurie Strode his sister and providing a specific, albeit retroactive, target for his rage.

The “Thorn Timeline” externalized his violence through a supernatural curse compelling him to kill his bloodline.

Rob Zombie’s remakes delved into psychological trauma and psychopathy, grounding his family violence in a disturbed desire for reunion.

Finally, the Blumhouse trilogy reverted to the original “pure evil” concept, severing familial ties and introducing the chilling idea of evil as a contagious force.

Despite the various attempts to explain him, the enduring power of Michael Myers, particularly in his initial portrayal, lies in his inscrutability.

The terror of the “Shape” is most potent when his actions, including the murder of his family, are devoid of discernible reason, making him a truly inexplicable and unstoppable force of malevolence.

Michael Myers’ legacy is inextricably linked to this ongoing debate about his motivations.

The franchise’s continuous reinterpretation of his “why” reflects not only a creative struggle but also the audience’s enduring fascination with the nature of evil.

Ultimately, the most chilling answer to “why did Michael Myers kill his family” remains the simplest, and perhaps the most terrifying: because he is purely and simply evil.

Works cited

1. Michael Myers (Halloween) – Wikipedia, accessed August 12, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Myers_(Halloween)
2. Turning Michael Myers Into a Supernatural Cult Monster Made Him …, accessed August 12, 2025, https://collider.com/michael-myers-halloween-backstory/
3. And Still It Comes: Fate and Mortality in the Halloween Franchise – Horror Homeroom, accessed August 12, 2025, https://www.horrorhomeroom.com/and-still-it-comes-fate-and-mortality-in-the-halloween-franchise/
4. An analysis of Michael Myers as he’s portrayed in the original Halloween (1978) – Reddit, accessed August 12, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/movies/comments/9n8wej/an_analysis_of_michael_myers_as_hes_portrayed_in/
5. Michael Myers’ motive 1978. : r/Halloweenmovies – Reddit, accessed August 12, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/Halloweenmovies/comments/11paqfn/michael_myers_motive_1978/
6. [Decoding Evil] A Study of Michael Myers and the Halloween Film Series – Slay Away, accessed August 12, 2025, https://www.slayawaywithus.com/post/decoding-evil-column-michael-myers-halloween-1978-john-carpenter
7. The Tao of Michael Myers? Or The Hidden “Shapes” of John Carpenter’s Halloween (1978), accessed August 12, 2025, https://johnkennethmuir.wordpress.com/2009/10/31/the-tao-of-michael-myers-or-the-hidden-shapes-of-john-carpenters-halloween-1978/
8. Was Michael Myers always cursed with thorn in the original timeline? : r/Halloweenmovies, accessed August 12, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/Halloweenmovies/comments/gndypw/was_michael_myers_always_cursed_with_thorn_in_the/
9. Is Michael Myers Human Or Supernatural? Every Version Explained – Screen Rant, accessed August 12, 2025, https://screenrant.com/halloween-michael-myers-human-supernatural-immortal-explained/
10. Halloween Movies Continuity Explained: | by Mike Moran | Medium, accessed August 12, 2025, https://medium.com/@michaelmoran/halloween-movies-continuity-explained-75bdde147085
11. Did Rob Zombie’s Michael Myers make sense? : r/horror – Reddit, accessed August 12, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/horror/comments/16krcat/did_rob_zombies_michael_myers_make_sense/
12. Halloween (2007 film) – Wikipedia, accessed August 12, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halloween_(2007_film)
13. Question on Michael’s motive for 2018 trilogy. : r/Halloweenmovies – Reddit, accessed August 12, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/Halloweenmovies/comments/tbq3i5/question_on_michaels_motive_for_2018_trilogy/
14. Michael Myers Explained ¦ My theory : r/Halloweenmovies – Reddit, accessed August 12, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/Halloweenmovies/comments/of5xw4/michael_myers_explained_my_theory/