I'd respectfully argue that Halloween is the inspiration for those other films, not the template. Halloween's descendants share a lot of superficial similarities, but there are some huge tonal differences. For starters, Halloween is not a body count movie. The murders aren't that important, and they're tame and subdued compared to what came later. For Carpenter, the murders were just a means to an end--unbearable levels of suspense. By the time of Friday the 13th, The Burning, and Halloween II, the murders aren't just part of the puzzle, they're the raison d 'etre. It probably sounds like I mean that in a condescending, insulting way, but I don't. I enjoy movies where you ROOT for the killer as much as most people here, but they're not the same as Halloween. None of the characters in those later movies inspire the same level of emotional investment as Laurie Strode. I don't deny that it's tougher to make the same argument for H4 (since Bucky and numerous others are there just to graphically expire), but I still think Jamie and Rachel are better-drawn than most slasher film heroines. For me, that elevates H4 above the more exciting but brain-dead sequels like H2 and H5. I'd rather have better characters and stories than superior scares and murders. Don't think that means I'm dissing those two. I love H2 and H5, too.