Did the Friday remake do Jason proud?

Discussion in 'Site Polls' started by rhett, Feb 17, 2009.

?

How was the FRIDAY THE 13TH remake?

  1. Awesome. It surpassed all expectations.

    16 vote(s)
    11.4%
  2. Good. A successful relaunch.

    53 vote(s)
    37.9%
  3. Mediocre. Crystal Lake just ain't the same.

    47 vote(s)
    33.6%
  4. Dud. Bring on Jason X2!

    24 vote(s)
    17.1%
  1. spawningblue

    spawningblue Deadite

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2004
    Messages:
    5,069
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
    Not to gang up here, but I agree 100% with this statement. It seems like a lot of people got the humour in the film, and got the tone they were going for, others seem to think they were going for a serious disturbing horror movie which I just don't see. From the beginning I thought the makers of the movie said it would be nothing like Texas Chainsaw Massacre and instead would be a fun slasher.
     
  2. Matt89

    Matt89 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2004
    Messages:
    5,638
    Likes Received:
    914
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Toronto
    Well I gotta respectfully disagree with some of what you said, but I'm definitely willing, and plan to give it another go when it comes out on DVD. Other than some of the characters themselves - yes I also know people who act like them - I didn't see the humor in this. (Maybe I missed it? Maybe it's just not there? Maybe people are interpreting something that's not there? Who knows?) But in terms of the humor in the old ones, yeah I guess it was more prevalent from parts 5 onward. (Part 3 was goofy too, but I believe that was intentional, the whole 3-D thing.) And yeah I'd agree that the originals seem goofy because they've dated, but I still don't think they were made with much serious thought. I mean, they were ALL made to make money. The producer (I believe it was Victor Miller who said it) said that Cunningham came up to him and said, "Well Halloween is making a lot of money - let's rip it off." I think the fact that they've aged has ADDED to them being cheesy, but other than a few jump moments, I don't see how they're completely serious films. Not as serious as the remake, I think anyways. Either way, it always comes down to two things: Denotation and connotation.

    Although it is interesting to see how differently people interpreted this film.

    ~Matt
     
  3. Matt89

    Matt89 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2004
    Messages:
    5,638
    Likes Received:
    914
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Toronto
    Yeah but the ending of part 1 was a dream. You can't make any sort of rational judgment from a dream sequence.

    ~Matt
     
  4. spawningblue

    spawningblue Deadite

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2004
    Messages:
    5,069
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
    Yeah apparently I am one of the few who too enjoyed the Texas remake as well. Don't understand the hate for it, as it is a well made tension filled disturbing horror movie, even more then the original. Mind you, I like the original better, but I think the remake has more tension and is the more frightening experience. Maybe it gets a lot of hate just because people didn't want to see it made in the first place. Oh, and the cinematography was quite good in it as well.

    Descent was also incredible! One of my favourite horror films to come out in the last ten years. There were a few moments, like the first reveal of the monster, that actually made me jump!

    As for The Strangers...

    I agree with Matt, I thought it was amazing. One of the best directed horror movies in a while in my opinion. Didn't revert to a lot of quick cuts, almost felt like a modern day John Carpernter film, especially with that scene wear the masked man is in the kitchen. The first half scared the shit out of me when I first saw it in theaters. I'm a 25 year old horror fan, that doesn't happen to me very often! I do think the cat and mouse went on for a little long/ was a little repetitive, but other then that, great film. the acting was really good, and the ending, that is one of the biggest things people complained about I thought fit perfectly, and made the rest of the film that much more creepy.
     
    Last edited: Feb 24, 2009
  5. spawningblue

    spawningblue Deadite

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2004
    Messages:
    5,069
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
    I always thought that was one of those interpret it how you want moments. I always thought that it did happen. Kind of weird that she would dream Jason attacking her, and then a few months later an adult Jason actually does attack her. I thought in one of the interviews Cunningham stated that it did happen, and that him being an adult in part 2 was just one of the things that doesn't make sense with the franchise.
     
  6. Matt89

    Matt89 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2004
    Messages:
    5,638
    Likes Received:
    914
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Toronto
    Definitely. I can actually say I found this movie terrifying. It just very well represents something that could actually happen, and HAS actually happened. Bryan Bertino really knows how to build suspense. Such a great film.

    ~Matt
     
  7. maybrick

    maybrick Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2001
    Messages:
    10,748
    Likes Received:
    636
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Keene, NH
    The cinematography was shit! There were a few good shots that were lifted from the original, but otherwise it was almost nothing but fast editing and shaky cam from what I recall. Whoop-de-doo! That doesn't make me tense or frightened, it gives me a freaking headache. And the worst crime of them all is putting far too much emphasis on Leatherface and turning TCM into little more than a run of the mill slasher film.
     
  8. spawningblue

    spawningblue Deadite

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2004
    Messages:
    5,069
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
    Well I don't know what to tell you, it worked for me. I think the original is a lot more fun, but I think the remake is a lot more messed up and disturbing. And for the record, quick editing doesn't seem to bother me like it does a lot of people on this board. Mind you, I would rather have a really talented Director who doesn't need to resort to quick cuts, but it doesn't make me hate a movie like it does many on here. Although I will admit in transformers it bothered me quite a bit as I had no clue what was going on during the big city destroying action scenes, but with Texas and other newer horror movies like The Descent, it didn't really bother me at all. Again, to each their own i guess.
     
    Last edited: Feb 24, 2009
  9. Matt89

    Matt89 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2004
    Messages:
    5,638
    Likes Received:
    914
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Toronto
    But this is one of those weird situations where you can interpret it one way, but then are forced into interpreting it another way. If the sequels didn't exist, then yes I'd be in total agreement here. But because Part 2 changes the story, you're forced into believing it didn't happen because it doesn't really fit within the realms of the narrative. If Jason disappeared in 1958, then from 1958-1979 he would've aged 21 years, thus him being a child is impossible...unless he's Banjamin Button. However, through Part 2 we find out that he was "thought" to have drowned - we're forced to believe this through the existence of Part 2 - and that he's actually been living in the woods this whole time. Well, because of this twist in the narrative, that HAD to have been a dream. If you look at part 1 by itself, sure you can interpret it any way you want, but with the inclusion of the sequels, you are forced into disbelieving what happened on the lake.

    ~Matt
     
  10. spawningblue

    spawningblue Deadite

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2004
    Messages:
    5,069
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
    Again though, that's just one of the problems with the franchise. I thought that has been mentioned many times that the continuity in Friday doesn't make sense, with the ending to part 1 being a great example. Then there's the ending to part 5. And then the ending to part 8, where they completely ignore it for part 9. And Freddy vs. Jason completely ignores part 10, ect. But I'm pretty sure Cunningham stated, and again I could be wrong, but I thought he said that the ending to part 1 wasn't mean tot be a dream. But then they wanted to have him as the killer for part 2, so they jsut ignored the ending to part 1 as if it never happened, or just pretended it to be a dream.
     
  11. maybrick

    maybrick Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2001
    Messages:
    10,748
    Likes Received:
    636
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Keene, NH
    You forget one other scenario: The real Jason died in 1958. What we DIDN'T know was that he had a TWIN!!!!!!

    My God, how many times can this series jump the shark? :lol:
     
  12. spawningblue

    spawningblue Deadite

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2004
    Messages:
    5,069
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
    Exactly my point, if everyone is going to complain about the problems in the remake, well they should go back and watch the original movies, as there are so many continuity errors it's not even funny!
     
  13. Matt89

    Matt89 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2004
    Messages:
    5,638
    Likes Received:
    914
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Toronto
    Really? The remake is made hard to believe because The Texas Chainsaw Massacre was made into Hollywood junk. The original has that heightened realism very rarely paralleled in the horror genre, simply because of the way it was filmed. The long takes, the low-budget aspect to it. The remake was far too glossy. I wouldn't consider the original as much a "fun" movie as it is interesting. For me, the remake is nowhere NEAR as disturbing as the original. Never was, never will be. We recently screened this in my horror film class and the scene where Pam gets it on the meathook caused a good 2/3 of the class to gasp. The girl beside me looked like she was about to throw up. The remake is nauseating in the way that it's edited and IMO, completely takes away the realism the first one had. Thus, making it far less disturbing because you're made AWARE that you're watching a movie.

    ~Matt
     
  14. maybrick

    maybrick Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2001
    Messages:
    10,748
    Likes Received:
    636
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Keene, NH
    And yet see how neatly they could be tied up if you accept the premise that he had a twin! :)
     
  15. Matt89

    Matt89 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2004
    Messages:
    5,638
    Likes Received:
    914
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Toronto
    But dude, that would be TOTALLY OUT OF LEFT FIELD!! :lol: :lol:

    ~Matt
     
  16. maybrick

    maybrick Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2001
    Messages:
    10,748
    Likes Received:
    636
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Keene, NH
    But not really. See, you know how whenever somebody yells "JASON" he stops in his track and cocks his head? Everybody has always assumed up until now that he was responding to his name, but that's only because he doesn't talk. Really what he's thinking is "Dude! Why the fuck do people keep calling me by my brother's name? I'm SPANKY, dammit!"
     
  17. Matt89

    Matt89 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2004
    Messages:
    5,638
    Likes Received:
    914
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Toronto
    "Did you know that a young boy drowned, the year before those two others were killed? The counselors weren't paying any attention, THEY were making LOVE while that young boy drowned! ....His name was Spanky. I was working the day that it happened, preparing meals...here. I was the cook. Spanky should've been WATCHED! Every minute! He was - he wasn't a very good swimmer."

    "You see? Spanky was my son...and today is his birthday."

    :D

    ~Matt
     
  18. maybrick

    maybrick Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2001
    Messages:
    10,748
    Likes Received:
    636
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Keene, NH
    No, no.... Spanky was the twin that was too RETARDED for camp, so he stayed at home with his father in the city, that's how he became streetwise enough to find Alice at the beginning of Part 2.

    Which begs the question: who was Jason's dad? My money is on Crazy Ralph.
     
  19. Matt89

    Matt89 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2004
    Messages:
    5,638
    Likes Received:
    914
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Toronto
    Well, maybe Jason stayed with dad and he's out to avenge his mother's and brother's deaths?

    But really, the big question has not yet been answered: What was Mrs. Voorhees ON when she was pregnant with Jason/Spanky? That's one thing I wanna know.

    ~Matt
     
  20. maybrick

    maybrick Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2001
    Messages:
    10,748
    Likes Received:
    636
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Keene, NH
    What was she on? Mr. Voorhees' dick.
     

Share This Page