Friday the 13th: 8-Movie Collection (1980-1989)

[SeanJoyce]

Originally Posted by rocknblues81

[Show spoiler]Because you were throwing out the idea that Jason gave the boxing guy a quick death because Jason respected his braveness... It could be the other way for the professor? Maybe he gave him the more torture type of death because the guy is an *******?

Honestly, I think these two deaths are handled the way they intentionally. It's some of the few things that actually work in the film and are satisfactory.

Well that makes sense, and again, I don't necessarily disagree.

[RCRochester]

Originally Posted by Matt89

It's also just so f*cking STUPID. The whole idea that they can somehow take a boat from CRYSTAL LAKE all the way to NYC?? How is that even possible? Crystal Lake is not connected to another body of water. At least, that's what the geography suggests from the earlier entries. Dumb as all hell.

~Matt

There's nothing in the earlier entries to suggest that Crystal Lake is or isn't connected to another body of water. It's not unfeasible that in some far corner of the lake there is a small river connecting Crystal Lake to another body of water. It only has to be small enough for the original houseboat to leave, not the larger cruise ship.

Of all the dumb ideas that it takes a huge stretch of the imagination to work around in the series, to me that's one of the least implausible.

[EvilResident]

I always try and tell myself that they’re leaving from the TOWN of Crystal Lake, which is on the ocean… but I really don’t care for 8 that much.

[jstxanothrxstory]

Honestly, I find it easier to suspend disbelief that Jason was able to ride the houseboat from a New Jersey river into the ocean that it is to believe that Jason Takes Manhattan actually takes place in the mid/late '90s.

[badfingerboogie]

Originally Posted by jstxanothrxstory

Honestly, I find it easier to suspend disbelief that Jason was able to ride the houseboat from a New Jersey river into the ocean that it is to believe that Jason Takes Manhattan actually takes place in the mid/late '90s.

I always forget how far ahead the timeline's meant to be by the time of the later instalments

[RandomMovieFan]

I just realized Friday 2 3 4 take place over a single week

[HarrisonJohn]

Originally Posted by RandomMovieFan

I just realized Friday 2 3 4 take place over a single week

I don't think anyone caught this, including the film makers, until we were watching them back to back on VHS tapes.

[Rich1983]

Originally Posted by Matt89

Is it a good plot though? Lol. I'd have to disagree there. It's like a cheap knockoff of Carrie with worse acting and poorly fleshed out characters. The telekinesis angle is rightly criticized in my opinion, as it's not very well executed and made for a lazy confrontation with Jason. It doesn't really work and is just sorta...dumb.

I can understand people liking Part VII for what it is, it's certainly a hell of a lot better than the disaster that is Jason Takes Manhattan, but that doesn't exactly set a high bar and the plot is still pretty bad in both films.

Agree regarding Kane Hodder though. Jason's look in The New Blood was one of the best of the entire franchise. His makeup is just incredible.

~Matt

Is the plot a "cheap knockoff of Carrie?" Was Carrie's plot about a young girl who accidentally kills her father with powers that she did not know she had, only to be locked up in institutions all of her life? Then, when she finally gets a chance a life, her doctor turns out to be exploitative? Yeah! That totally sounds like Carrie.

Originally Posted by RandomMovieFan

They blow up a whole house and it has awesome kills that got cut know they look like shit i like the movie movie except i dont like how Tinas father returns from the dead.

Even with the censorship, that takes nothing away from the story and the characters to me.

[ravenus]

Originally Posted by ravenus

Going on, I saw the 4th installment captioned The Final Chapter

[Show spoiler] (that turned out a little hasty). If I thought the third one was kinda tame (although some of the kills were nicely framed for 3D), this one certainly got a booster shot of what made the first two films work. Apart from the wholly unnecessary recap of the previous movies (director Joseph Zito says he didn't want it), the film feels 'bigger'. There's the opening shot of the police staking out the scene of the last massacre, complete with helicopter trail (even if said copter is quite obviously a spotlight on a crane paired with the sound FX of a rotor). The names in the opening credits are like a who's who of 80's genre movies - Judie Aronson (who I had a crush on as a kid from seeing her in American Ninja), Crispin Glover and best of all Corey Feldman, who is very impressive as the precocious kid brother of the female lead who is into horror movies and make-up FX - I was vigorously nodding when Tom Savini in the extras says that Corey was basically him as a kid. Ted White dons the hockey mask and provides a suitably intimidating presence, moving with surprising agility for someone that was nearly 60 at the time of the movie.

My issues with the deficiencies of gore and titillation in the 3rd installment were also swept over quite early. While keeping the killings brief to minimize MPAA interference, they are definitely more visceral and the red stuff flows a lot freer. In the titillation department, Judie Aronson and the More twins provide ample charms before going to their grisly demises (Judie apparently developed hypothermia from being naked in the freezing water for long periods, prompting Ted White to argue with the director that either she be let out to thaw in between takes or he would walk off the shoot). Jason's death is a doozy both in terms of the VFX techniques as well as the very emotional transformational moment it has for the person that kills him.

So yeah, a great finale for the franchise...at least till they relented on it being the finale. That's for another day.

I saw all the featurettes on the disc (other than the Lost Tales from Camp Blood short film homages, which I thought were quite meh) as well as part of the CLM chapter on this movie. Corey Feldman seemed thrilled and happy to talk about the movie. His performances as a child and teen actor and later in movies like 'Burbs were the zeitgeist of the 80's, and it's sad that his personal life turned out so troubled. Zito in the retrospective pieces seems a good-natured guy, and Ted White gives him the excuse that perhaps the pressure of finishing the movie on time made him behave badly with Aronson (who in the CLM episode only says she had a hard time in part of the shoot, without blaming anyone). Interestingly enough, White thinks Feldman was a mean brat, while most of the other crew were quite fond of him. I imagine it's because Feldman was more an actor than a normal kid, and some of that attitude may have rubbed this movie's Jason the wrong way.

Last night was A New Beginning. I wonder if New Line even paused a little after The Final Chapter because this came out barely a year later. It's a little confusing because Tommy Jarvis who killed Jason in TFC (Corey Feldman returns for a small cameo at the start) is now supposed to be nearly an adult (John Shepherd who does the part was actually 24), so is this movie set in the future? Even if it is, not much seems to have changed in that part of the Earth. Tommy finds himself in a rehabilitation centre which seems to be staffed by the same kind of people that were counselors at camp Crystal Lake. There is a new kid in the movie, Different Strokes' Dudley, Shavar Ross who manages to be likable despite being a brat.

Since Jason supposedly died in the last movie, A New Beginning tries to bring some ambiguity into who the actual killer is that is continuing with Mrs. Voorhees' good work of hacking down the hornies and the junkies. Tommy seems to see Jason in flashes, but is this Jason real or a figment of his troubled psyche? The resolution of this mystery is a polarizing thing

[Show spoiler], the equivalent of the killer being some guy you barely saw before, turning out to have a connection that is almost hilarious in its incongruity. It's a rehash of the first FT13 idea, but in a lot dumber way

.

That said, while the film does not have the quality of its predecessor, in its modest and crude way it delivers the goods of a slasher flick. The kills are decent (the extras speak a lot about MPAA interference ruining the original scenes), but gratuitous nudity is where this one really takes the 80's cake. Some of the cast in the extras speak about director Steinmann making the shoot a rough experience and coming across as sleazy himself (he had previously made a porn film as well as the sexploitation classic Savage Streets). Actress Debisue Voorhees (was there ever a more striking coincidence?) as the sex-hungry Tina is the most memorable raunchy element before she meets a rather gruesome death by shears. Also Tiffany Helm's robot dance to His Eyes by Pseudo Echo before she gets impaled is a classic.

Saw the extras on the movie disc as well as the chapter on CLM. A fair number of cast and crew members participate, sharing anecdotes about the making of the film and Steinmann's attitude, the problems with the MPAA, the continuity errors, and where the franchise might have gone ahead with the new beginning (Feldman sounds like he might have liked to have a shot at continuing the Tommy Jarvis character) if the fear of lower BO revenues had not reverted them to the original Jason.

[Rich1983]

Originally Posted by Matt89

Ugh, Jason Takes Manhattan was such a wildly missed opportunity. The poster was great, the trailer was awesome. But then you watch the movie and it's just Jason on a boat for over an hour and he finally makes it to Manhattan in the last like 25 mins of the movie. The fact that the title is so misleading makes it even worse. They could've done so much more with it. They wouldn't have even had to fully shoot it in NYC (and they did shoot a lot of it in Vancouver anyway) but you could've expanded a lot of those scenes with Jason in NYC, him going on a rampage in the subways, stalking people on the city streets, maybe have him go apeshit in a nightclub, a strip club, a police station, have him wander around 42nd street with all the sleazy movie theaters, maybe throw a couple people off the top of the Twin Towers (which tbh probably wouldn't have aged very well post-9/11 lol) but it's something. This way it would've at least lived up to its name.

~Matt

This is the reason why I come down really hard on this tired old criticism of Jason Takes Manhattan:

1. You can't judge a movie for what you think it "could have been." If that is the case, then I wouldn't like ANY movie. You have to judge it based on what it was at face value.

2. The tired old criticism of Jason going to Canada instead of Manhattan is only so widely known because of 20 years of DVD extra features. If the BTS have not been exposed by DVD extra features, books, and documentaries; most people would have never even known that about the movie.

3. If you look at your timer on your DVD player, the last 45 minutes of the film took place in NYC, a statistic that absolutely NOBODY gives the film any credit for.

4. Kane was still awesome as Jason, and it was logical for him to take a boat there. Even though Jason was able to teleport in that film, him teleporting from Camp Crystal Lake to New York City would have been too much of a stretch.

[Matt89]

First of all, I never criticized the film for being filmed in Vancouver. In fact, I said they could've still done more with it even if a lot of it wasn't filmed in NYC, nor would it had to have been if they did some of the things I mentioned. And okay, sure, they spend 45 mins in Manhattan. The movie is 1 hour and 40 mins, so they still spend a majority of the film on a boat when the movie was titled freakin' Jason Takes Manhattan. And what about Manhattan does he 'take'? For the most part, he pretty much kills only the people he was after on the boat so it's not like Manhattan is in any state of danger with Jason being there. And then

[Show spoiler]the sewage washes him away in the end.

So, in the end, Manhattan Takes Jason.

And lol come down as hard on it as you want, doesn't change the fact that the movie still sucks and criticism towards it is completely warranted. It's still a stupid movie that was a completely wasted opportunity.

Are we honestly out here defending Jason Takes Manhattan??

Lol please.

~Matt

[ravenus]

A friend pointed me towards this movie. Directed by Deborah (Debbisue) Voorhees who starred as Tina in FT13-5, this is about a masked killer that murderously stalks several FT13 cast members. Sounds like it could have some fun moments:

13 Fanboy Trailer Official - YouTube

[Cherokee Jack]

Originally Posted by Matt89

First of all, I never criticized the film for being filmed in Vancouver. In fact, I said they could've still done more with it even if a lot of it wasn't filmed in NYC, nor would it had to have been if they did some of the things I mentioned. And okay, sure, they spend 45 mins in Manhattan. The movie is 1 hour and 40 mins, so they still spend a majority of the film on a boat when the movie was titled freakin' Jason Takes Manhattan. And what about Manhattan does he 'take'? For the most part, he pretty much kills only the people he was after on the boat so it's not like Manhattan is in any state of danger with Jason being there. And then

[Show spoiler]the sewage washes him away in the end.

So, in the end, Manhattan Takes Jason.

And lol come down as hard on it as you want, doesn't change the fact that the movie still sucks and criticism towards it is completely warranted. It's still a stupid movie that was a completely wasted opportunity.

Are we honestly out here defending Jason Takes Manhattan??

Lol please.

~Matt

All the F13 movies are pretty stupid. It’s part of the charm as far as I’m concerned.

And while Manhattan might have been a ‘wasted opportunity’, I agree with Rich1983 that you can really only evaluate the actual final product. Anything beyond that is more about your own subjective expectations.

[Matt89]

Of course they're all dumb lol, I'm not saying they're not. Jason Takes Manhattan just so happens to be one of the dumbest of the bunch.

~Matt

[RCRochester]

Originally Posted by ravenus

Last night was A New Beginning. I wonder if New Line even paused a little after The Final Chapter because this came out barely a year later. It's a little confusing because Tommy Jarvis who killed Jason in TFC (Corey Feldman returns for a small cameo at the start) is now supposed to be nearly an adult (John Shepherd who does the part was actually 24), so is this movie set in the future? Even if it is, not much seems to have changed in that part of the Earth. Tommy finds himself in a rehabilitation centre which seems to be staffed by the same kind of people that were counselors at camp Crystal Lake. There is a new kid in the movie, Different Strokes' Dudley, Shavar Ross who manages to be likable despite being a brat.

Paramount produced this film, not New Line. I don't really know what you find so confusing about Tommy Jarvis in this one. It takes place a few years after the last film and Tommy has grown up and is now living in a group home for troubled teens.

Originally Posted by Matt89

Of course they're all dumb lol, I'm not saying they're not. Jason Takes Manhattan just so happens to be one of the dumbest of the bunch.

I'd still rather watch Jason Takes Manhattan ahead of anything that comes after it.

[RandomMovieFan]

Friday the 13th Part 2 is my favorite but what happened to Muffin the dog did Jason kill him or did he just run away.

[Zillamon51]

Originally Posted by ravenus

[Show spoiler]Last night was A New Beginning. I wonder if New Line even paused a little after The Final Chapter because this came out barely a year later. It's a little confusing because Tommy Jarvis who killed Jason in TFC (Corey Feldman returns for a small cameo at the start) is now supposed to be nearly an adult (John Shepherd who does the part was actually 24), so is this movie set in the future? Even if it is, not much seems to have changed in that part of the Earth. Tommy finds himself in a rehabilitation centre which seems to be staffed by the same kind of people that were counselors at camp Crystal Lake. There is a new kid in the movie, Different Strokes' Dudley, Shavar Ross who manages to be likable despite being a brat.

Since Jason supposedly died in the last movie, A New Beginning tries to bring some ambiguity into who the actual killer is that is continuing with Mrs. Voorhees' good work of hacking down the hornies and the junkies. Tommy seems to see Jason in flashes, but is this Jason real or a figment of his troubled psyche? The resolution of this mystery is a polarizing thing

[Show spoiler], the equivalent of the killer being some guy you barely saw before, turning out to have a connection that is almost hilarious in its incongruity. It's a rehash of the first FT13 idea, but in a lot dumber way

.

That said, while the film does not have the quality of its predecessor, in its modest and crude way it delivers the goods of a slasher flick. The kills are decent (the extras speak a lot about MPAA interference ruining the original scenes), but gratuitous nudity is where this one really takes the 80's cake. Some of the cast in the extras speak about director Steinmann making the shoot a rough experience and coming across as sleazy himself (he had previously made a porn film as well as the sexploitation classic Savage Streets). Actress Debisue Voorhees (was there ever a more striking coincidence?) as the sex-hungry Tina is the most memorable raunchy element before she meets a rather gruesome death by shears. Also Tiffany Helm's robot dance to His Eyes by Pseudo Echo before she gets impaled is a classic.

Saw the extras on the movie disc as well as the chapter on CLM. A fair number of cast and crew members participate, sharing anecdotes about the making of the film and Steinmann's attitude, the problems with the MPAA, the continuity errors, and where the franchise might have gone ahead with the new beginning (Feldman sounds like he might have liked to have a shot at continuing the Tommy Jarvis character) if the fear of lower BO revenues had not reverted them to the original Jason.

I like Part 5 a lot. Most people don't, but it seems like most of their problems boil down to imitation Jason. A milder form of the Halloween III hate some folks still have.

My GF, who is also a big fan of the franchise, doesn't like the characters. Particularly the hillbillies. The shithouse serenade is classic, though. In fact, I can't pass up an opportunity to repost this:

Disco Enchiladas (ooh baby song) Friday the 13th V remix - YouTube

[Zillamon51]

Originally Posted by Rich1983

[Show spoiler]This is the reason why I come down really hard on this tired old criticism of Jason Takes Manhattan:

1. You can't judge a movie for what you think it "could have been." If that is the case, then I wouldn't like ANY movie. You have to judge it based on what it was at face value.

2. The tired old criticism of Jason going to Canada instead of Manhattan is only so widely known because of 20 years of DVD extra features. If the BTS have not been exposed by DVD extra features, books, and documentaries; most people would have never even known that about the movie.

3. If you look at your timer on your DVD player, the last 45 minutes of the film took place in NYC, a statistic that absolutely NOBODY gives the film any credit for.

4. Kane was still awesome as Jason, and it was logical for him to take a boat there. Even though Jason was able to teleport in that film, him teleporting from Camp Crystal Lake to New York City would have been too much of a stretch.

1. It's not unfair to judge a movie based on what it is supposed to be. It's subtitled Jason Takes Manhattan, and that's what all the marketing revolves around. By your logic, it could have been called Freddy vs. Jason, and it shouldn't matter that Freddy isn't in it.

2. Fans have always known it, because it was written about in Fangoria magazine when it came out. And even if you don't know the specifics of it being filmed in Vancouver, anyone can see that they very obviously cheaped out on locations, as it's all generic back alleys that could be anywhere, without a NYC landmark in sight.

3. It's technically "set there," but without any of the iconography that viewers (rightfully) expect. One big shot in Times Square, a shot of the Statue of Liberty, and the rest is bland anytown.

4. None of the stuff on the ship is unique enough to stand out. They should have done it like Dracula: A dead ship arrives, bringing with it the curse of Jason Voorhees.

Originally Posted by RCRochester

I'd still rather watch Jason Takes Manhattan ahead of anything that comes after it.

I rank Jason X, Freddy vs. Jason, and the remake ahead of it. Even the infamous "Jason in space" movie doesn't waste much time getting Jason into space.

[RCRochester]

Originally Posted by RandomMovieFan

Friday the 13th Part 2 is my favorite but what happened to Muffin the dog did Jason kill him or did he just run away.

Doesn't Muffin show up alive and well at the end?

[HarrisonJohn]

5 and 8 can always be defended as "you just don't like it because Jason isn't the killer" or "you just don't like it because they don't spend the whole movie in Manhattan".
And there will be people that will say "Jason wasn't even the killer, well that sucked!"
BUT
Both films want to make a change, but neither put in the effort. Imagine someone watching 5 and saying "wow, that was a great twist at the end they really pulled that off I didn't even miss Jason". No one is going to say that at the end of A New Beginning.