Kane Hodder should have been Jason in Freddy VS Jason

[Creamy Goodness]

Jason Takes Manhattan didn't end because it doesn't exist.

[Dr. Briggs]

Jason Takes Manhattan may non-exist as long as Saw 3D can also non-exist

[Oldman]

Jason Takes Manhattan: A real bad dream should have never been made, a total waste of everyone's timeuicide:

[Chainsaw Brutality]

If Jason Takes Manhattan doesn't exist, then Part V: A New Beginning doesn't/shouldn't either.

Jason really wasn't even actually in it. He's only in the opening scene, which is Tommy's dream, on top of that.

[Creamy Goodness]

If Jason Takes Manhattan doesn't exist, then Part V: A New Beginning doesn't/shouldn't either.

Jason really wasn't even actually in it. He's only in the opening scene, which is Tommy's dream, on top of that.

See, now you're thinking.

[Dr. Briggs]

Nope; I draw the line there, fellas. Part V, for what it's worth, was the first F13 since part 2 to have what I consider more of a point than "Jason is still alive." There's a mystery aspect, some psychological drama concerning Tommy...

Plus, though he wasn't Jason, Roy Burns is a cool character! We never really get a scene with him unmasked and saying something important, so we can only imagine what went through his mind as he hunted part V's victims down; was he outright insane? Possessed? Was he actually sane but vengeful for his son to the point of blood-thirst?

I think V is a very interesting fugue in canon, if nothing else.

[Creamy Goodness]

V felt very forced to me. The kills are tame and Ethel and Junior are annoying as all hell. The twist is interesting, but by the time that came about I just wanted the damn thing to end already. Friday the 13th isn't Friday the 13th without Jason as far as I'm concerned. That's why I'm not a big fan of the original film either.

[Dr. Briggs]

V felt very forced to me. The kills are tame and Ethel and Junior are annoying as all hell. The twist is interesting, but by the time that came about I just wanted the damn thing to end already. Friday the 13th isn't Friday the 13th without Jason as far as I'm concerned. That's why I'm not a big fan of the original film either.

Personally, I've got yet to see any Jason who beats Betsy Palmer's eerily calm, smiling persona in scare-factor x_X.

I can see your point about the deaths being forced in V, though I don't necessarily agree; I think they may have felt different mostly because the tone in V was different overall (again, more mystery-oriented)... well, except the road flare kill, I think the un-realism of that one killed the scene for me.

[Oldman]

See, now you're thinking.

If Jason Takes Manhattan doesn't exist, then Part V: A New Beginning doesn't/shouldn't either.

Keep up the good work you'll get there sooner or later.:rant:

[Creamy Goodness]

I guess when it comes to Friday the 13th, I want it to be a slasher and nothing more. Friday the 13th is known for Jason, inventive kills, and a bunch of titties. That's all I look for in a solid F13 movie. Trying to make it more than that just doesn't work very well.

[Chainsaw Brutality]

Nope; I draw the line there, fellas. Part V, for what it's worth, was the first F13 since part 2 to have what I consider more of a point than "Jason is still alive." There's a mystery aspect, some psychological drama concerning Tommy...

Plus, though he wasn't Jason, Roy Burns is a cool character! We never really get a scene with him unmasked and saying something important, so we can only imagine what went through his mind as he hunted part V's victims down; was he outright insane? Possessed? Was he actually sane but vengeful for his son to the point of blood-thirst?

I think V is a very interesting fugue in canon, if nothing else.

Without actually having Jason in it, I don't see the point of the film at all. The only thing I see, is misleading the audience into thinking this is another Friday the 13th film.

I understand that there is supposed to be some mystery involved, but when you realize Jason isn't in it (blue arrows on the mask, instead of red), it's tough to really give a damn.

The characters really don't help matters any either. It's hard to care about what happens to any of them, including Tommy. The acting is horrible as well.

Btw, I think Jason Goes to Hell shouldn't exist either. The whole "body jumping" bullshit is lame.

However, JGTH does have one of the best kills in the entire series (tent spike scene).

[Dr. Briggs]

Without actually having Jason in it, I don't see the point of the film at all. The only thing I see, is misleading the audience into thinking this is another Friday the 13th film.

I understand that there is supposed to be some mystery involved, but when you realize Jason isn't in it (blue arrows on the mask, instead of red), it's tough to really give a damn.

The characters really don't help matters any either. It's hard to care about what happens to any of them, including Tommy. The acting is horrible as well.

Btw, I think Jason Goes to Hell shouldn't exist either. The whole "body jumping" bullshit is lame.

However, JGTH does have one of the best kills in the entire series (tent spike scene).

The point of the film was to study of one survivor of Jason's massacres, and show how he is affected by the ghost of what happened so to speak. That's a pretty good plot basis IMO. Part 1 was a great suspense story even with Jason being an afterthought; part 2 was good even though Jason was far from the icon he turned into.

The acting wasn't that bad, although admittedly acting has to be noticeably awful for me to call it "bad." The acting was far from bad enough for me to take notice in this case. And I at least liked Violet, she was like the female Jimbo with her dance, dont'cha know? :3

----

Jason Goes to Hell was the first F13 film I saw; I knew the general F13 storyline before watching, but I came in after the film had already begun and initially thought... "WTF? Jason is a black guy??" because of it X)

[Creamy Goodness]

I didn't exactly like the body jumping thing in Jason Goes To Hell, but I feel like it has some of the best make-up effects and acting in the entire franchise. So it at least deserves some credit.

[Oldman]

Part V, Jason takes Manhattan, Jason goes to Hell and Jason X, should have gone in another direction or better yet not even made.

[Chainsaw Brutality]

The point of the film was to study of one survivor of Jason's massacres, and show how he is affected by the ghost of what happened so to speak. That's a pretty good plot basis IMO. Part 1 was a great suspense story even with Jason being an afterthought; part 2 was good even though Jason was far from the icon he turned into.

The acting wasn't that bad, although admittedly acting has to be noticeably awful for me to call it "bad." The acting was far from bad enough for me to take notice in this case. And I at least liked Violet, she was like the female Jimbo with her dance, dont'cha know? :3

----

Jason Goes to Hell was the first F13 film I saw; I knew the general F13 storyline before watching, but I came in after the film had already begun and initially thought... "WTF? Jason is a black guy??" because of it X)

In a Friday the 13th film, I'm not looking for someone to be haunted by what Jason did to them in the past. I also, do not want some guy posing as Jason because he is a crazed loon. The film MUST have the real Jason doing his thing, otherwise, it's bullshit.

The original is pretty good, but I don't have it on the pedistal most people do. I actually like part II better than the first.

I put Part V: A New Beginning and Halloween III: Season of the Witch in the same boat. There is a reason those films failed, and ended up being "one offs".

I'll give you Violet. I actually forgot about her, and yeah - she was the most interesting.

[Chainsaw Brutality]

I didn't exactly like the body jumping thing in Jason Goes To Hell, but I feel like it has some of the best make-up effects and acting in the entire franchise. So it at least deserves some credit.

I agree, Chris.

[Dr. Briggs]

In a Friday the 13th film, I'm not looking for someone to be haunted by what Jason did to them in the past. I also, do not want some guy posing as Jason because he is a crazed loon. The film MUST have the real Jason doing his thing, otherwise, it's bullshit.

The original is pretty good, but I don't have it on the pedistal most people do. I actually like part II better than the first.

I put Part V: A New Beginning and Halloween III: Season of the Witch in the same boat. There is a reason those films failed, and ended up being "one offs".

I'll give you Violet. I actually forgot about her, and yeah - she was the most interesting.

I consider Halloween 3 the same general way you do. Although I personally find it to be good, it's not part of the series to me, because it has nothing to do with any other part.

However, this is not so with Friday the 13th part V. So Jason himself wasn't in it but for flashbacks, but the film still revolves around him, his legacy, one of his notable victims, with a killer going around with the same MO. It's kind of like the Saw series after part III: just because the main killer is dead and the new one has a slightly different way of doing things doesn't mean it doesn't belong in the series. I'd say F13 failed among fans because they tend to hate it for what TV Tropes calls the "just here for Godzilla" factor. But not me, to me, plot counts more than the simple presence or absence of a character. I like horror as long as it works, and lack of a character doesn't typically make something "not work."

Admittedly the lack of a character can sometimes be a huge strike against a movie when a character is needed and replacements have to be written into long-standing plots, but F13 V is not one of those cases in my opinion. Roy was driven to kill; Roy knew about what Jason did and used it to his advantage; Tommy was traumatized by what Jason did and served as a red herring; the plot worked perfectly fine. Would V have been better if they simply came up for some way for Jason to come back to life or survive what he went through, and done the rest exactly how it was done? I myself don't think so.

[CarolinePar]

for me one of the best moments in the whole Friday the 13th series was when HIS mask was revealed at the end only to have Freddy's famous glove surface and drag the mask back down to...

did I hear a sinister laugh too or was that my imagination? exdev:

[Chainsaw Brutality]

I consider Halloween 3 the same general way you do. Although I personally find it to be good, it's not part of the series to me, because it has nothing to do with any other part.

However, this is not so with Friday the 13th part V. So Jason himself wasn't in it but for flashbacks, but the film still revolves around him, his legacy, one of his notable victims, with a killer going around with the same MO. It's kind of like the Saw series after part III: just because the main killer is dead and the new one has a slightly different way of doing things doesn't mean it doesn't belong in the series. I'd say F13 failed among fans because they tend to hate it for what TV Tropes calls the "just here for Godzilla" factor. But not me, to me, plot counts more than the simple presence or absence of a character. I like horror as long as it works, and lack of a character doesn't typically make something "not work."

Admittedly the lack of a character can sometimes be a huge strike against a movie when a character is needed and replacements have to be written into long-standing plots, but F13 V is not one of those cases in my opinion. Roy was driven to kill; Roy knew about what Jason did and used it to his advantage; Tommy was traumatized by what Jason did and served as a red herring; the plot worked perfectly fine. Would V have been better if they simply came up for some way for Jason to come back to life or survive what he went through, and done the rest exactly how it was done? I myself don't think so.

The thing is, the Friday the 13th franchise has really never been about mystery or mystique. Exceptions being: who the killer was in part 1 & what Jason's face looked like. It is always, however, been about nudity, partying teens, Crystal Lake & Jason terrorizing everyone. The mystery and mystique aspects fit better with Michael Myers & Halloween, imo.

To my point about not having Jason. He's a horror icon, with the likes of: Freddy, Candyman, Leatherface, Tallman, Chucky, Michael, Wolf Man, Dracula & Frankenstein. People go to a Friday 13th film to see Jason go ape-shit on everyone.....not to see him in flashbacks and whatnot.

When a horror icon, such as the ones I listed, are not present in their respective franchise's films, it just won't work. I mean, they're icons for a reason.

As for plots, the successful F13 films have been straight forward and simple. The movies that recieved alot of fan backlash have tried to make the film into something it isn't.

The Saw films are a totally different animal though. Those films can have interchangeable parts because the focus has never been on Jigsaw unless he was on his death bed or enduring brain surgery. That series is about the traps & the "game of death", so to speak.

I completely understand that Roy was a badass, crazed dude. But he's no Jason.

Yes, part V would've been better off continuing with how the film starts (digging up Jason from the grave). Is it REALLY that difficult to continue with that storyline there??

If not that, you could always go with him putting back on the burlap sack after part IV.

[LolliePop]

1,2 and 4 are the decent ones, 4 being my favorite. Jason Takes Manhattan is just an annoying waste of time. I hate it even more than Jason X. I'm with Chris aswell, 5 is a bit of a bore-fest where kills are concerned. Its not Noel Coward so I won't overly disect these films. They are sequels banged out to make money. Its supposed to be bums on seats entertainment. So entertain me! Give me what I go in for. 5 fails at that.