Forgettable ‘Friday the 13th’
by Mike LongThe remake of Friday the 13th is notable only for its title; we have seen this stuff literally hundreds of times before, sometimes done better (whatever that means to you in this context) and sometimes done worse. This new picture is a remake only in the sense that it borrows the famous name, the setting and a portion of the premise. Nothing wrong with that approach, it’s just that when somebody appropriates all those elements, they also appropriate a measure of expectation, even obligation, to do something memorable, or so I thought. These filmmakers failed to do any such thing. Maybe they never intended to. Movies are a business, after all, and there’s lots of bank to be made just thrashing a franchise.
Horror movies are almost all remakes now, and they fall almost exclusively into two big categories: Remakes of Old US Movies, and Remakes of Asian Flicks. Both tend to fail at the same rate in being great or even passable entertainment, and that rate is approximately 100 percent. Last year’s The Eye and Shutter were all remakes of Asian originals and all were pretty much forgettable. On the US side—and again, sticking just to 2008—we got Prom Night (which I thought was pretty good, but not many other folks agreed), and fresh (sic) installments of the Saw and George Romero’s …of the Dead franchises. Overall, these too were weak, and so were the dozen or so others I could have mentioned.
The Hollywood trend on horror (and pretty much all else) is to add on to a franchise or borrow a proven title on the belief that a previously proven premise is a safer investment than something brand new. The studio executives may be right: Horror movies are usually pretty cheap to make, so they can get into the black pretty fast. But few of these remake pictures are making crazy money (with the huge exception of the five–so-far–Saw films: $661 million gross on $37 million budget) and none of them are memorable entertainment.
Horror pictures have become an assembly-line operation. They rarely feature an original story and differ from each other only in the order in which they deploy the standard scary-movie tricks such as Loud Noise During Quiet Passage, Surprise Face In Mirror, Evil Child With Horrifying Prediction, and Creepy Image On Common Item.
There are young, will-work-for-cheap writers and directors out there who could have given Friday the 13th a surprising and engaging new direction. That would have been so much more exciting than the the slick, soulless 90 minutes this remake turned out be–a re-shoot incorporating the latest (and already exhausted) CG tricks. Absolutely any filmmaker’s product could not have been less stirring than this, and–here is the heart of the argument–the title alone would have brought in the same crowd in the same numbers, regardless of the content.
So going with some new idea means there’s not really a risk involved. Horror fans (I include myself in that group) will show up, regardless. Hey, studio heads, why not try something different next time? Who knows, you might actually end up with something different, something better, something that draws in folks who don’t otherwise care about the genre. Stranger things have happened–just not in the latest crop of horror movies.
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
75 Comments
It seems these day if you want to see anything even remotely watchable in the horror genre you have to go to foreign flicks or the straight-to-DVD rack. Christian Toto has a lot of good leads on passable lesser-known horror films on his site a lot. I've found some pretty good ones there.
Mike, I'm from Detroit, and what is going on with the Detroit Lions mirrors what has you disgusted with filmmakers; the football fans in Detroit are like the horror fans—they will attend, buy tickets, no matter how lousy the product. While Detroit won't spend the money on quality players, Hollywood won't spend the time on developing the cheap talent. But when the audience will spend the money, why waste your time developing quality?
Not being a horror fan AT ALL, I find the question sort of interesting. Horror has to have certain things, right? So what can be done different? Are there new things to be afraid of? Or is it a case of wanting better back story and character development for the people who are trying not to die?
I reviewed F13 last Friday for our website FilmmakerIQ
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lb7EcAJra8Q” target=”_blank”>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lb7EcAJra8Q
Now I enjoyed the cheap thrill of it all… like a fun house ride – nothing more. And what's wrong with that, exactly?
I don't even like slasher films – never seen a F13 film in my life (at least not the full show)… maybe that's why I wasn't bored
If you want "creative" horror – well the independent shelves are stock full of dreadful horror offerings. Not being a horror fan myself, I'll go so far as to say that 95% of those suck out loud. And yes, this version of F13 is better by far than most of the dreck that's out there.
Sure Hollywood is interested in creating "brands" – it's a locked in guaranteed audience just like there's a crowd that will only buy Tylenol even when you can get acetaminophen for a whole lot cheaper. And to pick apart the creative talents of Hollywood based on one movie which was made to reinvigorate a brand… well that's just unfair.
I reviewed F13 last Friday
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lb7EcAJra8Q” target=”_blank”>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lb7EcAJra8Q
Now I enjoyed the cheap thrill of it all… like a fun house ride – nothing more. And what's wrong with that, exactly?
I don't even like slasher films – never seen a F13 film in my life (at least not the full show)
If you want "creative" horror – well the independent shelves are stock full of dreadful horror offerings. Not being a horror fan myself, I'll go so far as to say that 95% of those suck out loud. And yes, this version of F13 is better by far than most of the dreck that's out there.
Sure Hollywood is interested in creating "brands" – it's a locked in guaranteed audience just like there's a crowd that will only buy Tylenol even when you can get acetaminophen for a whole lot cheaper. And to pick apart the creative talents of Hollywood based on one movie which was made to reinvigorate a brand… well that's just unfair.
I reviewed F13 last Friday for our website FilmmakerIQ
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lb7EcAJra8Q” target=”_blank”>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lb7EcAJra8Q
Now I enjoyed the cheap thrill of it all… like a fun house ride – nothing more. And what's wrong with that, exactly?
I don't even like slasher films – never seen a F13 film in my life (at least not the full show)
If you want "creative" horror – well the independent shelves are stock full of dreadful horror offerings. Not being a horror fan myself, I'll go so far as to say that 95% of those suck out loud. And yes, this version of F13 is better by far than most of the dreck that's out there.
Sure Hollywood is interested in creating "brands" – it's a locked in guaranteed audience just like there's a crowd that will only buy Tylenol even when you can get acetaminophen for a whole lot cheaper. And to pick apart the creative talents of Hollywood based on one movie which was made to reinvigorate a brand… well that's just unfair.
Synova
The big problem with horror movies nowadays is not a conceptual problem, it's an execution problem. Even things we've seen before can be scary if done properly. It hinges on the director's camera-work and sense of timing. Unfortunately these days horror director's are content to throw endless gore and nudity at the audience and then go collect their paycheck. They know they have a huge audience of high school kids who will watch whatever they produce and won't complain about things such as 'direction' and the 'script'
I stayed home and watched "Psych's" takeoff on "Friday the 13th." Now THAT was a fun Friday evening.
Although I hate horror movies and hardly ever watch them, I would venture to guess there was more creativity in that one episode than in the entire F13 franchise.
I think the problem with horror is that most of it mistakenly thinks that the creative kills is what drives the movie. Many go to see that, but focusing solely on that aspect ensures the movie will not be memorable. Those things have to be tools to ratchet tension so that we fear for characters we care about. The audience has to think, if they'll do THAT to that person, what is in store for the main character. Additionally, because the main character is the only one that gets any "character" we know that he/she will live, also reducing tension.
And Psych's episode was frakkin' awesome!
Mike, haven't you learned by now that studio heads never do anything original and that includes picking new voices. I've often thought about penning a "Deliverance" sequel (otherwise they'd never read it) set in Hollywood and starring cross-eyed, clearly "slow" idjits stuffed in suits playing air-guitar. These products of in-breeding (nepotism is the Hollywood way) would torture and try to make "squeal" every new director and screenwriter getting off the bus.
The film makers themselves in "30 Years Of Friday The 13th" lay out the simple formula for the FT13 series.
It's just about putting some young people in a place where they can't be rescued by adults, and sprinkle around some nudity and sex. Meanwhile, make the kills creative and gory.
Not much to it, and it works.
Psych's episode was fun. I can't do blood, guts just over and over — I mean, yeah, that's a horror movie to me. I don't get it.
But a scary, where's the murderer, what's really happening, when is the bad guy going to sneak around the corner — then that I can sit through. Scary is okay. But when is the last time there was anything remotely like that?
Like Alfred Hitchcok scary. Remember Vertigo? I can still get tense watching that movie.
For what it is worth, I actually think the Saw films are vastly superior to any of the 80's slasher franchises. Too, I think they make for an interesting starting point in the psychology of post 9/11 American youths.
It seems to me that horror fans have only themselves to blame. If you will watch whatever drek comes out of Hollywood, then Hollywood has no motive to produce anything but drek. If you actually want something better, you're going to have to withhold your ticket money.
I saw this movie this weekend and I thought it was hilarious. The plot was so ridiculous. I was able to see almost every twist, predict the next murder. I was only startled once or twice. These slasher movies have become so formulaic that they are no longer any fun. And is all the gore and nudity necessary? I mean that one chick did have a great rack and I was sad when she took a machete through the chest. But these directors seem to only want to one up each other with sex and gore and forget the most important part of a movie, plot.
I LOVE horror movies and I tend to see them all (no matter how bad). But to me, the problem with the more recent horror movies is that they no longer try to SCARE you — they rely on shock. It's not the same thing. Seeing someone jump out of the dark is shocking, seeing a body blown apart is disgusting (sort of shocking), BUT getting that creeping feeling up the back of your spine or getting so creeped out that you don't want to open your closet or go in the water or you find yourself wishing you knew a good priest — that's terror. That used to be the goal of horror movies and more movies should shoot for that again.
Good point, but one of the problems is that many of these horror movies probably aren't being marketed to you or me, the discerning film critic. They're made for, and marketed to, that 17-34 demographic (well, actually I do fall in that group). Teenage and college-age males will bring their buddies and their girlfriends and blammo, the movie makes $15 mil the first weekend.
Kit, you hit on something there. With the Lions we keep seeing the same grotesque scene over and over yet it's so predictable it fails to shock. And, like slavish horror fans, I'll be watching again once training camp starts. I think William Clay Ford is a sort of sporting Freddy Kreuger. Always turning up to slash any dream of football glory. I feel you.
Check out "Behind the Mask: Rise of Leslie Vernon" for a very original and often hilarious new take on horror.
But these directors seem to only want to one up each other with sex and gore and forget the most important part of a movie, plot.
The audience doesn't care about the plot either.
In my opinion, one of the best horror movies of all time is "The Uninvited," from 1944 with Ray Milland, Ruth Hussey, Donald Crisp, and the beautiful but tragic Gail Russell. It has everything: great story, wonderful acting, and adequate special effects. And it's scary. This is simply one of the most entertaining ghost stories you’ll ever see. TCM used to show it a lot, but I haven’t seen it in a while. Alas, Netflix doesn’t have it, only a movie from 2009 with the name title. But if you get a chance to see it when it finally comes around again on TCM, don’t miss it. You won’t be sorry.
Have you seen last years Dance of the Dead, a rollicking (no really that word fits here) horror comedy with more than a few conservative bones in its body dumped straight to video. There has been some quality product out there The Mist, Zombie's Halloween remake (I'm sure this will draw disagreements but we must at least agree that it stands far apart from the usual Bay/Asian remakes) 1408, The Orphanage, heck I'll even throw Doomsday up there, of course none of those movies made as much as Friday the 13th so who should we blame here. While I am at it thrill seekers should rent The Gravedancers (as well as the aforementioned films) its the only good film from the first wave of "To DIe For" movies.
I second this. That it worked as well as it did makes it a success.
I disagree about the state of horror films today. Some of the best horror films of all time have come out in the past 10 years. Yes, there's also a lot of crap, and a lot of remakes, but fine horror films are still being made.
Some examples are, The Descent, Session 9, Frailty, Wolf Creek, Eden Lack, High Tension, 28 Days Later, Hostel, and many more.
Also, even this past weekend's Friday the 13th wasn't bad. Yes, it was a bit of a paint-by-numbers approach, and you'll forget all about it the week after, but it was FUN! I saw this at Mann's Chinese theater with a packed house, ON Friday the 13th, and it was a very entertaining night.
Also, The Strangers wasn't great, but it was good, and it relied on fear, not shock. I think horror films have always had a hard time getting respect (often with good reason), but if you can rummage through some of the crap, you'll find some gems. This genre has never been better!
You admit to not being a horror fan, dismiss 95% of its output then recommend this junk with a straight face. Not trying to be D but really man think about that.
No, I have never heard of this one — but that's what I'm talking about — scary versus gore. Will try to watch for it.
Eli Roth has gone on record stating his Hostel movies are political, which I assume in his liberal addled brain means Americans are really the torturers in his films, and years from now film students (a discipline in which I hold my minor) can de-codify his junk. Not a fan of the Saw series but I guess something can be gleaned from their success…Perhaps in the age of unrestricted freedom (in the personal sense) some part of their psyche craves restrictions?
Goosebump city.
Just like every bad horror movie has one or two enjoyable moments, the Lions have one or two big plays per game from Calvin Johnson. Great analogy, but I think the Lions have a brighter future than the horror film genre.
Maybe the theater environment affected your experience with F13. I would try watching it on DVD.
And I would also add Cabin Fever to your list. Not having a human villain is a refreshing approach.
I have to respectfully disagree. Tastes differ, but I think each of these (except 28 Days Later and the Strangers) was just a pretty standard shock movie, with all the cliches. I haven't seen much lately that truly tries to scare you deep down.
Brisco, hate to disagree with someone who appreciated the bets FOX network series from the 1990s, but the horror genre has had several revivals over the last few decades, while the Lions continue to languish in the basement–despite having a few talented players each season. They don't know how to lead and utilize the talent—not unlike Hollywood.
Both Hollywood and the Lions would be better served with new blood an approaches; not sequels (especially not when repeating last seaon's mistakes!)
that is The Adventures of Brisco County Jr. was the BEST Fox series of the 1990s (yes, I know X-Files is from that era).
oh well, another fun of horror …someone that loves movies with subtitles…come on F13 is great pure entertaining!!!
fuck u and long life to Jason!!!
If you've never seen a Friday the 13th movie then you really aren't qualified to review a remake intended to invigorate the franchise. Because Jason has gone to Manhattan, Hell and space in his time, fought Freddy Krueger and murdered several hundred teenagers. Any movie made after that has to do something more interesting than just be a random assortment of pastiche kills. It isn't anywhere near fun if you know what's happened in the previous movies and you end up with this tripe.
And it's totally fair to say that people in Hollywood (a lot of the same people are doing these 'remakes' and they have all been fucking awful) are sucking the life from an entire genre with this pandering bull shit.
I think you have to consider the Descent a truly frightening film. There is some shock, but the monsters don't even show up until forty five minutes in – and it's genuinely creepy when they do – and the lead up to that is some of the most uncomfortable film making I've seen.
And the Strangers was creep-tastic. I was a little disappointed when they did actually kill people. I kind of wanted them to just be these assholes who fuck with people all night then disappear, leaving them to always wonder if someone's going to murder them in their sleep.
Yes, but films like that are made for the theater experience. I would only watch that with a large group.
I'm not arguing that F13 was a great film, it's not! But it was good, silly, slasher fun that doesn't take itself too seriously.
I didn't see Cabin Fever, but I'll add it to my list.
I agree. The Descent, and [REC] are the only two movies that ever made me feel deeply uncomfortable and frightened. Of course…I was almost murdered while walking home from seeing The Descent so that might have altered my memory. The Strangers made great use of sound, especially when making sense of the temporal overlay in the second act.
here is a list I made a while back of worthwhile horror films from the last 10 years.
Here is a list of movies from this decade that are worth watching for whatever reason. Not all of them are good. Some of them are awful. But all represent something fun, if only 1 specific kill, that make them stand out. most are in chronological order. Stars indicate an especially noteworthy film.
Battle Royale*
Final Destination*
American Psycho*
Requiem for a Dream*
Frailty*
28 Days Later
The Ring (American)
Freddy Vs. Jason
Wrong Turn
Dawn of the Dead (04)
Shaun of the Dead*
Shutter*
Cry_Wolf
Land of the Dead
Saw II (part 1 and 3…not so much)
Devils Rejects*
Running Scared*
Behind the Mask the Rise of Leslie Vernon
Monster House*
Pans Labyrinth
See No Evil
Turistas
The Hills Have Eyes (06)
The Descent*
Feast*
Bug*
Grindhouse*
So that's a top 14 I suppose.
Also, Automoton Transfusion and Beach Party at the Threshold of Hell are top notch, but as of yet unreleased.
And
House of the Dead
Alone in the Dark
Bloodrayne
All of these movies are horrid. However, I really enjoyed them in a hilarious way.
Then you must not have seen these films. Session 9 and The Descent are both slow boilers, Frailty has violence, but little blood or gore.
Automoton Transfusion has been released by Dimension Extreme (if we are thinking of the same movie.)
No really…. I have a perfectly straight face when saying that. There's more horror indie crap than comedy/drama indie crap because Horror is really the only place you can actually make a buck self distributing.
Oh please… I've heard that line so many times it's really starting to sound like a playground taunt. "You aren't qualified to review" for this or that reason.
You want to see my qualifications?? – I have it right here, it's this movie ticket stub that I paid $9 for!
I go see a movie, I tell you what I thought of that movie and why… wow… what a novel idea!! I don't need some fancy self appointed F13 trivia crown in order to give a review of a movie I sat through and watched.
See my issue with all this hate toward Hollywood and it's "lack of creativity" is… what's your alternative? Government sponsoring the arts? Oh yeah, there's a great idea.
Free market is going to lead to movies like this – as forgettable as it may be, it's still something that people will enjoy and spend money for. This is no more exploitative as the original movie and the 10+ sequels that came after it.
I think Friday the 13th could have been completely rebooted in a new direction. For instance, the psychotic mother could have been "Jason," although her true son died or Jason, the child thought dead could have been the original killer which closed Camp Crystal Lake 20-something years ago. My point is a twist has to remain to keep the audience on their feet since Jason has already become a cartoon.
The current remakes are soulless expressions at best. It tells me the creators are out of ideas.
Oh yeah…it was. I made that list in 06 or 07 I think. I'd add Diary of the Dead, The Strangers, REC, Let the Right One In and Coraline to it today.
Okay, well, that conversation went somewhere I wasn't talking about real fast. Government sponsorship of the arts? Are you even listening to yourself? I'm saying it's a letdown to fans of the franchise and people who are unaware of what's happened over it's course are unable to appreciate just how bad this movie actually is. And my alternative would be that I would be writing the scripts, and they would ten times more exploitative than this film, because that's why you're in the theater watching a Friday the 13th movie to begin with. If you see a movie like this and you are bored, then someone has failed to make a good slasher film. And I have to say, I was bored.
And you aren't qualified to review the film. I'm sticking by that.
Snappy retort idea (in case you don't have one): You are bored with ME! Gets me every time…
I am a 20-year old male, I wrote for http://www.bloody-disgusting.com during my free time in high school…I struggled to stay awake during this film.
"BUT getting that creeping feeling up the back of your spine or getting so creeped out that you don't want to open your closet or go in the water or you find yourself wishing you knew a good priest — that's terror."
That reminds me of "What Lies Beneath," (2000, Harrison Ford, Michelle Pfeiffer)
While watching it in the theater, I sat there like a kid… squinting, squirming and pretending to be elsewhere, cuz I knew something REAL BAD was about to happen…
That's one DVD that only gets watched on a dare.
Talking about deep-down scares, David Lynch's films always seem to push that button for me. He seems to be the only filmmaker left whose concern is with disturbing, as opposed to shocking the audience. Eraserhead is one of the most effective horror films of all time.
I've seen 'em all. On reconsideration, I'll give you Session 9 — until the ending kind of fell apart, that one was pretty tense, and I'll kind of give you the Descent — it took it's time. Frailty, nah.
Still, I think these few examples only highlight how much the whole genre relies on slasher flicks right now.
Pretty sure George Clooney has proved that hollywood stopped listening to the marketplace long ago. With an Obama government, the United States of Tara on tv, and a plethora of liberal bunk nominated this year, you still believe our entertainment isn't mostly government sponsored already?
"I'll go so far as to say that 95% of those suck out loud. And yes, this version of F13 is better by far than most of the dreck that's out there"
But since you don't watch this "junk" that statement is erroneous. Or do you watch the straight to video stuff and skip the original classics?
Are you kidding? Cabin Fever was a poorly-plotted piece of $#!+. I don't know how Eli tricked Peter Jackson into writing the blurb.
Jennifer Connelly's 'Dark Water' from 2005 was, I thought, one of the best examples of a remake of a Japanese original. It wasn't a slasher flick; it was a flick about a haunting where you never even got a look at the ghost until the final 15 minutes of the movie. I thought it worked brilliantly with the use of imagination for the first hour and 20 minutes until the ghost finally reveals herself.
The answer to your question is "yes" – I've seen a lot of it, horror and otherwise.
There is SO MUCH that independents could learn from Big Hollywood in terms of story telling – especially the classics. Even something like this has more "entertainment" value than a lot of the films I have had to sit through.
"I don't need some fancy self appointed F13 trivia crown in order to give a review of a movie I sat through and watched"
No but you do need a cheap cardboard paper one. You can get them at the movie theater for $2.98 + tax
How many people actually died in the Hitchcock Movie "Psycho"? Was it just the girl in the shower? Seems like you are saying that the long lost art of the Hitchcock psychological thriller is what is needed!
"You still believe our entertainment isn't mostly government sponsored already?"
Of course not!
Films in the U.S. are still almost entirely privately funded. If Mark Cuban wants to waste his money, I could care less.
"Snappy retort idea (in case you don't have one): You are bored with ME! Gets me every time… "
Yeah, that's so not grade school.
"And my alternative would be that I would be writing the scripts, and they would ten times more exploitative than this film"
Then why aren't you?
That would be fine with me.
Brisco, I hope you're right. And let me compliment you on using one of the most egregiously under appreciated and sublimely awesome TV shows in history as your nom de screen. I still curse FOX to this day for only one season. Maybe I'll switch my name to Lord Bowler or Wickwire. And Calvin is almost worth the price of admission and the flogging that comes with it!
You missed my point. I hope it was at least missed on purpose.
I am beginning to have trouble taking you seriously. Other than a ton of money spent on marketing, buying an already established brand name, repackaging it with little artistry and shoving it down America's throat, what could the independents actually learn from Bay and company? Make sure you are friends with Michael Bay? Have a ton of money to blow on MTV ads? When Platinum Dunes releases an original movie (are they not remaking the birds now?) and makes money from it I will gladly admit they know better. Till then umm…i'll remain doubtful.
There is hope for the Lions. My team, The Texans, were the worst in the league in 2004. By 2008, they had the third most yards in the NFL.
Fox also canceled Freaks and Geeks too early. I think that pissed off more people than the cancellation of Brisco County Jr. There's a great DVD package for Brisco County. There's also a DVD for another Bruce Campbell series called Jack of All Trades that had a short run but was mildly entertaining. It was set in colonial times and was loaded with shamelessly overt sexual innuendo.
No, I missed your point because it was an inane one.
Who forced you to go see George Clooney's movies?
Sure. Interestingly, the writer for the original Friday the 13th took a lot of inspiration from Psycho and Agatha Christi's Ten Little Indians. They spent a lot of time on the first person killed to try and head-fake the audience just as Hitchcock did with Psycho (and Kevin Williamson did later with Scream). To their credit, you can really see an effort to sustain tension in the first movie. Sure there's gore, but a whole lot of the movie was anticipation of what might happen, similar to placing a bomb under the table and showing it to the audience, just as Hitchcock did. I'm not saying it's the same caliber, but that was what they were shooting for.
Oh dear you missed my point for real…hah. Nobody is going to see George Clooney's movies yet they still get funded. The Passion made loads of cash, man did Hollywood sure stuff the marketplace full of religious movies after that one.
Scariest movie of all time: The Other Sister. I nearly cried watching Diane Keaton and Juliette "Full-Retard' Lewis emasculate Tom Skeritt. It scared me from ever taking another date to a movie.
Actually NBC canceled Freaks and Geeks, and Fox canceled Undeclared. Both great shows though.
horror films are junk. crap. sh**. enough of this tired, retread, done-over-and-over, same shi**, everytime. this genre is nothing but jack shi**. slasher nonsense and TOTALLY NON-BELIEVABLE. anybody who likes this junk has got sh** for brains.
get a fricking life people. horror – give me a fu***** break.
Yeah, I Netflixed the Freaks and Geeks DVD. Very awesome. And I watched most of Jack of All Trades in first run. I haven't used Hulu.com yet, but it appears that JOAT is available there (the entire series). I would be a Bruce Campbell junkie even it I didn't grow up in the same area (and my brother was an extra in a film with him and Sam Raimi back in the early 80's). I liked his run as Autolycus and I love Sam Axe on Burn Notice. Still, Brisco County Jr. is one of my all time favorites.
Oh, and on the Lions /Texans thing. I appreciate the positive thoughts, but at least you guys got to start fresh as an expansion team. Being a fan with William Clay Ford as an owner is like being Charlie Brown with Lucy holding the football. Still, maybe next year (That is the Lions fan mantra).
It had adequate gratuitous sex and violence. Two thumbs up.
A Friday the 13th movie is what it is – an exploitation film built around kills and boobs (the dock scene in the F13 remake encapsulates the whole series in about 5 seconds). No one watches them as anything more than an amusement, not wanting anything more than he would get from a haunted house ride. And, I cannot emphasize this enough, there is nothing wrong with that. We all need a little fun in our lives. Within that context, I think this was arguably the best film in the franchise – certainly it was better directed and better acted than most of the other films (which understandably set a very low bar). If you like these movies, you'll like this one. If you don't, why are you even reading this?
Good horror, original horror, is really hard to pull off, largely because there are only so many things that scare us. The same basic themes and ideas tend to be recycled, and so even in original stories there are familiar elements. Off the top of my head, I'd list The Descent, The Ruins, The Mist, Death Proof, Devil's Rejects, May, Ginger Snaps, the Others, Shaun of the Dead and Hostel (yes, Hostel) as 10 solid, original, english language movies released since 2000. If I could add foreign language, there'd be even more (the Host, Audition, Devil's Backbone, The Orphanage, Inside, Them, Let the Right One In, etc). This is a genre that is generally looked down on by Hollywood, just one step above porn, and as such rarely attracts the big name writers, directors, and actors. So yeah, there's a lot of crap out there, but for fans, just take a little time to look around, and you'll find the good stuff is out there.
The fact that you thought Prom Night was pretty good speaks volumes
You must be logged in to post a comment.