johnlink ranks FRIDAY THE 13TH 1 & 2 (1980; 1981)1)
I know the reboot of Friday the 13th is coming out this weekend. My initial reaction was to be outraged that they would consider remaking a classic. The only problem with that, is that I’ve never actually seen the original. So how can I have a position?
So FearNet had the first two on demand, and I figured I’d watch them, so that I could come out of the dark. The first, of course, is without Jason. The second is with Jason, but no iconic hockey mask. Go figure. I knew who the killer was in the first, thanks to SCREAM, so that wasn’t a surprise there.
I watched both the 1980 FRIDAY THE 13th and the 1981 FRIDAY THE 13th PART 2 for the first time on 2.10.09. This will be my first simultaneous review.
NOTE: THIS RANKING UTILIZES THIS SITE’S ORIGINAL SYSTEMIC ARTICLE WRITING METHOD. THE METHOD BY WHICH THE RANKINGS WERE ARRIVED AT, HOWEVER, REMAINS THE SAME.
FILM
The first one is actually a good slasher flick. The POV choices are solid, and the decision to start lying about whose POV we are seeing adds to the suspense of the movie. All in all, I was impressed with the quality. The second one grabs the POV idea and takes a big shit on it. Jason’s POV is never really established before the film starts lying to you, so it’s unreliable. Plus, when they do use it as his POV, people are looking right at him in broad daylight, but are unable to see him because of a few leaves. Lame. Lastly, the second one felt much more like a studio film. The darks were never quite as dark and images were just a little to well lit at night. Watching them back to back, the first one is definitely better. SCORE: PART 1: 6… PART 2: 2.
MOVIE
I’m a big advocate of trying to look at something in its time. I know how much these movies influenced other slasher flicks. The problem is, I just couldn’t really get into them here in 2009. They both felt flat, and the scares weren’t there. I know that I’ll get some negative comments on this (if anyone actually reads these rankings one day) because so many people grew up with these films. Oh well. SCORE: PART 1: 4… PART 2: 3.
ACTING
About the same in both. A couple scenes in the first one surprised me with how genuine they felt. But then that would be followed by a classically bad “Hello? Who’s there?” and ruin any momentum a character may have had. SCORE: PART 1: 4… PART 2: 2.
WRITING
The first one has a decent story, and a few lines made me laugh. I never felt like it was really bad, but was decidedly average. I did like the mother/son story and felt it was an attempt at originality. Plus the POV stuff helped make the surprise at who the killer was much more impactful, I imagine, to those who first saw it. I sure expected a big, huge dude. Writing in the second one was rough. I did like the child psychology angle, that was smart. But the inability to explain how Jason grew twice the size from ages 20 to 25 confused me. Also, if someone’s boyfriend is being killed in front of her, who just stands there repeating his name? Help or run. But don’t just stand there! SCORE: PART 1: 5… PART 2: 3.
FINAL TALLY
PART 1: FILM: 6; MOVIE: 4; ACTING: 4; WRITING: 5
PART 2: FILM: 2; MOVIE: 3; ACTING: 2; WRITING: 3
6+4+4+5+0=19
2+3+2+3+0=10
FINAL SCORE: PART 1: 4.75; PART 2: 2.5
My final verdict is still that we should be making new stuff rather that revisiting old stories. But, upon further review, it’s not like we’re redoing PSYCHO here.
johnlinkmovies 