Film-Tech Cinema Systems
Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE


  
my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » Film Handlers' Movie Reviews   » Freddy vs. Jason (Page 2)

 
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2 
 
Author Topic: Freddy vs. Jason
Dave Williams
Wet nipple scene

Posts: 1836
From: Salt Lake City, UT, USA
Registered: Jan 2000


 - posted 08-19-2003 03:50 PM      Profile for Dave Williams   Author's Homepage   Email Dave Williams   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Yeah, that's the ENTIRE point behind Freddy movies, that he kills in DREAMS, so it is really hard to not have any dream sequences. This movie just isn't for you, nor any freddy movie.

As for Texas Chainsaw Massacre, I find it very difficult to believe that anyone can topple the Tobe Hooper classic, especially with Marcus Nispel as the helmer, whose credits only include a few music videos for the likes of Faith No More and Janet Jackson, writer Scott Kosar who has only assisted with editing on a few movies, and Producer Micheal Bay, who we all know and love!!!

So who knows, Tobe Hooper once was a nobody, but he had talent.

Dave

 |  IP: Logged

Darryl Spicer
Film God

Posts: 3250
From: Lexington, KY, USA
Registered: Dec 2000


 - posted 08-20-2003 10:08 AM      Profile for Darryl Spicer     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
So why is this movie called ?Freddy Vs Jason?? They don?t actually fight each other till the last reel. (?and I still don?t quiet get the actual plot of the film.)

The plot is simple. Freddy can't kill no one unless they dream. He uses Jason to make the kids have nightmares again. Jason has to much fun doing what he likes to do, kill people. Freddy gets pissed cause Jason is taking his glory. A fight breaks out between the two. While all this is happening the special effects team is getting rid of all that fake blood they have been storing up for ten years to do thi piece of crap movie. I give it 1/2 star out of four.

 |  IP: Logged

Paul Rich
Film Handler

Posts: 56
From: Murfreesboro, TN, 37128
Registered: Nov 1999


 - posted 08-20-2003 04:48 PM      Profile for Paul Rich   Email Paul Rich   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Actually, you got the plot wrong.

As is stated clearly at the beginning of the film by the gloved one himself (Freddy, not Michael):

*******************SPOILERS****************************

The adults of Springwood have spent the past few years erasing all mentions of Freddy and the crimes related to him. They have taken any kids who do know about him or have had some sort of experiences with him and placed them in a mental hospital and have them on Hypnocil which is a dream-suppressing drug (as seen in A Nightmare on Elm Street Part 3). [One thing the adults didn't change was the TV station call letters - KRGR (or something like that) [Smile] ]

Because none of the teenagers, and even some of the adults, know anything about Freddy, he is essentially powerless. (The reason he could have power in the first film without the kids knowing about him was he had just recently (I'd guess 5 years) been killed by the parents)

So, Freddy needs someone to cause the kids to know about him. He knows that when Jason starts killing, the adults will automatically blame Freddy and the word will spread to the teenagers.

Unfortunately for Freddy, he can't control him as well as he thought he could (by taking on the persona of Jason's mother).

****************END SPOILERS***********************************

One question I do have is why doesn't Freddy kill preteen kids in their dreams? I suppose it's because these films are made in the U.S. This film came the closest to having that happen.

-Paul

 |  IP: Logged

Dave Williams
Wet nipple scene

Posts: 1836
From: Salt Lake City, UT, USA
Registered: Jan 2000


 - posted 08-20-2003 08:18 PM      Profile for Dave Williams   Author's Homepage   Email Dave Williams   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Actually, Freddie needs fear, not necessarily knowledge, of him, to be able to enter dreams and kill. Jason was the bringer of fear, and the parents were the blamer of death. Fear plus name recognition gave him power to kill. Once he had power, he could invade dreams and kill anyone in or from the area, regardless if they knew of him or not. Just plain fear is all he needed to get his power.

Or something like that.

Dave

 |  IP: Logged

Darryl Spicer
Film God

Posts: 3250
From: Lexington, KY, USA
Registered: Dec 2000


 - posted 08-20-2003 09:16 PM      Profile for Darryl Spicer     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I don't see where my explanation of the plot is wrong. If the kids don't have nightmares he can't kill them so he gets Jason to start killing causing the kids to start having nightmares. Even if it was to get them to think about freddy again. Funny thing is the cops memories were not surpressed. I guess freddy didn't like to kill older people.

 |  IP: Logged

Dave Williams
Wet nipple scene

Posts: 1836
From: Salt Lake City, UT, USA
Registered: Jan 2000


 - posted 08-27-2003 03:56 PM      Profile for Dave Williams   Author's Homepage   Email Dave Williams   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Well daryl, that's where you and the the box office numbers differ. Two weeks at number one and more than double the budget in revenue mean that story and plot have no bearing on success these days.

Story and plot only seem to make films do poorly, so be glad that we have lots and lots of brainless yet fun movies to eat greasy crappy popcorn and watered down coke to.

Dave

 |  IP: Logged

Paul Linfesty
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1383
From: Bakersfield, CA, USA
Registered: Nov 1999


 - posted 08-30-2003 10:32 PM      Profile for Paul Linfesty   Email Paul Linfesty   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Well, I have skipped all FRIDAY 13th films since Jason Takes Manhattan (yeah, only for the last 5 minutes or so! Ripoff!) and dont think I have seen a NIGHTMARE film after that 3-D travesty (I STILL remember the Roseanne Barr cameo, though). But, what the hell, I went anyway. Well, things haven't improved from my point of view. I DID like NIGHTMARE films I, III, and V. I don't think I liked any of the 13th movies. They played like pornography to me. Instead of sex, they substituted violence.

As to this movie, it was fairly well shot for this type of movie, but it definitely needed a sense of humor.

 |  IP: Logged



All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2 
 
   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic    next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:



Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.3.1.2

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.

© 1999-2020 Film-Tech Cinema Systems, LLC. All rights reserved.