WHAT’S OLD IS NEW AGAIN (and sometimes again) (and maybe again)
Here at the Monkey House, my writing projects have been a bit on the sparse side. And it’ll still be lacking for a while (busy season at the hubby’s store and I help out, so that takes time away from my creative ventures). But as Friday the 13th rolled around last week, I thought that would be the perfect opportunity to springboard a new series at my site: comparing/reviewing original films and their remakes. Some have more than one remake or reboot or whatever the fuck Hollywood calls it to distract you from their lack of originality, but I’m not sure I’ll cover each and every one.
And for the most part, I’d like to concentrate on movies that AREN’T based off books. Each of those films can be seen as different interpretations, as opposed to strictly remakes, but that’s mostly semantics, and I don’t have the time or energy to debate which is which.
I’m not going to worry too much about spoilers because a lot of these original films came out pre-MTV (that’s 1981 for those of you playing at home). If you’ve neither seen nor heard of them, that’s on you. Not me.
So let’s get going with Friday the 13th vs Friday the 13th.
Original 1980
For the uninitiated, here’s the back story: in 1958, Camp Crystal Lake is the site of a tragic drowning of a young, special needs boy, named Jason. The campers who were supposed to be paying attention to all of their young charges (not just Jason) we’re making love instead, so it’s basically their fault the kid died. After someone murders them, the camp is shut down and abandoned. Just a hair over twenty years later, some do-gooders decide to open the camp back up for another generation of youngsters. Unfortunately, an unknown killer doesn’t take too kindly to that idea, and decides to murder them all.
This film is part of the original generation of slashers - masked or unknown killer going after a group of young people because reasons. Some explain why, some don’t, but either way you know the shit’s gonna hit the fan if you’re under twenty-five. I personally liked the story/reasoning behind the F13 killer because it’s universal. I think most of us can relate to or understand the need for revenge, particularly after the loss of a child. Granted, the 1980 counselors-to-be aren’t responsible for Jason’s death, but to the broken heart of a mother, thinking her son’s memory could be left in peace, that’s enough to shatter her psyche even further and honestly, I’m on her side.
As for the acting in this film, it’s pretty bad, though for a bunch of unknowns, it’s not terrible. I really liked Laurie Bartram as Brenda, and it’s a nice, albeit shallow, vehicle for Kevin Bacon. Obviously Betsy Palmer is the real star here, though we don’t see her until the last ten minutes of the film. But her performance, as the broken mom on a tear for revenge, is brilliant. I also love that her last real-world movie performance was 1959 (the year before Jason drowned) and she only took this role because she needed to get a new car, thinking it would be a quick paycheck and no one would even remember the film.
Adorbs.
The characters are mostly throw-away, in my opinion, but there does seem to be less douchebaggery in the original than the remake. 1980’s Neddy, while annoying, isn’t an asshat so we can forgive him, unlike Trent, from 2009, who is just such a total fuckwad. Everyone else is either set dressing for a particular scene or fodder for the kill count. But I’d like to point out that, despite Roger Ebert’s insistence that this should be included in the misogynistic trope in slasher films, the survivor AND the killer are both women, so fuck any critic who lumps this in with the more generic women hating out there.
Yeah, I said it. Fuck the critics. Though if any of them hate the real deaths of real animals, I’m okay with that - and it turns out the snake death in the original F13 was real. And now I’m traumatized and hate the film, and Tom Savini for adding it in, just a bit.
As this was shot in 1980, the look of the film is definitely not slick and shiny, like more modern movies. Definitely lacking in the cinematography aspect. And I like that. All the films of this era look rougher, a little grainy, as if lost to time and not discovered until 50 years after being made. Even when they were new, they had the same worn appearance. I know that has to do with the filming ratio, film format, development, processing, and the actual camera used. I don’t know shit from poop in the technical side of the movie business. I just know I dig it.
While not a perfect film (honestly, very few of those exist), and not even my favorite in the franchise, it has its place in history and is worthy of its revered status. If you haven’t seen it, even if your resistant to ‘old’ horror movies, do yourself a favor and watch.
You know you want to. You like to watch, don’t you? Yeah...
Okay, wow. Let’s move on to the 2009 remake!
Remake 2009
We’ve got a similar story going - and by that I mean Jason is in it. Everything else kinda changed though. We get a quick recap, with different actors, of the final scene between Pamela and Alice from the original film. Then it goes off the rails. We see a quick shot of a youngster’s legs as he picks up the headless Mother Voorhees’ locket, then skedaddles (thereby confirming Jenny’s theory that Jason was there and witnessed the murder). Flash to present day to a group of young people hiking out into the woods to camp, and by camp I mean find the hidden pot farm from which to pilfer goodies. One of those is Whitney, and while the others are killed, she is kept alive for reasons unknown, but hinted at. Six weeks later, Whitney’s brother, Clay, is trying to find her, as the local cops are LESS than useless. He crosses paths with another group of young people who just wanna have a good time, but get caught up in the merciless murdering machine that is Jason Voorhees.
The story is okay. I can appreciate the filmmakers wanting to do something a little different from the original, instead of just throwing up a rehash. It’s like they took elements from several films in the franchise and mooshed them together (I’m not saying I liked it, but I can appreciate it). Pamela Schmamela, let’s get Jason in here right meow! That’s what the kids want these days! Which, let’s be honest, is mostly true. I do find Jason’s subterranean abode a titch more believable. I would think that kind of dwelling would be easier to hide in than some ramshackle ramshack in the middle of the woods (a la Part 2). I mean really, no one came across that bitch in all those years?
The film itself is much prettier than the original. Much more cinematic, the colors are brighter, the dark scenes spookier, as opposed to “what the fuck is going on? I can’t see shit!” While it doesn’t have the grainy look of the original film, the atmosphere of Jason’s domain is definitely rougher than the outside scenes. You can almost feel the mood shift while you’re watching. I also love the little nods to previous films thrown around, one being a quick glimpse of a wheelchair (poor Mark and the backwards machete to the face in Part 2).
While the acting is much better, it also seems like a wasted vehicle for some of the talent here. Richard Burton as the inept cop; Danielle Panabaker as Jenna; even Rosemary Knower as the Old Lady (she’s only in one short scene, but her presence is quite palpable and I wish her screen time was longer). Honestly, I only watched this because Jared Padalecki stars as Clay. But all of the characters, even his, seemed kinda shallow, and I didn’t really care what happened to any of them. There’s also a lot more douchebaggery going on with the characters in the remake, which added to my ‘couldn’t possibly care less’ attitude toward their fates. That, and the fucking weak ass, lame dick ending - dear gods, did anyone actually think that was interesting or clever or new - really kept the score on this remake very low.
Funny story - I went with a handful of my writer group’s members to see this in the theater. 1) we were the oldest people in attendance; and 2) we were laughing through the whole film, while the newbs in the audience were screaming and shitting their pants.
So while there are some elements I enjoyed in the remake, it is a mediocre at best attempt to refresh a franchise that had gone a little silly in its longevity (I’m looking at you, Jason Takes Manhattan). If you want a proper introduction into Jason Voorhees and his mommy issues, watch the original Friday the 13th from 1980. Trust me. It’s better for your overall mental health.
