![]() ![]() Recently I was listening to a podcast that was covering Friday the 13th Part 2 (1981) and one of the hosts proposed a theory that there’s an undercurrent of the mentally and physically handicapped character (Jason) lashing out at the attractive, “normal” people who exhibit no apparent mental incapacities (until Part V: A New Beginning (1985), which is an aspect of that film that can go fuck itself). But he’s sneakier than the undead zombie he becomes, and he thinks his way through his kills instead of going T-1000 on them. ![]() This is important for the argument I’m making, and part of the reason I ride-or-die for the earlier installments of this franchise – the Jason in Part III is alive, albeit with some battle wounds that would cripple an average human. He’s no longer even remotely human, and humans are the best at coming up with inventive ways to eradicate each other. We simply mustn’t expect a resurrected corpse to be brimming with creative ways to kill. That’s a simple and obvious example, but by Part VI Jason had been officially dead and buried for several Crystal Lake years (things don’t age properly at this place, so I assume they’re not Earth years). Ostensibly, the bandana is part of the rules of the game they’re playing, but it’s also a flashing neon sign pointing to his imminent demise. Filmmakers employ many devices used to convey the inevitable: a prop, a line of dialogue, a character choice, music/sound, lighting….and the list goes on.įor example, take a gander at this drop of testicle sweat from Friday the 13th Part VI: Jason Lives (1986) who adorns the DEAD bandana after being “killed” in a company paintball game. There are innumerable examples of foreshadowing deaths in cinema, and since horror is responsible for many cinematic deaths, it’s a frequent tool used within the genre. There’s a premeditated, methodical nature to each kill that goes deeper than foreshadowing. My epiphany is as simple as this: the Jason Voorhees in Part III uses very specific traits from each character in order to expunge them from this planet in a way that no other variation of the character does. The film is no longer tethered to the original blueprint, which allows it the freedom to explore some new ideas, including the detail that I glommed onto for this post. It’s certainly not the “best” film in the franchise, and I do love the two films preceding this one, but I enjoy that we get to wander away from the campgrounds and expand Jason’s kill zone (which will eventually swell to Manhattan and finally, the cosmos). I find myself returning to it more frequently than any of the other films in the series. It wasn’t important to the story, but he was stunned he’d never heard the line any of the countless times he’d re-watched that particular movie.Ī similar revelation happened to me when I was re-watching Friday the 13th Part III this past week and I wanted to make sure this thought in my head was given some space to breathe.įirst off, I unabashedly love this entry. Recently a friend texted me to point out he was in the middle of re-watching Good Will Hunting and he’d just heard a line of dialogue he’d never caught before despite having seen the film dozens of times. You could be watching a film you’ve seen a thousand times and suddenly the lightbulb pops on – there’s a new element you caught that you never thought about one single time in the previous 999 watches.Īnd sometimes it’s just an inconsequential detail. Re-evaluation is integral to cinema because art should be an ongoing discussion. One of the beautiful things about re-watching movies is the opportunity for new discovery. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |