Franchise Review- Friday the 13th

   Thirty-five years ago, a hockey-mask wearing killer began slaughtering bad actors pretending to be teenagers. Actually, that's not true, Jason's mother got the grisly cycle started(thanks, "Scream"). My feeling is that "Friday the 13th" is THE worst franchise this side of "Police Academy", and possibly the worst franchise in the history of Hollywood. That covers A LOT of ground. The next time you're feeling nostalgic about the 1980s, remember this- almost every year of that decade saw the release of a "Friday" film(1983 and '87 were both spared). It's Halloween, so please join me as I recap Jason Voorhees' lamentable legacy. I can't do it alone.

Horror fun fact- Betsy Palmer piled up bodies as Jason's maniacal mother.

"Friday the 13th"(1980)
Wes Craven apprentice Sean S. Cunningham, inspired by the shocking success of John Carpenter's 1978 landmark "Halloween", became the first and most successful in a long line of imitators, and is the father of the "Friday" franchise. Cunningham essentially took a catchy title and eight young novices(it's Kevin Bacon!) into the woods with half-a-million dollars and set the tone for an entire genre. The '80s was the best AND worst of times for horror fans- you were guaranteed MANY more visits from your favorite fictional killer until the death toll devolved into unintentional comedy. Filmmakers with talent approaching that of Hitchcock or Kubrick would rarely consider "a scary movie" after Freddy turned up for the fifth time. They had reputations to think about.

   Adrienne King is no Jamie Lee Curtis, but this series never needed a signature heroine. The closing shot of Jason's decomposed body coming out of that water("He's still there") may have been worth the price of a 1980 movie ticket alone, and is the single best moment in all twelve(so far) films. "Friday" made almost as much money as "The Shining" that summer(sigh), and Jack Nicholson's salary dwarfed it's entire budget. Guess which one is my favorite horror movie.

"Friday the 13th Part 2"(1981)
The second "Friday" begins with a recap of the first film's finale, like "Halloween II" which it beat into theaters by exactly six months(who copied who?), to pad out an-already scant 87 minute running time. Amy Steel replaces Adrienne King as the obligatory Final Girl(these names won't get any more familiar), while Steve Miner kicks off a revolving door of dirt-bag directors. Jason wears unintimidating overalls and a burlap sack over his head, clearly illustrating the hasty production process. I love how he effortlessly kills everyone in sight for a half-hour, only to fumble around and forget how to do so in the third act. I guess those eyeholes weren't big enough.

   Utterly incompetent filmmaking couldn't keep indiscriminant youths from dropping $22 million on this mess. With a $1.2 million budget, it was good news for enterprising Paramount execs that eyed a profitable product unburdened by expectations of actual quality. There was simply no way of knowing what we were in for.

"Friday the 13th Part III"(1982)
Jason, now sporting his iconic hockey mask, tears through more terrified teens to take the title of cinema's preeminent killer(MM took seven years off and FK wasn't around yet). Steve Miner is the only director to sit at the helm of more than one "Friday", and he brings the bloodshed in 3-D way before anyone knew who James Cameron was. "III" removed "E.T." from the top spot at the box office for one weekend in late August, so that's something "Friday" fanatics can gloat about(if there is such a thing). Like Michael Jackson, Madonna and Michael J. Fox, you soon wouldn't be able to escape Jason if you tried, such was the character's cultural omnipresence. An real machete to the throat was starting to look more appealing.

"Friday the 13th: The Final Chapter"(1984)
Did those Paramount pornographers REALLY intend to conclude the Crystal Lake saga in 1984? Despite fierce opposition from critics, it seems highly unlikely. False advertising aside, film buffs may have fun pointing out the presence of Corey Feldman and Crispin Glover. Unfortunately, there's nothing else to see here. Director Joseph Zito was reportedly hostile toward the cast and crew. He saved his greatest hostility for the audience. Are brutal murders entertaining? This terrible movie thinks so.

"Friday the 13th: A New Beginning"(1985)
The foul fifth entry arrived in theaters eleven months after the fourth, wasting no time in exposing the insincerity of that film's title. Masochistic viewers would be mistreated to a halfway house horror show in the wilderness with a mysterious NEW killer carrying on Jason's carnage- an attempt to 'freshen' things up that resulted in a lower box office tally than the last two. It turned out that creativity(if you can call it that) had no place in this slasher-thon, and mildly retarded teens had become rather attached to the real Jason and his stupid hockey mask. There was enough blood and breasts to make up for his relative absence if we're judging "A New Beginning" on it's own shallow terms, and a(then) series high body count. That's presumably why "V"(unlike the previous 'final' chapter) would sadly live up to it's name.

"Friday the 13th Part VI: Jason Lives"(1986)
A returning Jason is established as a supernatural force for the first time(sequels forever!!!), so at least we don't have to wonder how he keeps coming back. The pre-credits 007 homage was an admittedly clever touch, a sly acknowledgment that Jason now occupied a similar place in pop culture as the suave superspy. The awfulness of these films was becoming irrelevant because the studio knew what they were doing- keep it under 90 minutes, the budget under $5 million, quadruple that at the ticket counter and you come out a winner. That's capitalism, and it does have a downside. A fast food diet can be dangerous, and you don't want to shut your brain off TOO much. It might not come back on. Some people shouldn't be allowed to vote.

"Friday the 13th Part VII: The New Blood"(1988)
The ludicrousness reaches new levels with the introduction of a female psychic protagonist(Lar Park Lincoln) with telekinetic powers. A mildly interesting idea executed as excruciatingly as you'd expect. Hulking stuntman Kane Hodder makes his debut behind the mask, and would wear it for the next three installments(he's the only man to play the role more than once). Hodder agreed to be set on fire for a full forty seconds, a Hollywood record at the time(I needed something nice to say). Twenty years before Marvel, "The New Blood" got the summer of '88 started off all wrong. Thank God for Rambo and Roger Rabbit.

"Friday the 13th Part VIII: Jason Takes Manhattan"(1989)
Let's get one thing straight right off the bat, Jason doesn't really 'take' Manhattan. It's way too expensive to film there, so most of this bullshit takes place on a boat. We're in NYC for approximately twenty minutes(including an ugly opening credits montage). "Part VIII" bombed thanks partly to "Batman", indicating that the public was ready to part ways with Jason(AND Freddy/Michael Myers) as their decade of destruction drew to a close. Oh, if only that had been the case. The sewer-set finale finds the hockey-masked hellion covered in raw sewage. How incredibly fitting.

"Jason Goes to Hell: The Final Friday"(1993)
Now I'm really pissed. "The Final Friday", huh? Just like it was "The Final Chapter" and "The Final Nightmare"?! Fuck you. I'll watch "Jurassic Park" 900 times before I'll endure this ninth visit from Voorhees again. I don't know if Jason went to hell, but I sure did. You don't know what pain is, till you've seen Richard Gant possessed by the spirit of Jason after eating his heart. The '80s sequels had a sleazy charm. This is one of the biggest pieces of shit I've ever seen in my life.

"Jason X"(2002)
You thought it was over, didn't you? Nine years is a long time. It turns out Jason was just taking a little nap. If toxic Tinsel-town suits have their way, he might ACTUALLY make it to the year 2455. You'd be hard-pressed to find a more desperate endeavor than this early 21st Century revival. Every negative description in existence applies to "X", along with ones that haven't even been invented yet. I think it's supposed to be pronounced "Jason Ten", but this monstrosity doesn't deserve to have it's name said correctly. Anyone that sees the comedic value in this futuristic folly has a better sense of humor than I do. This is probably the worst movie of 2002. Maybe the worst movie of all time.

"Freddy vs. Jason"(2003)
Okay, here's the backstory- Paramount saw "Friday" as a dying property after "Manhattan", so they dumped the rights which were promptly picked up by New Line Cinema(Freddy's home). This smack-down was teased at the end of "Jason Goes to Hell", and it took ten years to come to frightening fruition and is every bit as pathetic as one of the pitiful pair's solo outings. If you funded this joint resurrection, then we're probably not going to get along very well. At least Hollywood hasn't booked a rematch.

"Friday the 13th"(2009)
History repeats itself as Jason rises from the grave yet again, nearly thirty years after his inaugural massacre. We have Rob Zombie's '07 "Halloween" remake(and the "Saw" series) to blame for "Friday" getting a fresh coat of paint. A new slate of attractive nobodies(that weren't even alive in 1980) are served up before Mrs. Voorhees' violent offspring. Michael Bay was behind the scenes for this rancid 're-imaging'(money is his middle name), which scared some business away from Liam Neeson's "Taken". It sucks, but you knew that already. Still, there's something strangely comforting about the fact that Jason's still out there. We've come this far, and today's kids should know what that hockey mask means. Their kids should know, too. James Bond has twenty-five films, so this unlikely icon has more work to do. See you next time, Jason.

Franchise Review- Star Wars 1977-1983

   A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away, George Lucas was the director of "American Graffiti", Harrison Ford was a budding carpenter, special effects were something you saw in Stanley Kubrick's "2001", box office results weren't treated like sports statistics and franchises weren't a foregone conclusion. The history of film can accurately be broken up into two categories- before "Star Wars" and after "Star Wars". If you know NOTHING else about movies, at least know this- George Lucas' space saga changed everything, and with Disney awakening the sleeping giant in December with "The Force Awakens", it's time to recap the most powerful film series in existence and how it got that way. May the Force be with us.

"Star Wars"(1977)
So, what more needs to be said that hasn't already, about this unrivalled pop culture colossus? I'm sure there was a fair amount of anticipation for "Exorcist II" before stunned audiences saw that Imperial Star Destroyer. Alec Guinness should have won Best Supporting Actor for the instant credibility he brought to the table as wizened old warrior Ben Kenobi(sorry, Jason Robards). "Wars" should have probably taken Best Picture from "Annie Hall" for that matter, as artful a representation of the romantic comedy as Woody Allen's crowning achievement is. Mark Hamill's youthful energy made him the perfect stand-in for the average viewer, as he's whisked a million miles away from his dull farm-boy life on Tatooine, while Carrie Fisher's hair-buns are as iconic as they come. Now let's talk about Han Solo. This lovably snarky space pirate positioned Harrison Ford as Hollywood's next great leading man, and is arguably the most beloved character in the vast "SW" universe that ISN'T supplied with the booming voice of James Earl Jones. Which brings me to Vader. Is there a more towering villainous presence in the annals of cinema? Don't let his early 21st century backstory fool you. We'd have to wait for the Joker(Jack AND Heath) and Hannibal Lecter to even MAKE that an interesting argument.

   I shouldn't have to tell anyone old enough to drive that this film was a phenomenon on par with Beatlemania, surpassing Spielberg's juggernaut "Jaws" as the movie event of the 1970s. It wasn't just a movie, that's a puny word to describe what happened in May 1977. During that confusing, transitional post-Vietnam/Watergate era, an eager public was literally transported into a fully immersive world that was far more appealing than the realities they were forced to deal with on a daily basis, and it's one they chose to return to again and again. Lucas' legacy lies in more than just special effects(that climactic aerial attack on the Death Star remains incredible), he's the first filmmaker to unleash the full power of escapist entertainment, inspiring countless others to follow his lead. The level of fan-boy obsession he created couldn't have possibly been predicted back when 'serious' movies ruled the day(with all due respect to "The Godfather" and "Taxi Driver"), nor could an entire generation's religious devotion to a 'silly sci-fi movie'. Yes, I know "Star Trek" had already amassed a sizeable following, but this is "STAR WARS" we're talking about here. I guess you know which side I'm on.

"The Empire Strikes Back"(1980)
"I AM your father". The four words that left aspiring Jedi as shaken as Luke Skywalker himself and changed the entire complexion of the saga. It's hard to believe there was ever a time when we weren't aware of Vader's revelation(it's also hard to believe George ever conceived of the idea before 1978, regardless of what he's been saying for the last thirty-plus years). It's the most famous moment in a flawless masterpiece that's as good as "SW" is ever likely to get. Ask anybody. The blistering opener on ice planet Hoth, Han and Leia's budding romance(she loves him, he knows) and the enormous effectiveness of Frank Oz's wrinkled green puppet all contribute to the exalted status of Yoda's debut flick. Director Irvin Kerschner and screenwriter Lawrence Kasdan are often credited for finding a darker, more intimate tone, while Lucas was busy setting up his FX house ILM and making sure he pocketed the lion's share of the profits. Ironically, "Empire" was the lowest-grossing film in the trilogy with a still VERY impressive $222 million- proof that moviegoers don't always know what's best for them until some years pass.

   Legions of tireless supporters came out in 'Force' to declare "ESB" THE greatest movie of all time in a 2014 Empire magazine poll. The franchise's undying influence and appeal insures that titles like "Citizen Kane" and "Casablanca" will never again claim the top spot in such a survey. I won't bother disputing these results, I know what I'd rather watch. As if it's genius creator didn't have a strong enough revenue stream, Lucas put Ford in a fedora and launched Indiana Jones the following year with his crowd-pleasing counterpart Steven Spielberg, irreversibly altering the cinematic landscape, for better or worse, depending on your point of view.

"What do you mean my acting career is over?"

"Return of the Jedi"(1983)
The least beloved third and final chapter in the groundbreaking OT, still beats the shit out of nearly every CGI-heavy spectacle designed to pounce on our wallets since the new millennium. "Pirates of the Caribbean"? Sorry. "Iron Man 3"?? Fuck off. Jabba the Hutt and Ian McDiarmid's Evil Emperor are the nasty new bookends, and I can't decide whose more vile. Luckily, Leia's gold bikini helps balance things out. No disrespect meant to late director Richard Marquand, but I was told Lucas was calling the shots on Endor. The triple-stranded climax contains the most relentless, thrilling forty-five minutes of action this side of "Aliens", unless you allowed Warwick Davis in a teddy bear costume to ruin that for you.

   "Jedi" was the second biggest moneymaker of the 1980s behind "E.T", and a mass-merchandised monster to boot. Lucas said in an accompanying interview that there would be SIX more "SW" movies, a statement he would back away from in the mid-to-late '80s(the dark times) as bearded basement-dwellers waited for ANY type of word on a possible continuation of their reason for being. Lucas would stay active overseeing Indy sequels and the eerily prophetic "Howard the Duck", before the astonishing success of 1993's "Jurassic Park" and it's promise of limitless technical advancements prompted him to pen the tragic tale of a young Anakin Skywalker. The resulting prequel package is discussed at length in a previous blog. But his seminal, ahem MIDDLE trilogy contains an innocence and a purity before those 'Episode' appendixes that even Disney can't replicate. They will try. Repeatedly. I'm nonetheless cautiously optimistic about the first "Star Wars" movie NOT presided over by it's now-retired tyrannical overlord. The man that once fancied himself an indie filmmaker with wacky ideas, became the cold, inflexible establishment that he used to fight like a member of the Rebel Alliance. Don't get me wrong, he opened the floodgates and shaped Hollywood into the PERMANENT premier destination for scripted family fun for children of all ages(forty former Lucas employees founded Pixar in 1986) and the Mouse House secures the survival of his brand for decades to come. Time will tell if that's really a positive thing. J.J. Abrams put a lightsaber back in Mark Hamill's (robotic) hand, though. I have a good feeling about this.

Franchise Review- Star Wars 1999-2005

   I can't believe I'm feeling nostalgic for the "Star Wars" trilogy that wasn't even meant for me. They're perhaps the most divisive films ever made, generating a crazed contempt from obsessive fan-boys that was wildly disproportionate to the gargantuan profits that poured into the pockets of the man that "raped your childhood". Bashing the prequels became a favorite pastime of movie geeks in the 2000s, but it didn't stop George Lucas from becoming a multibillionaire. Never before have the voices of dissent meant so little. That clever, bearded bastard knew that this thing was MUCH bigger than the thirty-something set that would never approve of Jar Jar Binks(they got a vitriolic head start on those cuddly Ewoks), but would still pay up to see the rest of the saga unfold, and they would bring their impressionable offspring that wouldn't care about Hayden Christensen and Natalie Portman's eye-rolling romance because Yoda is surprisingly mobile and somebody will be swinging a lightsaber any minute now.

   It's time for a fresh critical reevaluation of "Episodes I-III" as we prepare to face the mass-merchandised madness ALL OVER AGAIN starting with the Dec 18th release of "The Force Awakens". Strive for objectivity and remember this, WHOEVER you are- "Star Wars" doesn't belong to you.

"Star Wars: Episode I- The Phantom Menace"(1999)
The most hyped film in history was released on May 19, 1999. I remember it like it was yesterday. You couldn't escape "Wars" if you wanted to, from the moment that buzz-building trailer dropped on Thanksgiving Eve 1998, promising Force fanatics an EPIC exploration of the Old Republic replete with shiny CGI and colorful creatures from all corners of the galaxy(be careful what you wish for). What do you mean, you didn't camp out for a month to hear about the Trade Federation's response to the taxation of trade routes? Didn't you see that double-bladed lightsaber?? I know, there's too much Jar Jar, and too little of that bad-ass space devil Darth Maul. But the pod-race and Duel of the Fates were worth the price of admission alone, instantly joining the T-1000 and the T-Rex on the list of the decade's most stunning FX achievements, while Liam Neeson was everything a seasoned Jedi Knight should be. Alas, it wasn't enough.

   "TPM" was the second biggest moneymaker of the '90s behind "Titanic", AND the second movie to feel the full wrath of keyboard warriors(how ya doin', "Batman & Robin"?). This won't be a popular stance, but George Lucas is the author of the "SW" universe, and if he says that Anakin Skywalker was a bushy-haired brat that can't act, then who are YOU to say otherwise? The man just got too insulated and powerful. He told the story he wanted to tell with INSURMOUNTABLE expectations, it just wasn't the story that Jedi junkies had been writing in their heads for 16 years. Let's stop this nonsense once and for all about "Menace" being "one of the worst movie of all time", that dubious distinction is reserved for titles like "Battlefield Earth" and the latter-day works of Adam Sandler. "Episode I" WASN"T EVEN the worst movie released in the summer of '99(what's up, "Wild Wild West"?). It wasn't the cinematic Second Coming, but neither was "The Matrix" with the benefit of hindsight, so please just halt the hateful hyperbole when it comes to this movie and think about the kids. I'll bet you were one when you first fell in love with "Star Wars".

"Star Wars: Episode II- Attack of the Clones"(2002)
Lucas forged ahead, unfazed by the bombastic backlash swelling online(although he did give Binks the boot) as Anakin is transformed from a precocious slave boy into a temperamental teen torn between love and an outdated Jedi moral code. Opponents of Hayden Christensen's acting often neglect to mention Mark Hamill's lack of Oscar nominations(I like the guy, but it's true). Ewan McGregor was starting to look like Alec Guinness, and I don't recall too many complaints about his swashbuckling Ben Kenobi. The late Christopher Lee's commanding turn as Count Dooku was an effective villain that should have had a greater presence(alongside Maul!) in "Episodes II and II" to point out one of George's less frequently cited errors. Sam Jackson has a cool purple lightsaber, and Mace Windu is the Jon Jones of Jedi. The film is a visual feast(or at least it was in '02) and the climactic battle scenes deliver, yet too many of the criticisms of "Episode I" still apply.

   "Clones" is the only "SW" film to NOT rank as it's year's highest grosser(Tobey Maguire's Spider-Man swung away with that title). However, there was an even larger threat looming over Lucas' empire- an upstart Peter Jackson was showing moviegoers the correct way to do a fully CG character and his lush New Zealand landscapes stood in stark contrast to LucasFilm's sterile greenscreening. "LOTR" indeed stole the hearts of fantasy film buffs and won Oscars that Lucas' PT could only dream about(ironically, "The Hobbit" trilogy was met with a similar lack of reverence). I wouldn't call it an attack of the clones, but Lucas was hardly alone in the land of excessive film franchising as each passing year made it a little harder to impress a 21st century populace with a plethora of pyrotechnics to choose from.

"Star Wars: Episode III- Revenge of the Sith"(2005)
The fourth best "SW" movie(so far) and the best of the prequels was a lot closer to what the saga's notoriously nitpicky fan-base had in mind when it's controversial creator revealed that he was ready to tell the tragic tale of a young Anakin Skywalker(this was when he REALLY started tinkering with the OT that only matched about 50% of his TRUE vision). The lambasted Lucas should've used that precious time to punch up his dialogue which wasn't any easier to digest, but he was never Woody Allen or Quentin Tarantino and we don't walk into "SW" expecting dazzling wordplay. Ian McDiarmid rose above these verbal restrictions as the sinister, scheming architect of Anakin's fall from grace, his Emperor providing much of the connective tissue between "Sith" and the "Star Wars" of my youth. The lightsaber action rarely lets up before a demoralized Obi-Wan and Yoda take a 19-year hiatus as a hideously scarred Hayden suits up as Darth Vader(while diehards screamed "NOOOOO") and Natalie Portman's Padme pops out Luke and Leia to set the stage for "Episode IV".

   "Episode III" took in $380 million to rule the summer '05 box office, while an exhausted Lucas told the media that the story was now complete. It's extremely unlikely that he meant it, but at age 61, it was even more unlikely that he'd have the stamina to follow through on the once-promised Episodes VII-IX. "No more Star Wars", the gray-haired grump proclaimed, as if he were deliberately trying to disappoint his disciples one last time. An animated "Clone Wars" TV series satisfied the hunger until the most earth-shattering announcement since ol' Darth admitted he was a deadbeat dad- the 2012 Disney acquisition. Now the whole world waits for J.J. Abrams to atone for those pesky prequels with "The Force Awakens". A slew of standalone adventures are already being planned. But will they really be THAT much better? Is my age group still hoping for another "Empire Strikes Back"? Will the prequel supporters(yes, there is such a thing) finally GET how integral Harrison Ford is to the proceedings? There's one thing I do know- the kids are gonna love it.