Friday the 13th. The Remake.

Nick Peron boldly reviews this, the 12th installment of a franchise gone horribly wrong.

Before I begin, I have to thank my colleague Rhonda Baughman for having the courage to review this movie first, you were too kind to it. It with those initial words that I draw strength to write this review.

So if you've already read my review of My Bloody Valentine , you already know that the Hollywood machine has a knack for remaking cinematic gems, and usually turning them into steaming mounds of dog shit. And not just the usual kind, the kind with worms, because that's exactly what one usually experiences: Something that has an esthetic shape, has a star and finish, but there is something moist and unpleasant about it, and you can't help but shudder thinking about little buggy things wriggling all through it. You'd figure that Hollywood could not possibly take the horror remake and turn it into anything more putrid and vile.

I figured that, I really did, and it turns out I was wrong. Yes dear reader, I -- the model of perfection and near godliness -- was wrong, because I never took account two words that, once put in front of any movie can turn what would obviously be a train wreck, but into something equally more horrifying. Like a train-wreck in the middle of the wilderness, that not only dumped harmful chemicals and decimates the whole land, but also has seven passenger cars full of paternity test guests that have appeared on the Maury Povitch show, and it's such a horrific wreck there are bits of suspected baby-daddies all over the place. Arms hanging from the trees, and you, you've witnessed all this. And the worse is, a bit of paper floats to the ground, you pick it up, and read it, and amid all this carnage, you read that you were the father.

"Isn't that a slight exaggeration, Nick?" you may be asking. Yeah, it might be, until I tell you what those two words are: Michael Bay. See now you're getting it, I don't have to say anymore. In fact I could end the review right here. Michael Bay. That's it. But no, no no, see, just flat out Michael Bay bashing has become so common place and cliché, that even the hack writer that I myself claim to be will not stop there. Because if I were, it'd be a toss away review and humor strictly for the likes of Robot Chicken (Who's "Michael Bay-Splosion" bit was hilarious by the way.)

And really, Bay was just one of seven people with some permutation of "producer" in the credits. So it's not just fair to single him out, there is enough blame to go around. Mostly, I'm disappointed in Sean S. Cunningham. Yes, the man behind the original Friday the 13th, House , hell, even Deep Star Six (A classic in it's own right) put his name in the hat of this film. Executive producer. But granted, Cunningham has jumped on board of every Jason movie since New Line picked up the rights of the character (including the god-awful Jason X , if there's ever a movie to be embarrassed about, it's that one.... I'm looking at you Dov Tiefenbach...)

In watching this remake, I had walked out of the theater with the same opinion when Rob Zombie remade Halloween a few years back: It might as well have been another sequel. Because other than recycling a few plot points from the first three films of the series, that's just what it was. And how they did it was in that nod-to-the-originals-with-the-most-minimal-effort type of recycling. You can get why they did it: To please the hard core fans. But the problem with that is you're creating a paradox in filmmaking. They tell us, "we'll we're remaking this movie to make it for a new audience who may have never watched the originals" (Because today's generation never watch old movies because they're soooo inaccessible.) and on the other, they want to please the old time fans by putting in nods to the original films. As far as I'm concerned, shit or get off the fucking pot. Seriously. frankly, I would have preferred it if they only catered to this supposed "new audience" they're trying to tap, because in any situation where you try to appease the long time fan base, most of them are going to get pissed off at you. My extensive writings about Transformers fans should be a scientific paper on the phenomenon (or just read any commentary about Bay's previous opus Transformers by anyone who still thinks it's 1985 and legally changed their name to Optimus Prime.)

If I were the type to get militant about remakes (I'm not, I'm just a critic by nature and dissecting things -- even the things I love -- to find the flaws is what I do) I would look at what they borrowed from the previous films as a nod to the fan and be hopping mad. I'd be writing a flurry of angry message board posts about how much they (whoever they are) ruined my franchise to which I sword total allegiance until they did this with it. Which I'm sure is what's proliferating all over the internet, every second, as I write this. In fact, at the time of this writing they may be more negative reviews by angry fans of the new Friday the 13th movie as there are of video downloads of Asian girls dumping live eels down their butt-holes and shooting them in each others mouths.

Okay... This all being said, how about I just start talking about the movie already? Right, right, let's get down to business, where I will discuss my thoughts about this remake.

Original VS Remake: Well, like I said earlier, this movie may have been another sequel, because it only borrows slight plot elements from the first four Friday the 13th films. So if you are looking at seeing a direct remake of the original Friday the 13th you're going to be disappointed. No, this movie, in spite of being the remake mostly focuses on Jason Voorhees being the killer. The original, as I'm sure you know, started with Jason's mother, Pamela Voorhees, killing people first. Jason was just a toss in final shocker to the first film that mutated into a franchise. Plain and simple. Jason certainly stole the show in the later movies, but I'm sure the inclusion of him into the end of the first film was a screenwriters equivalent to a one-cheek-squeek. One last scare. Only this last scare is like a bad house guest and stuck around for about 11 other movies. The remake of Friday the 13th addresses this plot point in it's first few minutes. That's right friend, they took a 95 minute film and summed it up in five minutes. Only in a less than entertaining fashion. It's summarized as nothing more than exposition for the rest of the film. On the one hand, I can understand why they chose to go that route. The original Friday the 13th movie essentially was a whodunnit movie, you didn't learn the killers identity until the final reel. Naturally, given the popularity of the franchise, doing a direct remake just wasn't going to work. It doesn't have the same mystique that the original has because the mythos has already been firmly cemented into peoples head. Unlike the aforementioned My Bloody Valentine, this movie didn't have the liberty to mess around with the films star, Jason. I mean, you could have re-worked everything and created an entirely different story, but why call it Friday the 13th much less call it a remake?

But with the quick exposition, you lose the magic of how the original movie ended. That last final scare, as cheap as it's original intention was, was magnificent. The girl thinks everything is okay and BAM Jason pops out of the water and drags her under. She survives of course, but her realization that the boy is still out there, in the fucking water, is a chilling prospect to consider. The remake doesn't give us that, Pamela Voorehees gets decapitated (as one should expect) and young Jason shows up comes to get her head and picks up the machete that killed her. Now, granted the original series never really clearly explained how Jason came back to life (Yes, I know, Jason Goes to Hell shows a copy of Evil Dead 's necronomicon in the Voorhees house, but that's more a nod to Sam Raimi's work than an explanation -- if you paid any attention Jason Goes to Hell has homages to a lot of other horror movies) So in the remake the whole Jason suddenly appears like it's the most normal thing in the world is a little awkward. But then again, a sinister part of my brain hears the phrase "Friday the 13th: The Beginning", and I think of the Texas Chainsaw Massacre remake's Prequil and I try to hold back a shudder.

Longest Fucking Opening Ever: Seriously, this movie takes forever to show the films title. We're given a good 15-20 minute scene of these campers looking for a bunch of -- I'm assuming -- wild pot plants. This whole sequence of the film is to embellish the film makers desire to unleash a torrent of every possible cliché commonly associated with the Friday the 13th franchise. There's the dork, there's the pot-head/alcoholic sex machine, and the girl with obviously fake breasts. The really annoying thing about this whole sequence is that like with my comparison of My Bloody Valentine, a character has to fit the part. All these actors are too Hollywood pretty to be convincing. Except for the girl with the big boobs, she's porn star pretty, the only place she'd be convincing would probably be on a couch in a monster-cock three way. You know, the video you have streaming on the other browser window behind this one? That's exactly where she belongs. You ask me, I'm not going to complain if there is nudity in a movie (male or female nudity) but I make two exceptions to the rule: (1) If it's Kevin Bacon (which longtime readers will note that one of my greatest fears is Kevin Bacon penis, thanks to a child hood tragedy wherein I watched Wild Things ) and (2) If boobs are really fake in a movie that is trying to be serious. Give me big fake boobs in a Troma movie, or a Russ Myers flic, that's fine because it works with what they are doing. What I'm trying to say is that fake saline bag breasts have a place in movies. And I can say with absolute certainty, I am not believing for a moment of a character who's supposed to be playing someone in their early 20's that is going out camping is going to have fake breasts like that. Sorry. Just don't believe it. However, if you, or someone you know and care about, really do have fake breasts and enjoy going out camping with a bunch of losers who think they're going to make a killing off of a couple of wild pot plants, please send me an e-mail. I'd really like to hear from you, because I don't think you exist.

When the movie finally does away with these characters (well except for one, I'll get into that, hold your horses!) then, then, we're treated to the movies title. Now, no, it wasn't shocking that I was sitting through a Friday the 13th movie, I paid for the damn tickets myself, I didn't magically think I entered into a hellish realm where they remade the movie Ernest Goes to Camp where they included a killer in a burlap sack on his head. But the movie had already progressed so far, I completely forgot that they didn't show us a credit sequence. In fact, I thought it had already passed. It wasn't a very dynamic opening credit sequence. Remember the original when they did the bit with the logo smashing through the glass? Or the sequels where they did even nuttier stuff to the logo? You got nothing like that, just a bland title credit that looked like they scammed the font off of 1001freefonts.com. I haven't seen a more bland credit title since Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Next Generation .

Hey, That Looks kind of Familiar: As I mentioned above, the other thing about this movie is that they borrow plot elements from the first four movies in the series. From the first movie, it's obvious, I covered it above. The plot devices borrowed from the 2nd film are pretty obvious as well: Jason wearing the burlap sack, his shanty house in the woods, his confusing the character Whitney Miller for his mother, much like he did Ginny Field in the 2nd movie. The reference to the third movie is simple, Jason's trademark hockey mask. I suppose if you want to go for a stretch, you could also say that the teens hanging out in the cabin for the weekend are also a nod to the third movie (Or fourth, or seventh, or.. ah fuck it.) and the not to part 4 is simple, there's an older brother looking for his sister, (Whitney's brother Clay) kind of like the Rob Dier character in Part 4.

The thing that gets me about this one is that they take these small plot points from four different movies and cram them into one movie. The concepts themselves, have no relation to one another when if you took them from the source material and strung them together -- yes, the serve the greater tapestry of the mythos, but distilling each of these plot points (which only account for a fragment of the movie they're borrowed from) and stringing them together wouldn't have made sense, unless you re-write them in a way that they do. So to me, the whole thing seemed really rushed. They were trying to cram a much stuff into this movie as they could, and I think if they focused on that less, they could have made a better movie.

The Man Himself: Convincing or a Joke?: So, how does the actor playing Jason in this movie stack up to the rest? With these movies, I don't think it should matter too much. Put a big guy in a suit mess him up and knock him around for a bit. People will go at length about Kane Hodder being the best Jason, or any of the other guys who played the role in one movie or another. Please. It's Jason Voorhees. Part of the role is looking big and scary, if you're blessed with the biology and can move around like a force of nature as opposed to a guy moving you're all set. The guy they got for this one does a very decent job. I only wish his outfit was more convincing. What the fuck are those stains on his shirt? It looks like the previous owner was a big fat guy who spends his days spilling beer on himself while watching soccer. Okay, so he's not quite so messed up in this movie, and yes, that's on par with the earlier films, but I'm sorry but the psychotic red-neck look is old and tired. I think if there was anything they should have carried over from other movies was the "zombie" Jason look of the later films. That Jason was tough, rot and decay were nothing to him he'd smash through just about anything. This Jason looks like an armature "professional" wrestler in a silly mask by comparison. If you're going to make an unstoppable engine of death bent on eternal revenge you've got to make the guy look the part. In this regard, the Jason in this new film does not meet the task. It's an effective movie monster none the less, but not as powerful as he could have been.

Piss Drinking: This movie has a lot of toilet humor, a lot. And frankly, I'm not sure what to make of it. I am not exactly known for my aliquant use of the english language. My reviews often devolve into jokes involving feces, menses, sperm, fisting, the hot-carl, Hentai tentacle rape, and god knows what other fucking depravity my perverted and warped little mind can come up with. I'm by no means an authority on gross out things to say, but I think I'm qualified to speak on the subject. This movie puts the following subject of conversation out for all of us out enjoy: A conversation about piss drinking, a redneck talking about fucking a mannequin and lastly a guy about to masturbate to an L.L. Bean winter catalogue photo of a woman in a nice, conservative sweater.

Now, to make my point across: I find the human body hilarious More so because as a species we try to keep our bodily functions, it's secretions and ejaculations to our selves. Most of you probably don't want to hear about the apple green diarrheic shit I took this morning, with bits of corn and penults in it. Or how when I flushed, it left streaks all over the inside of my toilet bowl . Further, you probably don't want to hear how when I was taking that *epic* bowel movement, that whenever I farted it sounded like I was going to crack the porcelain if I kept things going. Because human's apparently don't talk about that. I find these things hilarious, I think it's partially because people are so embarrassed by it. They usually pass it off as me having an infatuation with shit, or something of the like. Which I suppose if you wanted to simplify it, then yes, yes I have an infatuation with shit. But seriously. How can the human body not be funny? Ever look at yourself in the mirror while you're taking a shit, or having very uncomfortable sex? I know I have. Let me tell you, it's hilarious

But this... This wasn't that funny. I mean I laugh. Piss drinking is hilarious as far as I'm concerned. I suppose the movie didn't take it far enough. Maybe I'm used to the indie scene where they would push things that much further. I mean, this is Hollywood trying to be racy? I'm surprised the MPAA didn't have that one cut (Kind of makes you wonder what was if anything was cut from this movie?) Okay, while most movies that I watch are far from object de art, but is it too much to ask that if you're going to have a bit about piss drinking -- and trying to make it funny -- at least have someone do a spit take? Honestly.

And another thing: How do you fuck a mannequin? Unless it's the guy from Today's Special, I can't imagine that fucking a mannequin is going to be all that easy, or very enjoyable. Okay, so the redneck character probably couldn't afford a real doll, so I'd bet that he'd find something else to corn-hole, but seriously, a mannequin? I just don't believe anyone can get anything out of that. And you're talking to a guy who've seen guys get blow-jobs by women with chewed up cockroach in their mouth (which is oddly fitting when you think about it.)

The Killings: Talk about yawn city. None of these kills are very exciting in this movie. While convincing and real looking, it's the old adage of the fix-it-in-post special effects. It's a lot better than Freddy vs. Jason 's CGI blood sprays, but not by a whole lot. While they tried to make a bunch of unique kills in the movie, they pretty much went back to the old reliable: machete kill. Which is kind sad, because they had some good ideas going. The most innovative thing they did was make Jason do the old honey pot routine. Put a victim in trouble out in the open and pick off anyone who comes to their rescue. It was a nice change up to the usual stalk-and-pick-em-off-one-by-one routine they usually did. But it certainly was too little to late. The worst crime this movie committed was the fact that they had a fucking wood-chipper and nobody was tossed through it. Nobody. They strangle Jason to death by wrapping a chain around his neck and tossing it into the machine, but even HE didn't even go all the way through. That pissed me off so much. So much, that I spoiled the ending for you. Because I'm that mad. I'm taking it out on you.

As a veteran horror movie viewer, I have to say that you should never show a fucking wood-chipper in a horror movie unless you intend to toss one of your characters in it. Especially in this million dollar special effects budget world, there is no excuse why they couldn't have put someone into that machine as a kill. None. Look at Flight of the Living Dead , they put a guy through an airplane turbine! Sure it looked like shit and a shackle, but at least they had the balls to do it.

This movie tries to be brutal, and at times I find that it's not brutal enough. Friday the 13th may not have been a movie that had a while lot of gore in it's early days, but it was known for it's variety of kills. If they could have used a wood chipper in one of the previous movies they would have.

The Case For: While Friday the 13th is a big disappointment in terms of being a Friday the 13th movie (as a sequel or a remake) it's still an amusing to watch. If you can overlook all it's flaws, it's still watchable.

The Case Against: Well, I think I pretty plainly explained it above. The only other thing I can add is once again like a lot of other movies by Michael Bay, after watching them I feel like calling Jessie James and apologizing on behalf of white people everywhere.

What They Could Have Done Differently: Instead of calling it a remake, they should have done a reinvisioning of the franchise. I think they relied so heavily on the pre-established mythos, all they made was pathetic imitation of the previous films. It's like you paid big money to go see another Jason movie, and instead of getting something good, you got a crappy fan-film. Remember like 20 miles of text ago, when I said that they couldn't seem to figure out who they were catering to? Well, that's the big problem with the story. They should have done something totally different. The best example of a cool idea that would have been an excellent take on remaking the whole Friday the 13th series was when they "reinvented" Jason in the Friday the 13th comic book that Wildstorm Entertainment printed a few years back. That was a good remake of the original idea. They managed to make Jason look creepy again, and have an air of mystery and suspensefulness that was completely lost after the seventh movie.

But in spite of it all, love it or hate it, at least it was better than Jason X.

Place Your Bets: So what's next for Friday the 13th? Whatever film they do next is going to be the 13th movie of the franchise. It should be something epic. But we'll just have to wait and see. My bet? New Line will probably cop out and do a Friday The 13th: The Beginning movie, like they did with Texas Chainsaw. Didn't make sense in the first film? That's okay, we'll do a prequel and it'll all make sense! That's right! Well whatever they do, you know they've done the worst: Put Jason in space, anything else can't be quite so bad. Unless it's a time travel movie where Jason goes back in time and fights the Roman army or something.

Okay, that's quite enough about this movie, my review is done. If you have 8 bucks to blow at the movies (or even better 8 bucks for a blow at the movies) go out and see Friday the 13th, it's certainly not going to be the worst one you've ever seen.