Friday the 13th was pretty much blacklisted by the MPAA and critics alike and the movies suffered a lot of censorship. Because if this the movies had to not only try to come up with creative deaths without as gore, but find new angles to sell the films to the public. As I stated to Cullen, when you get to a 5th sequel you must try to find new ways to bring the audience in. Jason Lives is a good movie and the cinematography looks real good. Now, I personally know people who feel that after A New Beginning they should have stopped. So, everyone can have their feelings on the series, but I just had to voice my opinion and didn’t want to hijack this bracket division. Sorry everyone!

Example: Muffin the dog is seen walking up to Jason’s feet, they cut to the next scene of hot dogs roasting on a grill. There’s humor there!

However, in 1986, the slasher genre had run it’s course and was pretty much dead. Also, A Nightmare on Elm Street was pushing the boundaries of horror movies. Since Paramount still wanted to make more money with a proven franchise, they decided to go with Tom as he had a unique vision on a 5th sequel in a franchise. He decided to go more gothic with an ode to old monster movies and throw the humor in to show that at movie number 6 they weren’t taking themselves to seriously. It worked.

The movie was critically received as in the movie critics embraced the writing and directing of the film. It is to this day the best reviewed movie in the franchise. It gave the franchise an ounce of credibility to stand on. The box office was not as good as the prrevious three film, but when you spend 1-3 Million and make over 20 million domestically, that’s a very profitable movie!

As for humor in franchise movies such as Hostel and Faces of Death. You have to remember that these movies are entertainment and should never be taken so serious to not laugh at some of the ridiculous scenarios that arise. Of course, if someone died in real life, you would not laugh. But these are movies, pieces of fiction that are created to entertain …… and make lots of money!

I totally agree that people should have a different sense of humor, BUT that doesn’t change what the INTENT was behind each director’s vision in those films. Steve Miner in NO way shape or form was trying to devalue life based on how his movie was directed. He didn’t use some slapstick formula to garner cheap laugh’s like that of Tom McLaughlin. Friday The 13th Part II, like that of it’s predecessor, and the III & IV installment relied on a concept of what we come to know as horror. Whereas, much of what we’ve become accustom to post Part V has traveled down that slippery slope, in which horror has taken a back seat to that of gore and cheap frills.

Jasonsfury, by injecting some much needed energy, do you mean comedic devices? I’m not sure where you’re coming from? Also, what do you mean by critically received? I can tell you this, Part VI through Jason X were one and done after the first weekend, as it pertained to box office receipts (which in layman’s terms = lost their ass). Those movies were dwarfed by the first four, and that’s even with ticket prices being exponentially higher, and an operational budget that was somewhat higher.

Regarding “Faces of Death” and a movie like “Hostel” being funny, that comment is disturbing on so many levels. I guess I’m not sure how a movie like “Faces of Death” is funny? Is it funny because you have a total disconnect from human life beyond those that you’re close to in life? I mean, you wouldn’t laugh if you knew one of those people, I’m guessing? Don’t get me wrong, I think “Faces of Death” is an important movie, if only for one reason, it is 100% real!!! The “Faces of Death” movies more or less instilled the idea of the fragility of our existence, and how in a blink of an eye, life can be over as we know it. For myself and millions of others, death is a fascinating subject, so I would hope that we aren’t trivializing the subject matter. Another welcome change would be to see the horror public not being perceived as this unfeeling community. Why perpetuate a stereotype even further?

Also, I don’t think Tom ’s scenes were sophomoric, he was trying to inject some needed energy into a franchise on it’s 5th sequel. And he succeeded as it was the most critically received of the series. The kills were still there and it was the last time the franchise had a camp in the story, at least until the remake.

No offense, but I’m guessing you’re in the EXTREME minority as it pertains to your feelings regarding the death scenes in Part II, as I’ve NEVER seen/heard anyone laugh at those scenes. You found those scenes funny in Part II, why, because both of those scenes involved two of the most helpless victims in the Friday franchise? Generally an audience sympathizes with those who are at a disadvantage, whether it be in life or in the moment. It doesn’t mean their deaths can’t still be powerful, but funny??? Hell, if you thought Mark’s death to be funny, I then suppose you found Franklin’s death scene to be funny in that of Texas Chainsaw Massacre?

and friday fans check out my friday the 13th franchise review on nov. 13