Friday Conversation: Which Characters Should Survive?
Everyone has their favorite character in the franchise that you wish had been left alive. I personally think that Rob in The Final Chapter should have survived, but his death scene was powerful and actually enhanced the movie. Another character I think should have survived was Crazy Ralph. I don’t know why they killed him off. What a waste of an established character.
There is a long list of these people in the franchise. Let us know who you would have like to have seen continue on to the end of their movie and possibly in future installments of the franchise.
Having a little “cameo” of Ralph in every Friday the 13th would have been great imho.
“”Doomed. You’re all doomed!”
I agree with you jasonfury, beside Jason, Rob is one of my favorite characters, the only thing that I dislike in the final chapter is that Rob was killed very easy I would have liked to see a real fight against Jason, that would have made the movie even better for me
I used to like Rob Dier, but the more I’ve thought about it, the more I hate him. He’s totally random in the movie, and when he’s dying, all he can say is, “he’s killing me”. I’m glad he died. I really don’t give a damn about any of the characters, really. Machete fodder and nothing more.
Gramps in pt.5 was pretty messed up. I mean the guy seemd so nice. He seemed like the sweetest old man ever. It was like killing Mister Rogers or something!
The only time the series actually went too far was when they killed a real snake in the first one. Nowhere near as bad as what they did in cannibal holocaust, but still….Savini “master of horror effects”, couldn’t make a rubber snake look real? I mean the scene doesn’t really even add anything to the plot.
Killing a real animal to make a stupid movie is uncalled for, and it makes people like Roger Ebert(who I actually like), and the MPAA a leg to stand on when questioning the morals of movies like Friday the 13th.
Good question…. Tommy’s mom in part 4 was a shock to me. Good single mom with morals. She didn’t deserve to die.
I liked Rob as well. Rob story added depth to the series, part 4 supposedly is the same weekend as part 2 and 3, so where did rob get the newspaper clippings and when exactly was his sister killed? It brings to light the possibility that (sackhead) Jason had been running around killing people prior to any of the films weve seen. Sackhead prequel anyone? what do you think? Jasons first appearance cannot have been part 2.
I would like to know for sure if Paul in part 2 lived. I always hoped that he did.
i don’t think enough of them were killed. i agree that the ralph death was random. it’s like the dude in pt 5 whose peeping on debisue. if they wanted a peeping tom in pt2 they could’ve used anyone. why ralph? he’s a townie and should be left as a townie.
the thing about rob or anyone in the movies is the more you like them, the more it hurts you when they die. that’s the whole point is that we’re supposed to feel shocked and depressed at the untimely deaths. It became too much of the formula of “how much of a f*cking tool can we make a person so you’re glad when they die?” doesn’t work for me.
person i wish lived:
Lawrence: the guy was actually smart. He went after Jason using a wok as a sheild! He gave Jason a whooping and if it weren’t for Jason’s great throwing skills he might still be around.
I agree that Lawrence should’ve survived, but my real vote goes for Tina’s mom from part VII. All she wanted was for her daughter to get treated, get better, and move on with her life. The fact that Dr. Cruise used her as a human shield was jacked-up.
Willa Ford in the Friday Remake.
First they took a half nude, smoking hot girl & hit her in the head with a boat only to follow that up with Jason ramming a sword thru her skull. I guess if Jason had to kill her then he had to kill her … but i wouldn’t have minded a few more nude scenes since she had already gotten all of that going.
im still mad that Alice was killed in pt.2, but i also would have liked to see Rick pt.3, mrs. jarvis pt.4, Gramps pt.5 all survive.
I guess with Ralph living, I hated his cheap knock off Abel, so I guess that when they made part 3, they had a part for Ralph but they had to use Abel. So I wished Ralph lived and Abel never was. Another group of people who should have not lived was part 8, all of the survivors. They should have killed the whole damm group. Hated that movie and since they made JGTH ( in know they did not know at the time) it would have been a good cliff hanger and lead into JGTH. Then again, the series kind of ended for me at 6. I liked CJ take on Jason, but he was not brought back, why I don’t know, but he was better than Hodder, granted Hodder was good for his set of Jason, but I have said before that when he took over a Jason, it did not seem like Friday the 13th anymore. Anyway, just my thoughts, I am sure the walmart man will disagree and get his fact wrong as he always does and say Willington is an ICON behind the mask and the only Jason.
I agree with *de ad fck* Gramps from part 5 was just too nice to die. I never agreed with that kill and actually found it was of really bad taste shame on the director for killing off gramps in such an ugly way.
I also agree with *de ad fck* on the snake part. No animal should be killed for a movie.
there’s probably a few other characters that really did not deserve to die but then again life aint always fair
Gee, I wonder who those who wanted Lawrence to live voted for in the election? lol What was so special about Lawrence?
Actually, I would’ve liked to see the whole crew of Part 8 get killed. Not only would it be unique because it’s the worst Friday film, but because there would be no survivors and Jason would be walking in Manhattan aimlessly.
Rob should off lived!! Ralph would off been perfect for the comady side off it!
Sam,
I already said. The ‘character’ Lawrence (if he were a white person I would have the same feelings BTW!) actually showed some brains, in arming himself, showed some balls, by going after Jason… and still all while really high and in the ultimate baked nightmare!
Cool conversation!
Not sure if anyone saw this, but Jason X made a top 25 list…yea, not a good list. Check it out
http://www.moviefone.ca/2009/10/19/worst-horror-movies-10-6
i don’t know. Sure gramps was a sweetheart, but i feel like these movies are about an indiscrimiate killer with no conscience whatsoever. not for this ‘they didn’t deserve it’ stuff. If that’s what you’re into there’s always the Saw movies. Sure, it’s great when there’s a Trent or a Dr Crews and you’re just salivating waiting for them to go in some particularly brutal way, but I think everyone is fair game. Although these movies are too fluff to have children being killed. Save that for the Clint Eastwood flicks (which I’ll never see).
I would like to see a Friday where ALL of the characters get killed, and Jason is the only one standing in the end. He’s the one we pay to see over, and over again even if it’s a different under the mask nearly every time.
I’d also like to see one where a black character, the nerd, and a stoner live. I mean I’m willing to bet that most of you are stoners,or nerds, or both(like me). Wouldn’t it be nice to see one of US make it out alive in one of these movies? People like us are the ones that keep the fucking franchise going in the first place.
Part 1 – Bill
Part 3 – Rick
Part 4 – Ms. Jarvis
Part 5 – Gramps
Part 7 – Ms. Shepard (can’t remember her fist name)
Remake – Jenna
I think David from part 7 shouldve lived…He was the man with the weed, and wanted to share with all who wanted to get stoned. “Columbian express is pulling out, all aboard”!
I like a lot of the characters named and wince when they die, but the only character I think it was a mistake to kill was Alice Hardy. Part 2 is one of the best installments of the series, but her death scene seems random and doesn’t add anything.
i wish debbie from part 3 would of lived just because she was so hot oh and also Jenna from the remake she was hot too
when i was little, i always hated it when Demon (pt. 5) would get killed. i’m not exactly what is was about him, but i thought the dude was bad ass! i don’t even see what the hell Roy was doing there…well how he just so happened to arrive there after Reggie, Pam, and Tommy left. I think he should have lived..or at least Roy should have waited for him to finish taking a shit…
Demon deserved to die, if for no other reason than just like Harold (pt 3), he didn’t wipe his ass when he was getting up!!!! That’s got to be worse than smokin’ drugs or having sex. Not wipin’ your corn is automatic slaughter in my books.
It would have been cool to keep Rob alive and have him help Trish and Tommy. In fact, instead of following a crazy Tommy and his pursuit of Jason, I think that I would have liked to follow Rob’s obsession for a couple more movies and maybe have him bite it in 6. It also would have saved us from the ridiculous lines, “Oh God! He’s killing me! He’s killing me! Run Trish, He’s killing me!” Really? Slaughter doesn’t need narration.
If Ralph lived that would have been alright but I wouldn’t want him in every god damned movie (sorry Ph1b3s) but occasionally, every second or third film would have been cool.
I LOVE the idea of everyone dying in part 8 leaving Jason roaming the city! That wsould have been the best ending ever!!!! Everybody blew in 8.
I was stunned when Jenna died but I thought that made it all the more effective.
Ralph should have lived… I would liked to have seen him in all the movies to help tie it all together. Woulda been funny to have seen him taking a vacation in NY when Jason popped up there in part 8…
I liked Rob… and would’ve been happy to had seen him survive the movie. Though he didn’t, I do wish he would have lasted longer and would’ve put up more of a fight….
One other thing, I wish the candybar eating turd from part 5 would have survived… just so that movie would have been different/better. lol.
de*ad fuck,
I want only say that in Cannibal Holocaust (one of my favourites movies ever) the animals that were killed were eaten by the staff and natives (who eat these things every day).
And it’s important to underline that when the movie was made (1979) the “animal sensibility” was very different from nowadays.
The same Deodato sayd that today these scenes will be no more necessary…
Sorry for my english but I want to underline this point ’cause allways someone talks about Cannibal Holocaust it ends speaking about animal killing.
Sorru if it’s OT
I apologise for the off topic post but I have been sitting here watching part 7 and something came up witch I have noticed before and I was wondering if anyone else did. There is a point about 27 minutes into part 7, just after Dan is killed while gathering wood for his bitchy girlfriend. They show a shot of the tent from the back as Jason comes up on it. This is not the same tent but rather a shot taken from part 4 of Rob’s tent when Rob is coming up and scares Trish who is in his tent! Anyone else notice this???
What about Paula from part 6. She was sweet, caring, and seemingly a virgin which I know goes a long way for girls in these films. I always hate that scene even though it scared the hell out of me as a child! Guess since 6 was trying for something different by letting the sexy and promiscuous and probably non-virginal gal live!
Danielle Panabaker should have survived the last movie as she was the only likable one. The rest of them were shallow and annoying and couldn’t die soon enough. Also Crispin Glover from The Final Chapter, and Violet from A New Beginning.
Why did you want Violet to survive other than her cool taste in music?
That is the same tent as in part 4
Because I liked her, why else?
She was ok but she really didn’t do much. Cool ‘Terri Nunn’ haircut.
It is the same tent as part four! And not the tent they actually used in part 7 at all! I wonder why? Bizarre.
Have anybody ever heard any reason for that same “tentshot” that they used in part 7 from part 4.. It would be interesting to know why. Did they run out of money?:) That’s kind of hard to believe.
The tent shot from part 4 was a pickup shot used after shooting wrapped. They did not have either the money or time to go back and shoot so they figured why not use footage from another Friday as a fill in.
Janessa from Jason X was cool too. She had attitude, was sexy and I’m sure had a heart somewhere. One of my favourite victims of the series.
Certain off topic subsentquent sequels and tips isnt anything to talk about in this current topic. The ventionall look over the ceretaionally movies, seemed great. Some slight adds maybe. The featuring of Jason, the texture of usage, is greatly done. Althought the session initiation was not very great, of a start, in the first movie. Establishing else, it was significantl worth it.
subsequent*
Of all the things in your convoluted, nonsensical 6:03 post, why did you choose to correct ’subsequent’?
I think one could find an example of sloppy writing when it comes to killing a character in almost every Friday The 13th movie. Those within Hollywood have been using the method known as shock writing for years, and unfortunately it’s been at the expense of a character/storyline that had so much more potential.
Friday The 13th:
The first example of sloppy writing could be seen as early as the first movie, with those behind the Steve Christy character. TPTB (The powers that be) introduced him as what SEEMED to be a vital cog in the overall storyline. We find out the importance of the Christy family, as it pertains to their history of Camp Crystal Lake. We also learn that there is some kind of relationship between Steve Christy and Alice Hardy, though Sean Cunningham doesn’t delve deeper, and then he subsequently abandons it altogether. I don’t know that the audience saw much chemistry between Steve & Alice, but I think that could’ve been different with stronger character development, and a more plausible ending.
I didn’t necessarily have a problem with Steve Christy leaving the camp grounds, but I felt his return to Crystal Lake, and his subsequent death were poorly written, and it left me feeling like TPTB never really had any idea of what they wanted to do with his character. Had I been apart of that writing team, I would’ve never had Steve come back to the camp grounds when he did. I’m sure the counter argument to that suggestion would be that it was important to establish some causal relationship between Steve and who killed him. BUT, did it really matter at that point? It became obvious to those watching Friday the 13th that the killer must be someone who hadn’t been introduced to the audience by that point.
Taking my suggestion into account, I would’ve had Steve either show up right after Alice killed Mrs. Voorhees, or I would have had him show up with Sgt. Tierney at the end (for the purists who loved the original ending). By going with the first scenario, it would have allowed TPTB to re-establish that there was a budding/established relationship between Alice & Steve. I think it would’ve also been cool to see a shocked look on Steve’s face, since he obviously knew Pamela. I would’ve loved for Steve to have shed some light on what he knew about Jason’s SUPPOSED death, but then to counter that with his bewilderment regarding the psychotic actions of Pamela Voorhees. To end the film, you could’ve had Steve and Alice exiting the camp grounds, but before the movie rolled to its credits, have the camera pan back to the decapitated Pamela Voorhees on the beach, and then have a figure come out of the shadows and stand over the remains of the deceased. The movie then would go to black, and it would have been left up to the movie goers to draw the conclusion that the figure standing there was that of Jason Voorhees. I would’ve nixed the concept of Jason being child like (since Jason’s supposed drowning took place all the way back in 1957), and replaced that child like figure with an average sized man (like that of Friday the 13th Part II). The shot of Jason could’ve been accomplished in one of a few ways, by simply showing his feet/lower legs (which were used in subsequent films), a revealing back side shot of him (leaving his face open to interpretation for the next film to come), or by revealing Jason in his true mongoloid state (pre burlap sac over his head).
By going with this type of ending, it would’ve then completely changed the ending as we know it. What it would’ve done, was allow for a more plausible ending, and not the Sci-Fi ending that we were given. The type of ending I suggested also could’ve made the segue into Friday the 13th Part II a little more believable. Going into Part II, TPTB would’ve been able to capitalize on Steve & Alice’s relationship, whether they chose to give them a domestic lifestyle (having them live together) or by having them live separately. I would probably have chosen the latter, as Alice was head strong, and didn’t seem to make rash judgments. I would’ve rather have had the character not living in the grips of fear, and instead having her revel in what was to become an exciting new beginning of her life (one with Steve). Instead of her being on the phone with her mother, it would’ve been interesting to see a picture of Alice & Steve sitting by her phone, as Alice picks up both the picture of them and the phone to call Steve. I would’ve had Alice reach Steve’s answering machine, and state something like, “Steve, this is Alice, I’ve been trying to get a hold of you all day. Please call me; I’m starting to worry (not fearing about his life hanging in the balance/just general concern). I love you (phone hangs up)”.
The one thing that always bothered me about the beginning of Friday the 13th Part II was, if Alice lived in what seemed to be a perpetual state of fear, then why on God’s green earth would she leave her window wide open like she did (with no screen)? Situations such as the aforementioned totally smack of inconsistency in the writing department. I think leaving her window open seems more plausible, if the event with Jason at the end of the first movie never occurred. Getting back to that opening scene in Part II, Alice could’ve gone through her domestic rituals like she had been, but when she eventually opens the refrigerator, instead of seeing Mrs. Voorhees head, TPTB (or in this case Steve Miner) could’ve capitalized on the idea of maybe having Steve meeting his demise, and having his head sitting there. Steve’s head on a platter would’ve created great symbolism, by suggesting the old adage, “An eye for an eye”. The scene then could’ve played itself out like it did, with Jason inserting an ice pick into her temple. In finishing my thoughts, I think Alice’s demise in Friday the 13th Part II was more or less a foregone conclusion, because TPTB presented her in a very defeated sense. She was gripped by fear (her nightmares), her body language/mannerisms suggested that she was just getting by in life, and then on top of that, TPTB turn her into ignoramus (I.E/leaving the window open, all the while living in fear).
I realize that the audience is required to have some kind of suspension of disbelief, but I have to agree with Victor Miller’s feelings regarding the hokey ending. The thought of a preserved young boy coming back to life right before his mother just died was totally disingenuous to its viewer. By going in that direction, it requires the viewer to believe that there is some kind of life force beneath the waters of Crystal Lake, and since future writers have never acknowledged such a thing, it makes the ending of the first movie totally contrived. Last but least, the two month gap between Friday the 13th and Part II would’ve been a hell of a lot more realistic, if Cunningham had used an adult Jason versus that of a pre-pubescent Jason at the end of the first film. The growth of Jason between the two films was silly to say the least based on the amount of time between the first and second installments, but I’m willing to forgive that error regarding continuity as there were far more egregious ones to come.
Gotta agree with Reggie the Rckless’s grandpa sentiment.
Mark from part 2. I mean shit, he’s in a wheelchair for christ’s sake!
I also found myself rooting for Julius in part VIII for going toe-to-toe with Jason.
Why should a character being in a wheelchair exclude them from dying in a horror movie? What happened to this equality people keep demanding? There’s always debates as to how women, gays and ethnics are treated in horror films. Why not debate how ‘all’ victims are treated? Now that would be equality!
Jason isn’t racist he kills white people, black people, boys, girls, etero, gays….everyone..He is a great man LoL
Part 1- Steve Christie
Part 2- Paul Holt
Part 3- Ali the Biker
The Final Chapter- Rob should have died better, but the kills are fine where they are.
Part 5- Roy Burns- What a great character. They killed him off in his first film?
Part 6- Sheriff Garis
Part 7- Perfect as is
Part 8- Terrible as is, but everyone needed to die.
Jason Goes to Hell- Diana should have stuck around longer, and Duke should have put up a better fight.
Jason X- No one comes to mind.
Freddy vs Jason- Tommy Jarvis should have been in the film… but the deaths are fine.
Friday 2024- Jenna and Whitney should have survived. We’ve never had 2 female survivors!
Well said, Johnny. Jason is an equal opportunities killer. We could all learn a lot from him!
Has there ever been a gay Friday character? I don’t think so.
Cullen, I always thought that the only reason we had a Steve Christie character was as a red herring? He drove the same jeep as Mrs Voorhees, he was away from the camp, hmmmmm….
Puckbunny, I don’t discount that was Sean Cunningham’s original intent(using Steve as a red herring), but The first rule of thumb in presenting such an idea, is to present your audience with more than two distinct OBVIOUS subplots. The idea of a red herring should’ve been more multi-layered. I’m of the persuasion that the obvious choice is the most illogical choice.
The Jeep was used to keep the audience in limbo, but once the killer (Mrs. Voorhees) tracked down Annie on foot, the killer’s dress/ensemble looked nothing like what Steve had worn once he hopped in his Jeep (which was practically the scene before) to leave for town. By the time Jack & Marcie were killed (which would’ve been 4 kills into the movie)it was blatantly obvious that there was no way Steve was the killer, as the next scene in the film was Steve at the diner.
I think Sean Cunningham could’ve used the idea of a red herring more to his advantage had there been some type of fight between he and Alice, or had Enos portrayed Steve Christy and his family in a negative light when chatting with Annie.
If you want to see a great movie using the concept of a red herring, then look no further than the movie “No Way Out” w/Kevin Costner. Talk about a movie that keeps you on the edge of your seat and guessing until the very end. Wow!!! I don’t know what your predilection is regarding movies, but if you want to see an old kick ass drama, then check it out. I’m also a “24″ fan, or was… There again, the 2nd season of “24″ does an equally good job with their red herring like that of the movie “No Way Out”. Both of those, “No Way Out” & “24″ (Season 2) are blue prints on how to use a red herring within a script.
Punckbunny.
In the movies not but in the comics are 2 gays
Sorry Puckbunny not punck XD
Puckbunny13, how do you know there hasn’t been a gay character? Maybe the writers created one that didn’t fall into the usual flamboyant, mincing, irritating category that generic gay characters usually do in films. The writers don’t have to make an issue about them being gay, it doesn’t always have to be the be all and end all. Several of them might be gay but we don’t know because their sexuality was irrelevant to the story
Cullen, I’m with you all the way on No Way Out but you lost me on 24. I watched the first season but that was enough. Very well done but a little overboard for me. I found it exhausting. Good call on the movie though.
Christian Sellers, you are quite right. I should have asked if there were any characters who’s homosexuality had been made known. I couldn’t think of any. I whole-heartedly agree thatg not every gay character should be painted with as pink a brush as Jack on Will & Grace. Living in Toronto (apparently now the gay capital of the world per capita), I know several who do not fit that stereo type. I hope that I did not offend anyone.
No of course you didn\’t Puckbunny13, most writers unfortunately do feel the need to fit everyone into a box. There have certainly been a few camp characters throughout the series, like Ted from Part 2. But off hand can\’t think of many gays. The problem is if they had a gay character and he was killed, the filmmakers would be accused of homophobia (just look at A Nightmare on Elm Street 2). So it\’s probably best to avoid using them if you don\’t want your movie to be the subject of debate.
‘camp characters’ That’s hilarious!!! Get it? Get it?
Remake: Jenna. Part 7: Robin. Part 8: Eva (Kelly Hu). Part X: either Brodski or Janessa.