Remakes are nothing new. From the silent era onward, filmmakers have returned again and again to the same stories, re-interpreting them and updating them either for the sake of modernization, to expose them to a broader audience or to just make more money. We modern film geeks tend to roll our eyes and groan cynically when a new remake comes down the pike, but the fact of the matter is that when done right there are few things as satisfying as a seeing a story we love get a good cinematic spit-shine. Remakes are a part of the grand tradition of storytelling and cinema history, and love them or hate them, they’re here to stay.
But in the last decade, the term “remake” has become something of a dirty word, and as a result Hollywood spin doctors and internet journalists have given us the new terms “reboot” and “re-imagining”. Do these terms actually have meaning, or are they just empty buzzwords? The mission statement of this ongoing column will be to answer that question by comparing an original film to a re-do and determining if the newer version fits one of the following definitions:
Remake: A straight re-telling of a story for the purpose of updating it for a contemporary audience, or making it accessible to a different culture or region.
Reboot: A course correction done with the purpose of restarting a franchise. A reset. Fealty to the original story or film is not a priority.
Re-Imagining: A re-telling of a story, but only in the broadest sense. Characters and some story elements may be retained, but mostly plot and story have been repurposed.
I also will make a judgment call on which version is superior. Some controversy may ensue.
FRIDAY THE 13TH (1980) VS. FRIDAY THE 13TH (2009)
The story: Nubile teenagers are stalked by a killer at an abandoned summer camp.
What’s the deal?: The deal is, these two movies are not at all the same. Aside from the broadest of strokes and a brief opening scene which plays as a Cliff Notes of the final scene of the 1980 film, Marcus Nispel’s Friday the 13th does not follow the story of Sean S. Cunningham’s Friday the 13th. Comparing the two films side-by-side in terms of plot is a worthless endeavor. But the one point of comparison that stuck out to me so strongly upon recent re-watching was intent, and I would argue that in terms of intent, Friday the 13th 1980 and Friday the 13th 2009 are almost the same movie.
I’m gonna be honest here – I do not hold the original Friday the 13th as some kind of classic of horror cinema. Aside from the remarkable kills, the movie just doesn’t do much for me. Where some people see suspense, I see a ploddingly slow and largely dull riff on something John Carpenter did a million times better in Halloween. The acting is mostly poor, the mystery is a cheat and aside from the slightly scummy and appealing grindhouse quality, the film isn’t particularly striking in its look or design. What it is most loved for is its place at the head of a beloved horror franchise, a franchise that would make an icon of a killer that doesn’t even show up in this film until the very end. Removed of nostalgia and historical importance, Sean S. Cunningham’s Friday the 13th is best remembered for the great kills by gore maestro Tom Savini, and that magnificent and still startling end dream sequence, also the work of Savini. As an early 80’s slasher movie it’s pretty decent and worthy of its place in the pantheon, but as a movie on the whole I don’t find much in it that I can’t find in other better films, and even other Friday the 13th films. It is not a film that I find myself wanting to revisit with any real frequency.
But I’m not going to begrudge anyone their love of the original Friday the 13th; we horror fans have our cherished favorites and the actual quality of the work itself usually isn’t a major factor. But one thing about Friday the 13th that seems to have been largely obscured by time and nostalgia is what a cynical cash-grab of a film it was. This was a movie that was sold as a title before it was ever even a script! You don’t get any more cynical than that. It was a cash-in on the aforementioned Halloween and cemented the early 80’s trend of slasher films based on significant calendar days. You might regard Friday the 13th 1980 as some noble work of art, but I have to tell you that if you think that, you are weird and possibly delusional. Friday the 13th 1980 is a big piece of crap. It may be a big piece of crap that you love and that entertains you with its Kevin Bacon death by arrowhead and generous amounts of onscreen camel-toe, but it was, is and always be a big piece of crap.
And guess what? Marcus Nispel’s 2009 Friday the 13th is also a big, cynical piece of crap! Like the original, this film exists mostly as a cash-in; the difference being that this time the cash-in is on the Friday the 13th brand name and its value as a money-making franchise. The producers of the 2009 film wisely understood that the value in the franchise was not in the original film’s story, but in the iconic hockey-masked killer Jason, a character that didn’t really get established until the sequels of the original film. So the story of the remake cuts right to the chase of Jason being the killer, hatin’ on partying, sex-hungry teens left and right. I wouldn’t argue that it’s necessarily a better story than the 1980 film, but as there would be absolutely no point in retelling that mediocre whodunit again, it’s a choice that makes sense considering today’s more plot-savvy audiences.
Thus far it seems like I’m really down on both Friday the 13ths, but honestly I’m not. I love all the Friday the 13th films, warts and all. But aside from a few highlights like Friday the 13th Part 4 the Final Chapter (a film the 2009 F13 borrows from most in terms of story) I see them as roughly the same in terms of quality, and that quality is junk food horror. It’s good junk food, like Popeye’s Chicken or In and Out Burger, but it’s junk food regardless. The entire film series exists for one purpose and one purpose only and that is to generate money. So as far as the series’ “integrity” goes, it never had any, so it never bothered me in the slightest that it was being given a re-do. In fact, it seemed inevitable considering the remake boom of the oughts. And hell, if it got my murderous and mentally challenged pal Jason Voorhees back on cinema screens, I was all for it.
I’m not going to sit here and tell you that Marcus Nispel’s Friday the 13th is a great horror film. It’s not. It’s loud, ungraceful, largely soulless and mediocre in execution, especially in the all-important kills department. But I’d be lying if I said that I don’t like it. It has one of my favorite Jasons thanks to the committed performance of Derek Mears. (Nerd digression: My two favorite Jasons are Mears and Ken Kirzinger from Freddy vs. Jason. They’re tied because Mears is clearly human Jason, and Krizinger is clearly zombie Jason. I know it is sacrilege but I hate Kane Hodders huffing supposedly “definitive” Jason.) It has the required nudity and gore, and I actually find the performances of the kids to be good as far as this sort of thing goes. And one thing the movie has that is rarely mentioned is that it has a decent sense of humor. The character of Trent is hilarious and an obvious send-up of countless teen slasher movie douchebags and the better of the kills have a sick humor to them, like the ‘through the dock impaling and subsequent boob reveal’ shot. There is entertainment value to be had in Friday the 13th 2009, which is something you can’t say about most of the horror remakes. I personally feel that when counted against its remake brethren and the franchise as a whole, it’s a pretty solid entry.
So as far as shameless cash-grabs are concerned, I don’t feel that Friday the 13th 2009 is particularly egregious. But the shameless cash-grab element is definitely the deciding factor in determining its remake, reboot or re-imagining label. It is certainly not a remake as it does not follow the original’s story other than that there are teens, a camp, and killing. It’s not a re-imaging either because outside of Jason and the brief flashback of Mama Voorhees, none of the characters are the same. The main purpose of the film is to reset the idea of Friday the 13th for a new audience, so in that sense it is purely a reboot. I don’t know how successful it was at achieving this as a sequel has yet to be announced. But chances are that if there are teenagers out there who know the name Jason Voorhees, it’s probably this film, or 2003’s Freddy vs. Jason, we have to thank.
Verdict: Reboot
Which is better?: OK, here’s where I’m going to get in trouble. I will not in good conscience say that Friday the 13th 2009 is a better film than Friday the 13th 1980. For all its flaws (and really, c’mon guys, there are lots) the original has a place in history thanks in no small part to Tom Savini, and the reboot will never have that honor. The reboot is a disposable foot note to the franchise (unless it remains the last film in the franchise, then it will be significant), a franchise that wouldn’t exist in the first place were it not for the original. But – and this is a big But – I personally enjoy watching the reboot more than watching the original. Sure, it doesn’t have a great score like the original does. (Why the hell didn’t they get Harry Manfredini back to score the reboot?! It would have added so much in the way of improvement.) Sure the kills aren’t on par with some of the series’ best. Sure it is slick and soulless. But it has a great Jason, and call me a fanboy, but when I want to watch a Friday the 13th movie, I want to see a hockey-masked maniac fucking shit up first and foremost. Really when I want to watch a F13 movie I’ll put in Part 4, but I find the reboot fun and it gets the occasional face-time on my Blu Ray player. It doesn’t carry the weight of the original, but I find it more enjoyable on a personal level, so I have to call this one a tie. Please don’t hack me up with a machete.
Up Next: The Thing
17 comments
A few things…have to agree with you on 4, easily the best Friday( thanks in no small amount to Joseph Zito, watch the Prowler if you do not believe me), I enjoyed the remake( being a Jason fan) and I have wondered why there never was a sequel. It made money, as much as the Halloween or TCM remake,but, I think it goes back to the idea of classics. TCM and Halloween( the originals) are classics that stand the test of time. The Friday series is like you said, junk food. I think a missed opporturnity was done in not having sequels to this one, maybe a tv show( where people run from Jason, like the Incredible Hulk except a killer and not a Hulk).
I think the lack of sequel so far is producers being terrified of diminishing returns. Though the remake made good money, its second week dropoff was a sign that people didn’t like it too much, and since these movies have become inexplicably expensive, they’re afraid the next one will only break even or worse. It;s telling that a found footage style sequel is being talked about as it would dramatically bring down the cost. I just hope whatever they do they bring back Mears. I really stand by my statement that he is great,
Just revisited Friday The 13th 2009 late last night, and I have to agree. It’s pretty fun, and I’ve seen my Blu-ray of it frequently. I even got it at midnight on release day. It’s fun, but the kills for the most part ARE uninspired. The best ones are Trent’s, and Chewie’s. Chewie’s in particular because it’s son drawn out (in the extended cut) that it’s just brutal.
I also like the lead up to Donnie’s death. All that stuff was hilarious. The movie’s sense of humor was in the right place too.
I found the reboot to be, by and large, pointless. Sure, remaking Friday the 13th is far from sacrilige but honestly, they could have just gone for another sequel, which I truthfully feel would have worked better. There were a few fun moments (the afore-mentioned Willa Ford death boob reveal) but the characters were obnoxiously cliche, even by F13 standards. I felt the complete opposite way about Trent. He was THAT character from every movie that has to do something contrived just to make sure the audience really HATES him. It’s the sort of issue I have with fanboys trying to recreate “Fun Trash” from the 70’s and 80’s. They take a premise that is already wild and they try to push so much over-the-top energy into it, just to drive home the point that they are in on the joke. I think the only one to get it right in this series trying the humor idea was Tom McLaughlin.
THE THING? Interesting choice. Will it be the Howard Hawks version against the Carpenter remake, or the Carpenter remake against the 2011 “re-remake”?
Ok for the most part I agree with this but I have never agreed that this was a bite off of Halloween. If you read the book Making Friday the 13th you will get all kinds of info on the making of this movie and all of its sequels even budgets and shooting locations.Jasons character was inspired by a monster in the original Hills Have Eyes accrding to the book. I do enjoy the remake better and have always hated the original except for the Pam Voorhees death scene(that was dope). Also part 4 is one of the best but I also enjoy part 6 as well(one of my faves). I do disagree with the Jason actor beign the best. Truthfully I am a Kane Hodder fan his Jason was my favorite. I loved Jason Takes Manhattan(that rooftop decap punch was the truth). Of course these are just my opiniions and I will agree that 09 Jason was physically Jason but I still prefer Hodder I mean the guy has kill tattood in his mouth behind his lip(now thats dedication).
Also the Police officer kill was really nice but too bad they did not show it outright. Im sick of these watered down kills.
Really the only reason I’d revisit the remake is for the best pair of tits in recent cinematic memory.
My 9 yr old has been wanting to see an F-13 flick, for a while. I chose the remake for his first, now he’s moved on to the originals. I just wanted him to be guaranteed tons of Jason action. BTW, I think what they were trying to basically make it cover 1-4 in one flick. I hated it in the theaters, but it has grown on me.
I really did enjoy F13 the remake, although the original one will always have a place in heart for terrifying the crap out of me with Kevin Bacon’s death and the final sequence. Derek Mears did a great job as Jason as well. I think there was going to be a sequel and it was even going to be in 3D but it kept getting shuffled around till everyone lost interest. So I think this is in fact the final Friday the 13th
I neither loved, nor hated Friday the 13th 2009. What I do feel is that this film is best not looked at as a remake. While it may serve as a ‘reboot’, this film holds up best when looked at as just another sequel in the long Friday legacy. Yes, the opening scene retells the final events of the original film. I don’t see how this is any different from the campfire storytelling sequences from the early Friday the 13th films. The characters and events are completely exclusive to this film, just as the other sequels, and continuity was always thrown out the door in this series(for the most part). My personal belief is that this film would sit nicely in a box set with the retrofitted ’11′(12 if you count FvJ) by the title. If looking at this as a sequel, it would have been quite successful in bringing something back that was long lost in the Friday films, the original Camp idea. None-the-less, a decent entry into the franchise that, at the very least, is superior to JGTH, JX, and FvJ.
On a side note, this series certainly has never been known for integrity. The death scenes in part 2 were copied nearly frame for frame from the Italian horror film Twitch of the Death Nerve.
Both in the book “Crystal Lake Memories” as well as the documentary “His Name is Jason,” original F13 screenwriter Victor Miller said that one day Sean Cunningham called him up and said, “Halloween is making a lot of money. Let’s rip it off.”
Amen, brother.
No love for the great fake-out opening scene? I loved that, and it even ends with Jason reaching approximately 30 mph for the first time in his movie career.
I think you’re comparing the wrong films. This isn’t so much a reboot of the first Friday the 13th as it is a sequel. It even begins with what was basically the end of the first film. This is a re-imagining of Friday the 13th part TWO.
It’s really a remake of parts 2 and 4, if you want to get technical.
Well, 2 through 4 at least. Someone else mentioned that I think, and I remember it being thrown around a lot back then. Parts 2, 3, and 4 all took place in the same weekend or so, yet Jason looked wildly different in each installment, which I always got a kick out of. Also, part 4 had the “Oh my God, he’s killing me!” guy that had been supposedly been hunting Jason for a while because he’d killed his sister in part 2, which would have been like 2 days ago if you thought about it. Hmmmm, I guess they did kind of lift that idea for the character for the 2009 version, or “A Very Special Episode of ‘Supernatural'”. I got all caught up on that show right around the time that the latest Friday came out, and man, that Jared Padalecki’s hair was really starting to impress me with it’s acting abilities.
Comments are shown as archived from the original site; new comments are closed.