Movies: Horror Movie Discussion

[PK Cronin]

Resurrection has redeeming qualities? I must've missed them.

Yes, Halloween Kills comes out in 2020 and Halloween Ends comes out in 2021.

I mean, it's not a good movie but it's so corny it is enjoyable for me. The scariest thing about it is wondering how the heck anyone approved it in the first place. I don't think the latest will ever be looked at as being fun, enjoyable, or corny/campy. It'll just be a bad attempt at a horror movie.

 

[PK Cronin]

Are you serious?

Halloween Resurrection had not a single redeeming quality. It was a disaster from start to finish and is easily the worst of series which is impressive since Rob Zombie's Halloween 2 and Halloween 5 are terrible

I probably should've used a different phrase. It's not a good movie, and certainly isn't a good horror movie, but it's more fun/comical than the latest entry. It's just non-stop laughs for me.

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

I just caught up with the remaining 'Nightmare on Elm Street' entries that I hadn't seen and am doing the same with the Halloween series. Last year, I tackled 4-6, which was not a whole lot of fun.

Halloween H20 (1998) - 5/10 - 20 years later, Myers comes once again for Laurie Strode... and her son and his friends. This was obviously inspired by Scream, tone-wise and story-wise, so much that it often felt more like an entry in that franchise than the Halloween franchise. I didn't really mind that, though, since I like the Scream movies enough. It's not very scary, but at least it's watchable. It was nice to see Jamie Lee Curtis back and it had a strong ending.

Halloween Resurrection (2002) - 2/10 - Where to begin? It starts with a ridiculous retcon of the end of the last movie to explain why Michael didn't actually die and which basically ruins that ending for future rewatches. It follows that up by ruining the Laurie Strode character that's central to the franchise. Next, it changes gears completely and moves to the meat of the plot, which involves a bunch of attention-seeking young people who win a competition to be on a live internet reality show and spend a night in the abandoned Myers house, with cameras rolling, coincidentally the same night that Michael decides to return to it. Believe it or not, it actually gets even stupider from there, such as Busta Rhymes trying out kung fu against Michael and a room full of young people watching online and cheering when Michael "dies." This had to be awful in 2002, but it's aged even worse with its early internet/reality show fascination and desperation to be modern and cool. By the end of the movie, your intelligence has been thoroughly insulted in a way that even the other worst entries in the franchise don't do.

Halloween (2007) - 4/10 - This remake of the original wasn't quite as bad as I thought that it would be. It's unnecessary, it takes too long to get going, it feels like two separate movies (a prequel and remake in one) and it's nonsensical in places, but at least it feels a bit like the original in look and tone and tries to add a little explanation and thoughtfulness. Unfortunately, because of that, the execution and knowing how it ends, it's not very scary or even all that creepy. It doesn't compare to the original, but it's not one of the worst in the franchise and isn't the insult to it that the entry 5 years earlier was.

Halloween II (2009) - 3/10 - Where to begin? It's 30 minutes too long, most of it due to pointless dream and fantasy sequences. It has almost no story. It has little style. Nearly the whole thing takes place at night. No character is likable, not even Laurie Strode, who was an adorable babysitter worth rooting for in the last one and has become a slacker party girl with psychological and anger issues. Finally, it's not fun and, unlike the previous one, has nothing to try to say or evoke, yet feels remarkably pretentious, anyways. I'm starting to think that what Rob Zombie got right with the remake was due more to riding on the original's coattails and that this is the mess that happens when that's gone and the film is fully his own.

The only entry in the franchise left to see is last year's Halloween. I may save that for Halloween night, though, and didn't want to wait that long to put down my thoughts on the previous four.

I tried to find your reviews for 4-6 but couldn't. As for these, well as I posted my Halloween II comments just yesterday, I guess you know I don't agree at all!

I do agree that Resurrection is the worse film in the franchise - I'd even agree with the 2/10, even on a slashers-only scale. For the rest, they're all pretty much 3s or 4s if you go into full appreciation mode and consider them for the cheap thrills they are. But only rating them as slashers, I'd say H20 is the second worse here (and even though I'm a sucker for intertextuality, I hate Kevin Williamson - he wrote the first sketches for this film and it reeks - as you said it's closer in tone to Scream than Halloween, which to me is a deal breaker). As for Zombie, I wouldn't blame anybody for disliking him as a director, I watched 31 recently and it's pure crap (2/10 too), but you can't say the guy doesn't have style. There is really few horror filmmakers who have a stronger signature - you just know, in tone and in imagery, that it's a Zombie film, and that in itself is already a lot more interesting than anonymous doers like Steve Miner (who directed one of my favorite slasher films - not H20 - but who has absolutely no impact on the products he puts together). In fact, I'd go as far as to say that the hospital dream in Halloween II could be my favorite all-time slasher sequence in terms of tone and style (of course, it lacks in suspense because as you rightly mention, we don't give a f*** about these slacker characters and because it's squeezed into a film that doesn't have a clear identity in that it's supposed to be a Halloween sequel, but it comes up with all this "symbolic" crap that just don't belong).

 

[Blackhawkswincup]

Halloween (1978) = 9/10

Love the movie but it is not a perfect film (Some of the production was flawed and crew made mistakes here and there) and I feel at times it can drag with some of Jamie Lee/Michael interactions at end a bit flat. But it is classic and spawned the franchise

Halloween 2 (1981) = 6/10

Not close to original but overall like Jaws 2 its a flawed but acceptable movie that does its job of entertaining you. When I was kid I enjoyed film more then as an adult

One gripe I always had was the lack of people/staff at hospital which to me just wasn't believable also I hated the whole Dr Loomis killed a teen and it just being dropped with no consequence. He practically chased guy into road

Halloween 3: Season of the Witch (1982) = 5/10

I hated this movie as kid naturally since it didn't have Myers but as I got older I appreciated it for what it was and overall its not bad film. Not great but entertaining , when I was younger I taped it onto VHS with the film Runaway (1984) and honestly it fit in well with that film and films of similar premise of robots/androids , etc with a nefarious motive on top. The whole witchcraft/stonehedge stuff was dumb though

Halloween 4: The Return of Michael Myers (1988) = 7/10

Film was a nice return for franchise star Myers and contained a lot of moments that reminded me of original. I enjoyed Harris/Cornell in it and overall the story isn't bad with some good kills/fun. Donald P was fun in it and it was good to see his character back even if it wasn't believable he would survive 2

The look of Myers was not good (I hated the mask and Wilber in pads was a bit ehh) and I hated the dumbass Rednecks run amok angle which like part 2 leads to death that is basically just "Whatever no consequences)

Ending was fantastic but was squandered in subsequent sequels

Halloween: The Revenge of Michael Myers (1989) = 2/10

Such a disappointment from the god awful tone at times (The stupid clown cops for instance) to overall a weak story and an ending that was just absolutely awful

Very few redeeming moments and it felt like Donald P phoned in this performance. Harris did her best and the scenes in house were only real highlight of film to me but I hated how the house was not even remotely close to original house

Halloween: The Curse of Michael Myers (1995) = 3.5/10

Well this movie continued the god awful conclusion of Revenge and amp'd up the dumb with the druid nonsense and a rather weak/dumb cat and mouse hospital finale

I did enjoy the kills earlier in film and thought the family dynamic/storyline was good concept and wish they would have just dumped rest of film and focused on that and Myers killing them

Overall movie is a mess but it has enough redeeming quality to put it over Revenge as a more enjoyable experience

Halloween H20 (1998) = 4/10

I liked this movie at time it was released as I was younger and well the Scream/I Know What you Did , etc was all the rage and I like all teens back then embraced it. Doesn't stand up well now when I watch it but overall its not a bad film it has its moments and you walk away with a generally ok experience after watching it

I found LL Cool J annoying in it though and didn't think Jamie Lee Curtis was all that great either. Found Hartnett and such more interesting and wish the story maybe would have focused on them more and had more kids at school (AKA victims)

Halloween Resurrection (2002) = 0/10

What a steaming pile of crap. Everything about it is awful and that includes the kills , acting , setting , etc

The Michael vs Busta Rhymes karate fight was absolutely absurd and just cringingly awful

I got this on DVD and gave it away. That is how much I hate it and I don't bother to watch it during Halloween marathons

Halloween (2007) = 3.5/10

Honestly didn't see need for this and Zombie copied too much of the original and should have done a more original take with regard to deaths , etc in 2nd half of film

There were pieces for a good film here when it comes to the cast (Very talented cast) , production values , etc but nothing really worked well. And naturally Zombie cast his wife who cant act and well watered down the Myers family to stereotype "Dysfunctional family"

In the end it was just a disappointment but still had moments that were ok and seeing Harris return to series was nice

Halloween 2 (2009) = 1/10

Wow this movie sucked outside of handful of scenes and the conclusion was dumb and pointless. And of course Sheri Moon Zombie bad actress on full display. Even wasted away Danielle Harris and Brad Dourif with meh roles/scenes

Halloween (2018) = 7/10

Upgrade over most recent films and decent overall film. Some things I didn't like (The whole Grandma/Daughter/GrandDaughter forced drama was bad) and I hated the new Dr and his role

Some nice kills and having Myers just a heartless/soulless killing machine worked well the way they did it during his kills in Haddonfield

In end the Halloween series has far more up and down quality compared to Nightmare on Elm Street and Friday the 13th franchises and has always been distant 3rd on the totem pole of slasher horror franchises to me because of the varying and dramatic quality shifts from film to film

 

[Osprey]

I tried to find your reviews for 4-6 but couldn't. As for these, well as I posted my Halloween II comments just yesterday, I guess you know I don't agree at all!

I do agree that Resurrection is the worse film in the franchise - I'd even agree with the 2/10, even on a slashers-only scale. For the rest, they're all pretty much 3s or 4s if you go into full appreciation mode and consider them for the cheap thrills they are. But only rating them as slashers, I'd say H20 is the second worse here (and even though I'm a sucker for intertextuality, I hate Kevin Williamson - he wrote the first sketches for this film and it reeks - as you said it's closer in tone to Scream than Halloween, which to me is a deal breaker). As for Zombie, I wouldn't blame anybody for disliking him as a director, I watched 31 recently and it's pure crap (2/10 too), but you can't say the guy doesn't have style. There is really few horror filmmakers who have a stronger signature - you just know, in tone and in imagery, that it's a Zombie film, and that in itself is already a lot more interesting than anonymous doers like Steve Miner (who directed one of my favorite slasher films - not H20 - but who has absolutely no impact on the products he puts together). In fact, I'd go as far as to say that the hospital dream in Halloween II could be my favorite all-time slasher sequence in terms of tone and style (of course, it lacks in suspense because as you rightly mention, we don't give a **** about these slacker characters and because it's squeezed into a film that doesn't have a clear identity in that it's supposed to be a Halloween sequel, but it comes up with all this "symbolic" crap that just don't belong).

Yeah, I'm pretty sure that I didn't review Halloween 4-6, probably because they were just so blah that I felt no motivation to say anything about them. Also, truth be told, the Halloween franchise is one that I just didn't watch when I was younger. I was into Friday the 13th and A Nightmare on Elm Street more and paid no attention to Halloween. As far as I can remember, I hadn't seen any of them until a few years ago. I should've reviewed the first three, because that would've been interesting for some of you to read, but I was too embarrassed to admit that it took me over three decades to get to them. Maybe that carried over to 4-6. Now that I've seen the entire franchise minus the latest entry, though, I feel more comfortable in admitting it.

When I said that Zombie's Halloween II has little style, I meant it more in the sense that Carpenter's original had style... i.e. a classy, restrained style. Obviously, brutality and weird dream sequences is technically a style, just not the subtle, creative kind that I would've liked. It's like how someone can wear flamboyant clothes that don't match and that's his "style," but others might say that he has no sense of style.

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

When I said that Zombie's Halloween II has little style, I meant it more in the sense that the Carpenter's original had style... i.e. a classy, restrained style. Obviously, brutality and weird dream sequences is technically a style, just not the subtle, creative kind that I would've liked. It's like how someone can wear flamboyant clothes that don't match and that's his "style," but others might say that he has no sense of style.

Got you, but still don't agree. It's not just "bad crap is a style", the film is signed. To me, no matter that we appreciate it or not, Zombie has a stronger signature than Carpenter. It is rather obvious that Halloween and House of a 1000 Corpses were crafted by the same hand. Carpenter is not a doer like Miner is, and I'll give you that he can do more with less, but a Carpenter film doesn't necessarily feels like a Carpenter film (you know, like a Godard film feels like a Godard film, or Duras, or Greenaway, or De Palma, etc.). Zombie's signature obviously has nothing to do with these auteurs, but still, it is something, and not only pure trash (for that, we could discuss Lucifer Valentine's signature).

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

Halloween (1978) = 9/10

Love the movie but it is not a perfect film (Some of the production was flawed and crew made mistakes here and there) and I feel at times it can drag with some of Jamie Lee/Michael interactions at end a bit flat. But it is classic and spawned the franchise

Halloween 2 (1981) = 6/10

Not close to original but overall like Jaws 2 its a flawed but acceptable movie that does its job of entertaining you. When I was kid I enjoyed film more then as an adult

One gripe I always had was the lack of people/staff at hospital which to me just wasn't believable also I hated the whole Dr Loomis killed a teen and it just being dropped with no consequence. He practically chased guy into road

Halloween 3: Season of the Witch (1982) = 6/10

I hated this movie as kid naturally since it didn't have Myers but as I got older I appreciated it for what it was and overall its not bad film. Not great but entertaining , when I was younger I taped it onto VHS with the film Runaway (1984) and honestly it fit in well with that film and films of similar premise of robots/androids , etc with a nefarious motive on top. The whole witchcraft/stonehedge stuff was dumb though

Halloween 4: The Return of Michael Myers (1988) = 7/10

Film was a nice return for franchise star Myers and contained a lot of moments that reminded me of original. I enjoyed Harris/Cornell in it and overall the story isn't bad with some good kills/fun. Donald P was fun in it and it was good to see his character back even if it wasn't believable he would survive 2

The look of Myers was not good (I hated the mask and Wilber in pads was a bit ehh) and I hated the dumbass Rednecks run amok angle which like part 2 leads to death that is basically just "Whatever no consequences)

Ending was fantastic but was squandered in subsequent sequels

Halloween: The Revenge of Michael Myers (1989) = 2/10

Such a disappointment from the god awful tone at times (The stupid clown cops for instance) to overall a weak story and an ending that was just absolutely awful

Very few redeeming moments and it felt like Donald P phoned in this performance. Harris did her best and the scenes in house were only real highlight of film to me but I hated how the house was not even remotely close to original house

Halloween: The Curse of Michael Myers (1995) = 4/10

Well this movie continued the god awful conclusion of Revenge and amp'd up the dumb with the druid nonsense and a rather weak/dumb cat and mouse hospital finale

I did enjoy the kills earlier in film and thought the family dynamic/storyline was good concept and wish they would have just dumped rest of film and focused on that and Myers killing them

Overall movie is a mess but it has enough redeeming quality to put it over Revenge as a more enjoyable experience

Halloween H20 (1998) = 5/10

I liked this movie at time it was released as I was younger and well the Scream/I Know What you Did , etc was all the rage and I like all teens back then embraced it. Doesn't stand up well now when I watch it but overall its not a bad film it has its moments and you walk away with a generally ok experience after watching it

I found LL Cool J annoying in it though and didn't think Jamie Lee Curtis was all that great either. Found Hartnett and such more interesting and wish the story maybe would have focused on them more and had more kids at school (AKA victims)

Halloween Resurrection (2002) = 0/10

What a steaming pile of crap. Everything about it is awful and that includes the kills , acting , setting , etc

The Michael vs Busta Rhymes karate fight was absolutely absurd and just cringingly awful

I got this on DVD and gave it away. That is how much I hate it and I don't bother to watch it during Halloween marathons

Halloween (2007) = 4/10

Honestly didn't see need for this and Zombie copied too much of the original and should have done a more original take with regard to deaths , etc in 2nd half of film

There were pieces for a good film here when it comes to the cast (Very talented cast) , production values , etc but nothing really worked well. And naturally Zombie cast his wife who cant act and well watered down the Myers family to stereotype "Dysfunctional family"

In the end it was just a disappointment but still had moments that were ok and seeing Harris return to series was nice

Halloween 2 (2009) = 1/10

Wow this movie sucked outside of handful of scenes and the conclusion was dumb and pointless. And of course Sheri Moon Zombie bad actress on full display. Even wasted away Danielle Harris and Brad Dourif with meh roles/scenes

Halloween (2018) = 6/10

Upgrade over most recent films and decent overall film. Some things I didn't like (The whole Grandma/Daughter/GrandDaughter forced drama was bad) and I hated the new Dr and his role

Some nice kills and having Myers just a heartless/soulless killing machine worked well the way they did it during his kills in Haddonfield

In end the Halloween series has far more up and down quality compared to Nightmare on Elm Street and Friday the 13th franchises and has always been distant 3rd on the totem pole of slasher horror franchises to me because of the varying and dramatic quality shifts from film to film

I agree with your take on Revenge and on Resurrection, but nothing else!

Haven't seen the new one, but for the rest my ranking would look something like:

Halloween II
Halloween
Season of the Witch - even though not a slasher
Halloween II (Zombie)
Halloween (Zombie)
The Curse
The Return
The Revenge
H20
Resurrection

And please don't tell me how great of a film the original was. It wasn't.

 

[Osprey]

Halloween (1978) = 9/10

Love the movie but it is not a perfect film (Some of the production was flawed and crew made mistakes here and there) and I feel at times it can drag with some of Jamie Lee/Michael interactions at end a bit flat. But it is classic and spawned the franchise

Halloween 2 (1981) = 6/10

Not close to original but overall like Jaws 2 its a flawed but acceptable movie that does its job of entertaining you. When I was kid I enjoyed film more then as an adult

One gripe I always had was the lack of people/staff at hospital which to me just wasn't believable also I hated the whole Dr Loomis killed a teen and it just being dropped with no consequence. He practically chased guy into road

Halloween 3: Season of the Witch (1982) = 6/10

I hated this movie as kid naturally since it didn't have Myers but as I got older I appreciated it for what it was and overall its not bad film. Not great but entertaining , when I was younger I taped it onto VHS with the film Runaway (1984) and honestly it fit in well with that film and films of similar premise of robots/androids , etc with a nefarious motive on top. The whole witchcraft/stonehedge stuff was dumb though

Since you just reviewed them, I'll give my thoughts on seeing the first three for the first time a few years ago.

Halloween (1978) was very good. I really liked the slow pacing, the camerawork, the look and the tone. Speaking of camerawork, the Steadicam work, the over-the-shoulder shots and the eye-level shots were all really effective at heightening tension. Even after watching countless other slasher films first, the original was still effective. It felt really tame when it came to the kills, but that also made it feel like a classier film. As you said, it's not perfect, but few horror movies are.

Halloween II (1981) was OK. I liked your comparison to Jaws 2. It's enough like the original to be enjoyable, even though most of what made the original special is gone. Being directed again by John Carpenter no doubt helped. I thought that the script was weak, though. I didn't like that the Dr. Loomis character spent the whole movie doing exactly what he did in the original: running around town in a frenzy, hoping to get the police chief to believe him that Michael is on the loose. It might've been better if the character just hadn't returned, IMO, especially since the series would end up making him the main protagonist for three sequels and marring the end of a good actor's career.

Halloween III: Season of the Witch (1982) wasn't as bad as I was prepared for by reading reviews of it ahead of time. If I had been a Halloween fan in the early 80s, I likely would've hated it, but watching it for the first time 35 years later and knowing that it's completely different allowed me to just treat it as a standalone horror movie. I kind of liked the premise and how it felt like a really long Twilight Zone episode. It has dumb moments, borders on the bizarre, is hardly a good movie and will disappoint if you expect anything like the first two in the series, but it's rather unique as a Halloween-themed horror film that isn't a slasher film and might be appreciated as such if you can just get past the association with the franchise. Since watching it and not being sure what to think, I've thought about it while continuing through the franchise and think that I might be at the point where I kind of like it. At the very least, it's something that I would gladly watch again, which is something that I can't say for many of the later sequels in the franchise.

 

[Blackhawkswincup]

Since I did Halloween I will do a few more series

Friday the 13th (1980) = 6/10

The movie is not a perfect film or even great film but it is very much enjoyable for what it is and knowing it helped to propel the 80's horror boom

Most of the acting is ok but given inexperience of young cast and budget limits that is not surprising and it may be argued the result is better then expected. Some of the scares/kills are fun and Betsy Palmer in finale is certainly good

Friday the 13th Part 2 (1981) = 6/10

Like the original you get some decent acting from amateur cast (Of course some not so decent acting as well) and the kills increase in both # and violence. Special effects by Carl Fullerton were not bad at all as he more then reasonably replaced departing Savini

The look of Jason is weak point (The sack is still bad look) as is the ending (The fate of Paul left audiences scratching heads and still does). Overall the film works but it is nothing special much like original

Friday the 13th Part III (1982) = 5/10

I liked a lot of this cast to be honest outside of the opening characters and hippies but the film is a little too campy and corny compared to first two and the 3-D gimmick w did not age well and is major issue for film and too much emphasis was put into that rather then the special effects/kills which while numerous are not all that memorable

Part III has its fans but to me it is purely average and I don't go out of way to watch it when its on

Friday the 13th: The Final Chapter (1984) = 9/10

The Casablanca of franchise with Savini returning to bring about top notch special effects to some good casting choices (Feldman a kid in horror movie that isn't annoying or terrible for example) and some fun and memorable kills. Movie amp'd up the death and nudity which is no issue for me honestly

Only major flaw to film would be continuity errors while trying to connect to previous film via Rob character. For non fans it isn't issue but for FT13 fans it certainly makes you go "Wait , what?"

Friday the 13th Part V: A New Beginning (1985) = 1/10

Paramedic Roy and a list of other nonsense including Steinmann's poor directing and just mostly idiotic and awful characters make this a film to mostly forget

Outside of a couple of kills it really just fails everywhere. Even Tommy Jarvis character has no real direction and god damn is Reggie "The Reckless" annoying (The absolute opposite of Feldman in previous film)

Unlike Halloween III that has seen improvement in view of film with time there is no polishing this turd and imposter Jason simply left fans annoyed especially given who it turned out to be (And it was predictable from start)

Friday the 13th Part VI: Jason Lives (1986) = 9/10

The beginning of zombie Jason and movie that many would credit as being ahead of its time with self-referential humor and struck nice balance of horror and comedy within film

Well cast with not only a younger cast but some decent veteran older actors in roles such as Sheriff Garris and Ron Palillo as Hawes

Jason in this film played by CJ Graham is a fun lean/mean killing machine (Of course it was not Graham doing the paintball scenes as original Jason was noticeably pudgy) and there are some fun kills despite gore being toned down and less realistic kills

The toned down gore and kills work witht his film and its script/depicition of Jason

All in all I loved it as kid and still love it today

Friday the 13th Part VII: The New Blood = 4/10

Carrie vs Jason

Everything that I loved about part VI was removed and the younger cast in this film is simply piss poor actors and a script that makes them all annoying. Terry Kizer as scumbag doctor is a + in this film and some of the kills are great as are the effects

All in all though its just a disappointing follow up to part IV with a weak storyline , poor acting and an ending that is just crap. Original ending with more decayed father still would have been weak ,, The ending just doesn't work no matter if it was Buechler ending or the weaker version forced on director by Barbara Sachs

I get people love Hodder but I think it would have been interesting if they wouldn't have recast Graham who I much enjoyed as Jason. Director was one who made choice and cant complain about Hodder portrayal of Jason in his films

Movie was also victim of MPAA but in some cases I think it worked out better like sleeping bag scene

Friday the 13th Part VIII: Jason Takes Manhattan (1989) = 3/10

Jason takes a boat! Or Jason takes Vancouver!

A film that was overambitious from start turns into meh mess and sent franchise into short hibernation

The storyline is weak , the film is filled with errors/crew mistakes , the acting is underwhelming and even the deaths are for most part poor

Add in the vanishing class (I get it had budget but my god what happened to rest of graduating class , LOL) as well as a all around crappy and dumb ending and you get a film that most fans skip over or only watch vaguely as they do other tasks. I can watch and enjoy it even if it is very weak film though

Jason Goes to Hell: The Final Friday (1993) = 2/10

The attempt to take franchise in new direction fails just as much as part V

Jason is not seen much in this film and the means in which his "Spirit" or whatever transfers to people is dumb. The kills are over the top and nonsensical to be frank and even as a horror fan I simply didn't care for much of film

There is really nothing redeemable here despite what is largely a well cast film but script/story/direction/etc just drag this down and sent franchise into yet another hibernation especially as the Freddy vs Jason went into development hell

Jason X (2002) = 0/10

When a franchise goes to space the results are simply not pretty and the gimmick isn't even all that appealing so I don't understand why they go to it. The fact film sat on shelf 3 years after it was filmed adds to mess that was production and the already bad special effects looked even more dated when released

Just a piss poor and dumb film that is waste of your time and even the score by Manfredini sucks

I hate this film and only got it on DVD because it was gift from someone who thought I would like it

Freddy vs Jason (2003) = 4/10

After the long wait we finally got the showdown and all in all it was a big ole meh

Some decent kills , some good effects, Englund and a few other things are positives but overall it was largely forgettable film with weak acting , weak story and just a movie that failed to be anything but an average movie

Improvement over what became of the F13 franchise in end but after all the speculation years of getting movie produced many fans felt letdown. Most still enjoyed it enough and it has enough to enjoy it but it just is average and again largely forgettable

Friday the 13th (2009) = 3/10

Pointless remake just doesn't work and didn't bring much of anything to franchise as reboot. Some annoying characters even by FT13 standards and humor that didn't even come close to drawing laugh didn't help

Some of the kills were fun and it wasn't an amateur production no doubt but just failed to bring interest back to franchise and audience vanishing from theaters after opening weekend showed that it didn't resonate with fanbase who quickly moved on from a movie they had hopes for

The 2nd/3rd reboots died in pre-production thankfully as idea's leaking out made both sound like complete messes

Sunset on franchise long ago but who knows maybe someday we will get another film and it will go back to basics and just be fun. Wont hold my breath on that though

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

Since I did Halloween I will do a few more series

Friday the 13th (1980) = 6/10

The movie is not a perfect film or even great film but it is very much enjoyable for what it is and knowing it helped to propel the 80's horror boom

Most of the acting is ok but given inexperience of young cast and budget limits that is not surprising and it may be argued the result is better then expected. Some of the scares/kills are fun and Betsy Palmer in finale is certainly good

Friday the 13th Part 2 (1981) = 6/10

Like the original you get some decent acting from amateur cast (Of course some not so decent acting as well) and the kills increase in both # and violence. Special effects by Carl Fullerton were not bad at all as he more then reasonably replaced departing Savini

The look of Jason is weak point (The sack is still bad look) as is the ending (The fate of Paul left audiences scratching heads and still does). Overall the film works but it is nothing special much like original

Friday the 13th Part III (1982) = 5/10

I liked a lot of this cast to be honest outside of the opening characters and hippies but the film is a little too campy and corny compared to first two and the 3-D gimmick w did not age well and is major issue for film and too much emphasis was put into that rather then the special effects/kills which while numerous are not all that memorable

Part III has its fans but to me it is purely average and I don't go out of way to watch it when its on

Friday the 13th: The Final Chapter (1984) = 9/10

The Casablanca of franchise with Savini returning to bring about top notch special effects to some good casting choices (Feldman a kid in horror movie that isn't annoying or terrible for example) and some fun and memorable kills. Movie amp'd up the death and nudity which is no issue for me honestly

Only major flaw to film would be continuity errors while trying to connect to previous film via Rob character. For non fans it isn't issue but for FT13 fans it certainly makes you go "Wait , what?"

Friday the 13th Part V: A New Beginning (1985) = 1/10

Paramedic Roy and a list of other nonsense including Steinmann's poor directing and just mostly idiotic and awful characters make this a film to mostly forget

Outside of a couple of kills it really just fails everywhere. Even Tommy Jarvis character has no real direction and god damn is Reggie "The Reckless" annoying (The absolute opposite of Feldman in previous film)

Unlike Halloween III that has seen improvement in view of film with time there is no polishing this turd and imposter Jason simply left fans annoyed especially given who it turned out to be (And it was predictable from start)

Friday the 13th Part VI: Jason Lives (1986) = 9/10

The beginning of zombie Jason and movie that many would credit as being ahead of its time with self-referential humor and struck nice balance of horror and comedy within film

Well cast with not only a younger cast but some decent veteran older actors in roles such as Sheriff Garris and Ron Palillo as Hawes

Jason in this film played by CJ Graham is a fun lean/mean killing machine (Of course it was not Graham doing the paintball scenes as original Jason was noticeably pudgy) and there are some fun kills despite gore being toned down and less realistic kills

The toned down gore and kills work witht his film and its script/depicition of Jason

All in all I loved it as kid and still love it today

Friday the 13th Part VII: The New Blood = 4/10

Carrie vs Jason

Everything that I loved about part VI was removed and the younger cast in this film is simply piss poor actors and a script that makes them all annoying. Terry Kizer as ******* doctor is a + in this film and some of the kills are great as are the effects

All in all though its just a disappointing follow up to part IV with a weak storyline , poor acting and an ending that is just crap. Original ending with more decayed father still would have been weak ,, The ending just doesn't work no matter if it was Buechler ending or the weaker version forced on director by Barbara Sachs

I get people love Hodder but I think it would have been interesting if they wouldn't have recast Graham who I much enjoyed as Jason. Director was one who made choice and cant complain about Hodder portrayal of Jason in his films

Movie was also victim of MPAA but in some cases I think it worked out better like sleeping bag scene

Friday the 13th Part VIII: Jason Takes Manhattan (1989) = 3/10

Jason takes a boat! Or Jason takes Vancouver!

A film that was overambitious from start turns into meh mess and sent franchise into short hibernation

The storyline is weak , the film is filled with errors/crew mistakes , the acting is underwhelming and even the deaths are for most part poor

Add in the vanishing class (I get it had budget but my god what happened to rest of graduating class , LOL) as well as a all around crappy and dumb ending and you get a film that most fans skip over or only watch vaguely as they do other tasks. I can watch and enjoy it even if it is very weak film though

Jason Goes to Hell: The Final Friday (1993) = 2/10

The attempt to take franchise in new direction fails just as much as part V

Jason is not seen much in this film and the means in which his "Spirit" or whatever transfers to people is dumb. The kills are over the top and nonsensical to be frank and even as a horror fan I simply didn't care for much of film

There is really nothing redeemable here despite what is largely a well cast film but script/story/direction/etc just drag this down and sent franchise into yet another hibernation especially as the Freddy vs Jason went into development hell

Jason X (2002) = 0/10

When a franchise goes to space the results are simply not pretty and the gimmick isn't even all that appealing so I don't understand why they go to it. The fact film sat on shelf 3 years after it was filmed adds to mess that was production and the already bad special effects looked even more dated when released

Just a piss poor and dumb film that is waste of your time and even the score by Manfredini sucks

I hate this film and only got it on DVD because it was gift from someone who thought I would like it

Freddy vs Jason (2003) = 4/10

After the long wait we finally got the showdown and all in all it was a big ole meh

Some decent kills , some good effects, Englund and a few other things are positives but overall it was largely forgettable film with weak acting , weak story and just a movie that failed to be anything but an average movie

Improvement over what became of the F13 franchise in end but after all the speculation years of getting movie produced many fans felt letdown. Most still enjoyed it enough and it has enough to enjoy it but it just is average and again largely forgettable

Friday the 13th (2009) = 3/10

Pointless remake just doesn't work and didn't bring much of anything to franchise as reboot. Some annoying characters even by FT13 standards and humor that didn't even come close to drawing laugh didn't help

Some of the kills were fun and it wasn't an amateur production no doubt but just failed to bring interest back to franchise and audience vanishing from theaters after opening weekend showed that it didn't resonate with fanbase who quickly moved on from a movie they had hopes for

The 2nd/3rd reboots died in pre-production thankfully as idea's leaking out made both sound like complete messes

Sunset on franchise long ago but who knows maybe someday we will get another film and it will go back to basics and just be fun. Wont hold my breath on that though

My natural thinking was that the F13 franchise was overall better than the Halloween one, but now that I've read your post and thought back a little about these films, I have to reconsider. Overall, I think F13 might be a little more fun, but there's a lot of smelly crap in here, and the drop from top-end is really abrupt... As for my ranking, it would go (but really isn't as clear-cut as the Halloween one):

Final Chapter
-
3D
-
Part 1
Part 2
Lives
New Blood
-
-
Manhattan
Freddy vs Jason (I prefered Carrie vs Jason!)
Remake
-
Jason X
Goes to Hell (if I want to watch The Hidden, I'll watch The Hidden, at least it has Kyle MacLachlan)
New Beginning

 

[KallioWeHardlyKnewYe]

Got you, but still don't agree. It's not just "bad crap is a style", the film is signed. To me, no matter that we appreciate it or not, Zombie has a stronger signature than Carpenter. It is rather obvious that Halloween and House of a 1000 Corpses were crafted by the same hand. Carpenter is not a doer like Miner is, and I'll give you that he can do more with less, but a Carpenter film doesn't necessarily feels like a Carpenter film (you know, like a Godard film feels like a Godard film, or Duras, or Greenaway, or De Palma, etc.). Zombie's signature obviously has nothing to do with these auteurs, but still, it is something, and not only pure trash (for that, we could discuss Lucifer Valentine's signature).

Zombie DEFINITELY has a style. He's real hit-or-miss with me overall, but I do appreciate the way he goes about his business (even if I don't always care for the results).

 

[KallioWeHardlyKnewYe]

Nightmare on Elm Street is still my favorite series. I think it has the best single movie (the first, obviously) and even its clear low point (Pt. 2) is SUPER interesting both in its backstory and its bonkers campy execution. I know some are put off by the increasingly jokey Freddie Krueger, but it never bothered me. The style and creativity built into the premise just takes me so much further than the fairly rote masked killer schtick of the Friday the 13th and Halloween movies.

Friday comes next for me. Some clear repetitive duds, but I like 1 and 4 quite a bit. Both 6 and 7 are solid and there’s a small place in my heart for the sheer weird stupidity of both Manhattan and X. (Not a big place, but a small one).

I certainly stan for the original Halloween (who doesn’t?). I have soft spot for 2 and I liked the most recent reboot. I actually like 3 a fair amount too, but it doesn’t really count, ya know. Beyond that, the other seven movies could disappear from existence and I wouldn’t lose sleep.

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

Nightmare on Elm Street is still my favorite series. I think it has the best single movie (the first, obviously) and even its clear low point (Pt. 2) is SUPER interesting both in its backstory and its bonkers campy execution. I know some are put off by the increasingly jokey Freddie Krueger, but it never bothered me. The style and creativity built into the premise just takes me so much further than the fairly rote masked killer schtick of the Friday the 13th and Halloween movies.

Friday comes next for me. Some clear repetitive duds, but I like 1 and 4 quite a bit. Both 6 and 7 are solid and there’s a small place in my heart for the sheer weird stupidity of both Manhattan and X. (Not a big place, but a small one).

I certainly stan for the original Halloween (who doesn’t?). I have soft spot for 2 and I liked the most recent reboot. I actually like 3 a fair amount too, but it doesn’t really count, ya know. Beyond that, the other seven movies could disappear from existence and I wouldn’t lose sleep.

I agree that Nightmare is the superior franchise, but not that the low-point is part 2. To me, the Talalay one (part 6 I think) is by far the worse and at that point, there's nothing but a void and unmastered formula. Wes Craven's return to the Nightmare series uses this to raise the bar into high-end auto-reflexivity. All the series went into self-reflexive modes at some points (and only Halloween avoids complete disaster at this - I mean, Resurrection is a complete mess, but its auto-reflexivity ain't a total miss), but nothing gets close to the Craven take at this.

 

[Blackhawkswincup]

Nah part 2 is the low point

Nothing is redeeming about that and the whole "Freddy running around in real world" BBQ killing everyone is so dumb

Entire film is trash

It was amusing to see them acknowledge all the problems and everything about part 2 in Never Sleeps Again though

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

Nah part 2 is the low point

Nothing is redeeming about that and the whole "Freddy running around in real world" BBQ killing everyone is so dumb

Entire film is trash

Ahahahah, yes, that was a huge mess! And those human-faced dogs going for a "body snatchers" moment were hilarious. But still, Freddy's dark and mean and it's still a horror film. Nightmare 6 is just camp and weak autorefexivity (the Johnny Depp commercial...).

 

[Osprey]

I watched all of the Friday the 13th series 3-4 years ago. I had seen all of the ones from the 80s several times before, but really long ago, and everything since I watched for the first time. I mostly agree with Blackhawkswincup's assessment. The first four and VI are the essentials and highlights of the series and everything else is just varying degrees of awful. He wasn't a fan of III, but I think that it's essential viewing if only because it depicts Jason putting on the hockey mask for the first time. It also leads right into IV. VI is definitely the most fun entry in the entire franchise, since it doesn't take itself seriously. It's too bad that they didn't make any more like that. They hit on a new formula that worked, especially when the slasher craze was dying, and immediately abandoned it to do "Carrie vs Jason."

 

[KallioWeHardlyKnewYe]

I agree that Nightmare is the superior franchise, but not that the low-point is part 2. To me, the Talalay one (part 6 I think) is by far the worse and at that point, there's nothing but a void and unmastered formula. Wes Craven's return to the Nightmare series uses this to raise the bar into high-end auto-reflexivity. All the series went into self-reflexive modes at some points (and only Halloween avoids complete disaster at this - I mean, Resurrection is a complete mess, but its auto-reflexivity ain't a total miss), but nothing gets close to the Craven take at this.

That's fair. I think two is the biggest mess but there is something very watchable and entertaining to me about it. I still like 4-6, but that's definitely Nightmare's version of the same cruise control approach that befalls the other series as well. Parts of 6 stand out to me (neither good or bad), but I don't know if I can keep 4 and 5 straight. Freddy's Dead is definitely the one I've seen the least. Maybe only 2-3 times.

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

That's fair. I think two is the biggest mess but there is something very watchable and entertaining to me about it. I still like 4-6, but that's definitely Nightmare's version of the same cruise control approach that befalls the other series as well. Parts of 6 stand out to me (neither good or bad), but I don't know if I can keep 4 and 5 straight. Freddy's Dead is definitely the one I've seen the least. Maybe only 2-3 times.

I've seen it (6) twice in its original theatrical run, and the whole "put your 3D glasses when Freddy does" gimmick was just ridiculous.

And speaking of ridiculous:

 

[the squared circle]

I've seen it (6) twice in its original theatrical run, and the whole "put your 3D glasses when Freddy does" gimmick was just ridiculous.

And speaking of ridiculous:

LOL awesome

 

[Blackhawkswincup]

Now onto NES

A Nightmare on Elm Street (1984) = 9.5/10

A classic in genre and overall just wonderful movie that despite limited budget worked out wonderfully. Only real negative is Heather Langenkamp at times meh acting but overall it worked out even with that minor drawback

A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy's Revenge (1985) = 0/10

I hated this movie. Every aspect of it

No redeeming qualities , none!

A Nightmare on Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors (1987) = 10/10

The series shakes off the mistake that was part 2 to return to fine form. A wonderful story and fun effects make this a great redeeming entry that brings back to life a franchise that could have died an early death after part 2

Only real drawback here is once again Langenkamp at times poor/meh acting

Honestly this is my favorite of series

A Nightmare on Elm Street 4: The Dream Master (1988) = 8/10

Enjoyed easily this installment and this marked when the series really began to move into a more humor based/entertainment

Only real drawbacks were limitations of budget (The stupid fight vs invisible Freddy a result) and a rather poor ending.

A Nightmare on Elm Street 5: The Dream Child (1989) = 4/10

This film was major stepback in series IMO and honeslty was rather boring with a cast of characters I didn't really care for much and a storyline that was weak

The ending was once again a weak point with the whole (Jacob) thing

Freddy's Dead: The Final Nightmare (1991) = 3/10

Film goes off rails with camp and humor that falls flat often. The storyline could have worked real well if in a more serious tone

All in all rather forgettable installment that showed a series at end of its run that had lost out on idea's and purpose

Wes Craven's New Nightmare (1994) = 4/10

I get what Craven was trying to do and why some people love this film but overall I didn't care for it. It had some nice moments and the storyline had intriging idea behind it but just fell flat for me

Had neither the quality effets of a say 3/4 or the fun appeal of the 1st

Freddy vs Jason (2003) =

Covered in FT13 summary

A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010) = 2/10

A rather pointless remake that added nothing to series and frankly the attempt to put forth a "Maybe he was innocent" only to pull it back and throw it away at end of story felt cheap to viewers and threw away what could have been a rather interesting take on story. Also was not impressed by JEH portrayal of Freddy

Also didn't think the deaths or effects were good

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

Now onto NES

A Nightmare on Elm Street (1984) = 9.5/10

A classic in genre and overall just wonderful movie that despite limited budget worked out wonderfully. Only real negative is Heather Langenkamp at times meh acting but overall it worked out even with that minor drawback

A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy's Revenge (1985) = 0/10

I hated this movie. Every aspect of it

No redeeming qualities , none!

A Nightmare on Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors (1987) = 10/10

The series shakes off the mistake that was part 2 to return to fine form. A wonderful story and fun effects make this a great redeeming entry that brings back to life a franchise that could have died an early death after part 2

Only real drawback here is once again Langenkamp at times poor/meh acting

Honestly this is my favorite of series

A Nightmare on Elm Street 4: The Dream Master (1988) = 8/10

Enjoyed easily this installment and this marked when the series really began to move into a more humor based/entertainment

Only real drawbacks were limitations of budget (The stupid fight vs invisible Freddy a result) and a rather poor ending.

A Nightmare on Elm Street 5: The Dream Child (1989) = 4/10

This film was major stepback in series IMO and honeslty was rather boring with a cast of characters I didn't really care for much and a storyline that was weak

The ending was once again a weak point with the whole (Jacob) thing

Freddy's Dead: The Final Nightmare (1991) = 3/10

Film goes off rails with camp and humor that falls flat often. The storyline could have worked real well if in a more serious tone

All in all rather forgettable installment that showed a series at end of its run that had lost out on idea's and purpose

Wes Craven's New Nightmare (1994) = 4/10

I get what Craven was trying to do and why some people love this film but overall I didn't care for it. It had some nice moments and the storyline had intriging idea behind it but just fell flat for me

Had neither the quality effets of a say 3/4 or the fun appeal of the 1st

Freddy vs Jason (2003) =

Covered in FT13 summary

A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010) = 2/10

A rather pointless remake that added nothing to series and frankly the attempt to put forth a "Maybe he was innocent" only to pull it back and throw it away at end of story felt cheap to viewers and threw away what could have been a rather interesting take on story. Also was not impressed by JEH portrayal of Freddy

Also didn't think the deaths or effects were good

I'll continue answering these lists with my own rankings - now who's gonna go and watch all Amityville films? (some of these later films are execrable! even worse than the Texas Chainsaw entries).

Part 1
New Nightmare
-
-
-
Dream Warriors
-
Dream Master
Freddy's Revenge
Dream Child
-
Freddy vs Jason
Remake
-
-
-
-
Final Nightmare



(and for the record, I love Amityville II: The Possession - the first half of that film ranks very high in my favorite horror films, most of the second half was re-written and garbage)

 

[Papa Francouz]

My wife got to pick the movie we watched this evening since I got to pick last time. She chose Would You Rather (2012). It was absolute crap and I was laughing at everything about it from the moment the first scene began.

Apart from Robb Wells more or less playing Ricky but in a torture porn movie, there was nothing redeeming here. Even my wife started laughing at how terrible it was about 10 minutes in, and she likes pretty much everything she watches.

 

[Blackhawkswincup]

I'll continue answering these lists with my own rankings - now who's gonna go and watch all Amityville films?
(some of these later films are execrable! even worse than the Texas Chainsaw entries).

Part 1
New Nightmare
-
-
-
Dream Warriors
-
Dream Master
Freddy's Revenge
Dream Child
-
Freddy vs Jason
Remake
-
-
-
-
Final Nightmare



(and for the record, I love Amityville II: The Possession - the first half of that film ranks very high in my favorite horror films, most of the second half was re-written and garbage)

Amityville, Hellraiser and TCM series really go off the rails with many low points

 

[KallioWeHardlyKnewYe]

Anyone have thoughts on the Phantasm series? I've never gone past 1 & 2.

Rewatched 1 recently and was reminded how much I love it. I know it's considered a classic, so I wouldn't say it's underrated exactly, but it never seems to get quite as much love as a lot of others. Great work on a low budget. Coscarelli clearly throws every idea he had into the blender with it, but it still works. Dope score too.

I remember digging 2 when I was younger, but haven't seen it in decades. Never watched the others.

 

[Osprey]

I want to beat Blackhawkswincup to something and I watched the last one last night, so...

Child's Play (1988) - 7/10 - This was both terrifying and original in 1988. There's something really basic about the fear that we have for things like dolls coming alive. It's harder to take the original seriously nowadays, especially with how campy some of the sequels were, but I think that it's still effective and I'm not going to judge it for not totally holding up. I just remember being chilled to the bone seeing it in 1988. Fun fact: Roger Ebert gave it 3 out of 4 stars.

Child's Play 2 (1990) - 6/10 - It's not as terrifying, but it adds more humor and a toy factory. It's a step down, but still a fun sequel.

Child's Play 3 (1991) - 4/10 - The military academy setting at least changed things up a little, but the shtick started to get old. Don Mancini, himself, said that he was running out of ideas.

Bride of Chucky (1998) - 5/10 - Chucky gets a female sidekick. This entry marked the turn towards comedy and parody. I kind of detest that change of direction, but I have to admit that this film was kind of entertaining. I can't say that I liked it, but it's hard to dislike something that makes fun of itself.

Seed of Chucky (2004) - 3/10 - Ok, I stand corrected. I can dislike something that makes fun of itself. This one ratcheted up the absurdity and comedy and went too far, becoming stupid. Glan (what kind of name is that?) is a really creepy looking (in a bad way) doll that travels to Hollywood to find his parents, but Chucky is disappointed in his son's sweetness and innocence and tries to teach him the ways of being evil. Enough said.

Curse of Chucky (2013) - 7/10 - The franchise returns to its horror roots. I really liked this one. It was ingenious to put the heroine in a wheelchair, as that makes her a lot more vulnerable, especially to a 3-foot doll. This is easily the 2nd best in the franchise and actually stands as a pretty good horror film in general. Fun fact: the heroine is the daughter of Brad Dourif (the voice of Chucky since the original).

Cult of Chucky (2017) - 5/10 - This one picks up after the last one, but slips a little back into the comedy and "hard to take seriously" elements that defined 'Bride' and 'Seed'. There's even a twist/cameo that directly links to those films and suggests that these last two are part of that continuum and not as much of a reboot as we might've assumed. It's really not bad, but was disappointing after how good 'Curse' was. It was nice to see the guy who played Andy in the first two Child's Plays return and have a fairly sizable role, though.

Child's Play (2019) - 4/10 - This is pretty much a remake of the original, but, notably, the first entry in the franchise to be made without Don Mancini's involvement and the first to not be about a possessed doll. Instead, Chucky is simply a high tech doll that learns to be bad as part of its AI. His motives never really seem evil, just misguided, like an algorithm run amok. That ends up making him not very scary. He's also not that funny. The funny bits of the movie tend to be jokes added in that have nothing to do with the doll. If the doll known for being evil and funny is neither, what are you left with? It was also a bit too conspicuous that the movie was trying to copy Stranger Things by having the plot turn into four diverse 13-year-olds (a white boy, a redhead girl, a black boy and an overweight boy) teaming up to stop Chucky. Finally, except for one, the kills were underwhelming and half of them weren't even by Chucky's hand (they were by other toys that, I guess, Chucky somehow programmed to attack humans? Who knows). A lot of people seem to like this entry, but I didn't. It felt on the level of most remakes/reboots: OK in some respects, but missing the mark on enough others that it feels unnecessary.

In retrospect, it strikes me that the Child's Play movies range from bad to good, but not from awful to great like some of the other horror franchises do. There isn't that "great" entry like the original "Halloween" or "A Nightmare on Elm Street," but there also isn't an awful entry with no redeemable qualities like "Halloween Resurrection" or "Freddy's Dead: The Final Nightmare." Even the worst, "Seed of Chucky," has, I suppose, a "so bad it's good" quality and might be enjoyable if you're in the right mood.