[Shawn]

I guess that's the beauty of opinons.

I prefer Halloween to mindless slasher shit. And this remake just cemented that opinion.

[Roman]

Shawn, on Feb 15 2009, 09:44 PM, said:

Just saw it.

Seriously expected WAY more than what they delivered.

The plot was almost non existent. The shocker of the movie was so transparent that my sister and I called it the moment it was hinted at and the deaths could have been SO much more brutal or simply more creative.

Derek Mears played Jason well, but seriously, WTF?

Tits, sex and weed does not a decent horror movie make. It simply hides the fact that the movie has no structure whatsoever.

I'd give it a D.

And I'm sorry, but the Halloween remake was better. Atleast Rob TRIED.

Friday the 13th is a rental worthy movie at best, and I want my money back. You know its bad when the previews satisfy you more than the actual feature.

Shawn, you know you and I will always disagree on Halloween. You loved it, I hated it.

With that said, FT13th was bad after the first 20 minutes. It seemed like it was written by two different people. DM did play Jason very well, but some of the shit in there.........like where does he get the money to pay his light bill? Why did it come off like TCM? Why were the characters so damn stupid and mindless? Wow, it had sex, nudity and weed. I've NEVER seen THAT in a FT13th film. And this thing with "Let's go check out this house and see what's in here" crap.......there were people in the show actually saying good-bye to the characters when they went investigating. They ONLY part of the film that acually scared the folks in the show was everything before the opening credit. After that, everyone was laughing at how bad some parts were. They were calling kills before they happaned. And who didn't seethe ending coming?

It will probably be No.1 at the B.O. this week, but after that.......it may tanked just because word of mouth.

[Roman]

stephanie, on Feb 15 2009, 01:32 PM, said:

lol so true roman


but i actually liked it. way better than remake of halloween

I wonder if that is what's happening.......people are comparing it to Halloween?

Until the last one, Halloween seemed to always be about the story and the horror was the punch line. FT13th seemed to be about the gore and the kills (not to mention the stupidity of people constantly going to the very same area many people had died at the summer before).

[Roman]

(Entertainment Weekly) -- With $42.2 million, the biggest opening gross thus far in 2009, "Friday the 13th" easily won the record-breaking Presidents Day weekend box office race, beating out Valentine's Day favorites "Confessions of a Shopaholic" and "He's Just Not That Into You," as well as solid holdovers "Taken" and "Coraline."
Horror flick "Friday the 13th" debuted with a $42.2 million take over Presidents Day weekend.

Horror flick "Friday the 13th" debuted with a $42.2 million take over Presidents Day weekend.

That $42.2 million sum is the top first-weekend figure for any movie in the nearly 30-year-old "Friday the 13th" series -- including the 2003 mashup, Freddy vs. Jason, which premiered with $36.4 million. In fact, the original "Friday the 13th" movie, from 1980, grossed just $39.7 million during its entire run, not adjusted for inflation.

In addition, this marks the best bow ever for a horror remake, besting "The Grudge's" $39.1 million debut gross. And it arrives despite a weak B- CinemaScore review from an audience that skewed male.

In other words, great as this first frame was for "Friday the 13th," expect a big drop next weekend.

Second place went to hearty holdover "He's Just Not That Into You," which banked an expected $19.6 million on a 29 percent drop.

"Taken" came next at No. 3, with $19.3 million in its third frame, a mere 6 percent decline from its previous outing. In three weeks, the out-of-nowhere Liam Neeson juggernaut thriller has grossed nearly $78 million.

Audiences were just not that into freshman flick "Confessions of a Shopaholic" (No. 4), however. The Jerry Bruckheimer-produced farce opened with an okay $15.4 million and drew a similarly okay CinemaScore grade of B from a crowd that was 75 percent female.

"Coraline" rounded out the top five with $15.3 million, another teensy decline of just 9 percent from last weekend. "Paul Blart: Mall Cop" (No. 6) brought its five-week sum to $110.5 million, making it the first-ever non-sequel January release to hit the century mark.

And new movie "The International" (No. 7) stumbled with just $10 million -- and a poor CinemaScore grade of C+ from mostly older men.

Overall, it was the best Presidents Day weekend ever: The total gross of all movies playing during this frame was about $190 million, which trumps the previous benchmark of $157 million in 2007 (and is up more than 38 percent from last year). No doubt, Washington and Lincoln would be proud.

[xoxomollyburnettxoxo]

well the Halloween remake had no nudity, but i don't really remember. I haven't watch it in forever. But Friday the 13th had some nice hot girls who had a nice tan body

[Roman]

I don't care how many naked women are in a horror movie.

I pay 10 bucks to be scared, not to watch naked women running all over the place. If you do, Terry, right on, pimpin'. But that was a waste of time for me.

But get down like you live, dude.

[xoxomollyburnettxoxo]

^^^ yea but is better then a girl half naked, in a bikini, or naked being chased by a psycho Killer.

I thought Friday the 13th remake had some scary moments---its way better then the boring Original.

wow 10 bucks for a movie ticket, i only pay 7.25 plus soda and popcorn

[Shawn]

If people want tits and ass they should watch porn.

If they want horror look at movies like Halloween (1978), Psycho, Exorcist, Rosemary's Baby, Alien, and the like.

Horror should scare you, not get you horny.

[xoxomollyburnettxoxo]

^^first of all, Porn is nasty---it degrades Women. Nudity has always been part of horror movies. Plus the nudity in friday the 13th didn't take away from the plot.

Plus they are teenagers, goes to the Lake, what would you expect---they were having fun. What a fun times turns into a gory bloody nightmare

[Shawn]

xoxomollyburnettxoxo, on Feb 16 2009, 05:18 PM, said:

^^first of all, Porn is nasty---it degrades Women. Nudity has always been part of horror movies. Plus the nudity in friday the 13th didn't take away from the plot.

Plus they are teenagers, goes to the Lake, what would you expect---they were having fun. What a fun times turns into a gory bloody nightmare

Some of the best horror has been done SANS nudity or sex. If you haven't seen any, you haven't seen true horror.

[Roman]

Shawn, on Feb 17 2009, 06:23 AM, said:

xoxomollyburnettxoxo, on Feb 16 2009, 05:18 PM, said:

^^first of all, Porn is nasty---it degrades Women. Nudity has always been part of horror movies. Plus the nudity in friday the 13th didn't take away from the plot.

Plus they are teenagers, goes to the Lake, what would you expect---they were having fun. What a fun times turns into a gory bloody nightmare

Some of the best horror has been done SANS nudity or sex. If you haven't seen any, you haven't seen true horror.

Thank you, Shawn. Where this thing that nudity has t6o be in a horror movie started is beyond me. Some of greatest of all time had very little to NO nudity.

I also feel that directors who rely on that are quite lazy and are more worried about getting somebody's rocks off instead of scaring people.

Not to mention that ticket prices are based on what city or town carries which movie theater chain. It depends on what is charged.

[Shawn]

JP62883, on Feb 17 2009, 08:31 AM, said:

Shawn, on Feb 16 2009, 01:55 PM, said:

If people want tits and ass they should watch porn.

If they want horror look at movies like Halloween (1978), Psycho, Exorcist, Rosemary's Baby, Alien, and the like.

But most, if not, all slasher films contain T&A (Halloween, A Nightmare on Elm Street, Friday the 13th both this one and the original, Scream)...remember that the rules from Scream in surviving a horror film: one is you can never have sex. So they obviously have characters be sexual so as to kill them off since that is part of the rules.

I agree with your list of horror films, especially on Psycho (1960 version. GVS' 1998 version was okay) and The Exorcist. Do not forget The Omen of 1976

Another thing...about some of the best horror being done w/o tits and ass. That is true but, in those films, the directors of them (men. There was no such thing as a woman film director in those days) tended to be very chauvinistic...Alfred Hitchcock was very notorious for being misogynistic/chauvinist against women

The original Halloween was not a slasher film. It was more psychological and unnerving, and it did not rely on gore to get scares, but rather subtleties. It also didn't have nudity in it JUST to have nudity in it, or to give some drunken horndog in the audience a thrill.

Subsequent sequels tended to be more slasher.

And it doesn't matter if the director of a movie is chauvenistic. The topic here is horror. And sexist pig or not, Alfred Hitchcock was a genius in his field.

[xoxomollyburnettxoxo]

Shawn, on Feb 17 2009, 07:23 AM, said:

xoxomollyburnettxoxo, on Feb 16 2009, 05:18 PM, said:

^^first of all, Porn is nasty---it degrades Women. Nudity has always been part of horror movies. Plus the nudity in friday the 13th didn't take away from the plot.

Plus they are teenagers, goes to the Lake, what would you expect---they were having fun. What a fun times turns into a gory bloody nightmare

Some of the best horror has been done SANS nudity or sex. If you haven't seen any, you haven't seen true horror.

whats the joy out of that...not seeing any hot tan girls naked and then being stalked by a psycho killer. I watch horror movies for Blood and nudity. Nudity became a big part in horror movies probably since 2000.

i am not surprised there weren't many nudity scenes in the 80's cause the Qualty sucks and who wants to see a pale girl with big hair naked. The girls in movies these days ARE WAYYYYYYYYY Hotter---nice bodies---nice tan bodies.

The only movie i really enjoyed that had zero nudity in was THE REMAKE OF the Hitcher but the only reason i went to see it was because of Sophia Bush, who is a fantastic actress, who probably the only time she had not jeans or short jean skirt on was in the hotel room when she fault John Rider and another great actor in Sean Bean.

[Roman]

Shawn, on Feb 17 2009, 09:05 AM, said:

JP62883, on Feb 17 2009, 08:31 AM, said:

Shawn, on Feb 16 2009, 01:55 PM, said:

If people want tits and ass they should watch porn.

If they want horror look at movies like Halloween (1978), Psycho, Exorcist, Rosemary's Baby, Alien, and the like.

But most, if not, all slasher films contain T&A (Halloween, A Nightmare on Elm Street, Friday the 13th both this one and the original, Scream)...remember that the rules from Scream in surviving a horror film: one is you can never have sex. So they obviously have characters be sexual so as to kill them off since that is part of the rules.

I agree with your list of horror films, especially on Psycho (1960 version. GVS' 1998 version was okay) and The Exorcist. Do not forget The Omen of 1976

Another thing...about some of the best horror being done w/o tits and ass. That is true but, in those films, the directors of them (men. There was no such thing as a woman film director in those days) tended to be very chauvinistic...Alfred Hitchcock was very notorious for being misogynistic/chauvinist against women

The original Halloween was not a slasher film. It was more psychological and unnerving, and it did not rely on gore to get scares, but rather subtleties. It also didn't have nudity in it JUST to have nudity in it, or to give some drunken horndog in the audience a thrill.

Subsequent sequels tended to be more slasher.

And it doesn't matter if the director of a movie is chauvenistic. The topic here is horror. And sexist pig or not, Alfred Hitchcock was a genius in his field.

There were two nude shots. One was obscured in the beginning of the movie, and then there was PJS's topless shot near the end. Also, only 5 people were killed in that movie, and yet it is still a classic.

I personally can't compare classic horror movies to the utter crap that is being made today, and I just can't spend money to go to a horror movie for the expressed purpose of seeing some naked chick. So what, their nude........and? How scary is the movie?

[xoxomollyburnettxoxo]

^^^Boring only 5 kills and 2 nudity shots=boring for me. Thats why I never am into the 80 horror movies, no hot girls and its never a blood bath like today horror movies.

[Roman]

And that's why today's horror sucks, because they spend more time thinking of naked crap and gore than true suspense.