+- NightOwl Forums (https://forums.nightowlpro.com)
+-- Forum: The Crypt (https://forums.nightowlpro.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=12)
+--- Forum: Off Topic (https://forums.nightowlpro.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=9)
+--- Thread: A New Friday The 13th Film? (/showthread.php?tid=9895)
A New Friday The 13th Film? - adam - 01-31-2006
Quote:Just because the movie sucked doesn\'t mean that the look of jason sucked. :thumbsup:Yep. Jason looks awesome in Jason Goes To Hell, but the movie didn\'t hold up as well hehe. As far as Jason X... man, that was just all trash!
[post=\"138028\"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]
Anyway, think that rumor is true this time? As much as I couldn\'t see a point in a prequel, I\'d still watch it.
A New Friday The 13th Film? - TheCreeper2003 - 02-01-2006
I think this one will actually show Jason as a child going to the camp, being ridiculed by the children, and then drowning, and show either how he survived, or what brought him back to life after drowning. Probably have something to do with Pamela Voorhees too.
In fact, I\'d be so bold as to say they\'ll probably show him growing up, and showing that not all of the bad things that happened at Crystal Lake was all Pamela Voorhees.
A New Friday The 13th Film? - SoulCatharsis85 - 02-01-2006
yea they just kinda had clips here and there, leaving you wanting to know more...I want to fully understand the whole story.
A New Friday The 13th Film? - Golgo 13 - 02-01-2006
I always thought there was room for a prequel between parts 2 and 3. I don\'t buy the whole 3 happened right after 2 thing. It wasn\'t seamless like from part 3 to 4 and I think it would have been if it wanted to since 2 and 3 had the same director. They could do a prequel that includes the whole senario from the Chris flashback in part 3, and then pad it out with more lakeside killings of new characters. This would also allow them to get away from the hockey mask, which unfortunately I think is what they are looking for. It probably won\'t even have "Friday the 13th" in the title, since no New Line "Jason" movie ever has. Maybe just "Crystal Lake", too fool sceptics into thinking its not F13.
The other possibility is the "young Jason and Mrs. the goalie" angle, but its pretty straight forward and there are only 2 killings in that story. Unless they re-tell it and vamp it up. That would kinda piss on every Paramount era movie though. So to keep up with every New Line Jason movie so far, that\'s probably what they\'ll do. We will all bitch about it, but ultimately all go to see it.
My rant is over now.
:happy:
A New Friday The 13th Film? - adam - 02-01-2006
Quote:I always thought there was room for a prequel between parts 2 and 3. I don\'t buy the whole 3 happened right after 2 thing. It wasn\'t seamless like from part 3 to 4Well, actually it is. At the very beginning of 3, we see Jason take out the machete from his shoulder, which pretty much links the two closely. But the most noticable thing that would is when he goes to the grocery shop place when he gets his clothes off the clothes line. You hear on the radio or tv about the \'events\' from the night before, ala part 2.[post=\"138227\"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]
A New Friday The 13th Film? - VF31 - 02-01-2006
all i know is if they keep making them i will keep seeing them..
liking them is another story
but for me in every flick so far jason himself has held as up "cool" in my book so i havent yet been fully dissapointed (except VS which doesnt exist to VF)
A New Friday The 13th Film? - ssj4freddy - 02-02-2006
Hmmmm....I posted my idea about a Friday prequel on the net before.....hopefully NewLine didn\'t steal it.... :yucky:
A New Friday The 13th Film? - Golgo 13 - 02-02-2006
Quote:Well, actually it is. At the very beginning of 3, we see Jason take out the machete from his shoulder, which pretty much links the two closely. But the most noticable thing that would is when he goes to the grocery shop place when he gets his clothes off the clothes line. You hear on the radio or tv about the \'events\' from the night before, ala part 2.I don\'t mean to argue but the part where he takes the machete out is basically part of the part 2 flashback, not the part 3 movie. He is in the overalls in his perv-shack/altar still from part 2. I wouldn\'t doubt if this footage was from the part shoot since they pretty much new they would make sequels indefinately.
[post=\"138260\"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]
The radio "events" would be the events of the proposed prequel. There had to be something inbetween. Otherwise what the hell was Chris talking about? The other possibility is something before part 2. It obviously didn\'t happen during the events of part 2. Especially if you notice he isn\'t wearing the overalls or the plaid shirt from part 2 in the Chris flashback. And whatever clothes he is wearing he decided to change them at the start of part 3. Maybe because they were also now "dirtied". The kink in this is they actually show footage of Ginny getting loaded in the ambulance and mention she is the only survivor. If it was only talking about anonymous victims then it wouldn\'t have to be the part 2 victims. It lists the number of victims at 8 (The must not be including Alice or the cop), and hints more may be found. They never actually say when the Ginny killings happened, just that the made a gruesome discovery "today", which may not have been the same or even next day neccessarily. That is the "in". There could be a couple days (he usually only needs 1) for some more action. His shoulder wound doesn\'t seem to be weeping through his shirt or hindering him in part 3 at all, maybe it was longer even.
I guess I am just hoping for a "fanboy" prequel that doesn\'t destroy the already laid tracks....... and won\'t suck. :confused:
A New Friday The 13th Film? - Cryptoys.com - 02-02-2006
Quote:I think this one will actually show Jason as a child going to the camp, being ridiculed by the children, and then drowning, and show either how he survived, or what brought him back to life after drowning. Probably have something to do with Pamela Voorhees too.
In fact, I\'d be so bold as to say they\'ll probably show him growing up, and showing that not all of the bad things that happened at Crystal Lake was all Pamela Voorhees.
[post=\"138207\"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]
I tend to think this is right. I don\'t think they should ever tell it completely, that\'s why I like Jason, no explanation just murder.
What I mean by that is I would hate to see something corny like a pact with the devil underwater or "young Jason finds the key to evil / everlasting life".
For me I really don\'t care why or who he kills only that he looks cool and the film holds my attention. Now what was I talking about..? :confused:
A New Friday The 13th Film? - adam - 02-02-2006
Quote:I don\'t mean to argue but the part where he takes the machete out is basically part of the part 2 flashback, not the part 3 movie. He is in the overalls in his perv-shack/altar still from part 2. I wouldn\'t doubt if this footage was from the part shoot since they pretty much new they would make sequels indefinately.Well, the only problem with that theory is, you can clearly tell its Richard Brooker in the overalls and flannel. The purpose of that scene was to show him getting away and not have to show the scene at the end of part 2 in the recap, since Jason\'s look was radically different in 3. So, this would make what happened to Ginny at the end of 2 a nightmare at the end, like with Jason at the end of part 1.
Quote:The radio "events" would be the events of the proposed prequel. There had to be something inbetween. Otherwise what the hell was Chris talking about? The other possibility is something before part 2. It obviously didn\'t happen during the events of part 2. Especially if you notice he isn\'t wearing the overalls or the plaid shirt from part 2 in the Chris flashback. And whatever clothes he is wearing he decided to change them at the start of part 3. Maybe because they were also now "dirtied". The kink in this is they actually show footage of Ginny getting loaded in the ambulance and mention she is the only survivor. If it was only talking about anonymous victims then it wouldn\'t have to be the part 2 victims. It lists the number of victims at 8 (The must not be including Alice or the cop), and hints more may be found. They never actually say when the Ginny killings happened, just that the made a gruesome discovery "today", which may not have been the same or even next day neccessarily. That is the "in". There could be a couple days (he usually only needs 1) for some more action. His shoulder wound doesn\'t seem to be weeping through his shirt or hindering him in part 3 at all, maybe it was longer even.Very true, but remember, these are cheaply made films, and the production for continuity and obvious things is sometimes very lacking and poor. The whole unofficial theory with part 3 is that Jason, after having somewhat of a defeat at the end of part 2 left the scene, shaved his head, and changed clothes to hide his identity from police and other people on the lookout (since he was still human afterall). If you notice, in part 3, he hides out in the barn for a good deal of the film. As for the flashback Chris has, thats a total fluke on the production team, as just a day ago (or a few days, whatever you want to think), Jason was down the road, killing part 2 peeps. He should have had the overalls and flannel at least in that flashback, but maybe they thought it would confuse the dumbasses out there. Also, in part 4, Rob is hunting down Jason, because he killed his sister in part 2, which was just a few days ago in that movie. So.. idk. There is bad continuity, but I guess that leaves room for crazy explanations like these :lol:
Quote:I guess I am just hoping for a "fanboy" prequel that doesn\'t destroy the already laid tracks....... and won\'t suck. :confused:Good luck on that one. :whoops:
[post=\"138361\"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]