06-16-2008, 04:12 AM
Honestly, I don't see it in Kane either... I mean he was A JASON, but honestly, he had the most beat to shit rotted looks and was in the worst story plots. Why does everyone love his acting so much? I think it's because, to make up for the shitty movies, you concentrate strictly on Jason, therefore making the movie seem good. The earlier films (parts 1-6) were great, story wise, hell acting wasn't horrible, and the FX was great. Every Jason played it there own version.Kane is just a robotic figure who pumps his chest and walks slow yet appears infront of you within seconds.You know who showed some real great acting additude? Ari Leman? Steve Dash? Ted White? Hell, even Warington Gillet was pissed off lookin at the end of part 2. What I love the most about Brookers performance is he was a more demented, psychotic and happy killer. You could see he enjoyed what he was doing. With Kane... well.... what's the point? If the story isn't convincing, why is the killer?Most of the time, your too busy concentrating on the make up and masks that you don't realize the acting isn't so great either. But then again, when the hell was the acting ever supposed to be good in these films?