Film Review: Friday the 13th: The Final Chapter - 40th Anniversary

  "Friday the 13th: The Final Chapter"

   ** 1\2 (out of ****)

 Does violence beget violence? What are the emotional and psychological effects violence has on us? It's a question I believe "Friday the 13th: The Final Chapter" (1984) - which I will simply refer to as "Friday the 13th" - asks us to consider, as we look back on it for its 40th anniversary.

I'm a little late in the game when it comes to the "Friday the 13th" horror series. I've seen the first and second movie. The first one I didn't like. It was a predictable, by-the-numbers slasher gore fest that had the primary objective of killing its attractive teenagers one by one. It also referenced the work of Alfred Hitchcock from its musical score by Harry Manfredini to its ending. For some reason I liked the second one.

The '80s slasher genre doesn't interest me in general, from the "Nightmare on  Elm Street" series, to "Halloween" and  "Friday the 13th". These movies wore out my interest because the villains won't die. How many movies around these characters can you possibly make? How many new scenarios can you create until the movies begin to repeat themselves? On top of which these movies are too gory. I don't find watching characters get sliced and diced scary. Disgusting? Sure. Thrilling and exciting? What am I? A sociopath?

But we are supposed to find it thrilling and exciting, aren't we? We are supposed to want to see the characters get killed one by one at the hands of the serial killer. We hope and wait in anticipation that each death will become more gory and bloody than the last one, right? What does this say about society and movie fans that relish this kind of "entertainment"? Oh Alex, you stupid Hungarian bastard, it's only a movie. Then explain the last shot of this movie? What does it suggest? And socially speaking, what impact have these violent images had on society? Before you yell out "nothing", think for moment. Does the world seem okay today? Well, it's all the politicians' fault and don't forget inflation! It has nothing to do with the sight of watching movies where people get slashed by a machete! My mistake. Damn you price of eggs!

By the time this sequel of "Friday the 13th" was released, three others had come out before it. This we are told in the title will be the conclusion of the franchise. Although from the initial reviews I read of this movie, it seems critics weren't fooled. In her New York Times review, the great critic Janet Maslin started things off writing, "A promise is a promise, or at least it ought to be. But despite its title, "Friday the 13th - The Final Chapter" shows no signs of being the last in its none-too-illustrious line." Forty years later, I know for certain it was all a sensationalist gimmick.

This "Friday the 13th" begins by recapping the first three movies as a camp counselor explains to his kids what has previously happened. Jason's body was never found, he witnessed the death of his mother, the young girl that survived the first attack has been killed. Jason is still out there. It is actually an interesting montage that lead me to sit back and believe I may actually enjoy this installment. 

The counselor wasn't wrong. Jason is still out there. Paramedic workers are called to a scene where the body of Jason is among those claimed to be dead. After being taken to a hospital, we discover Jason isn't dead. I initially thought the movie was going to be similar to "Halloween II" (1981), which took place primarily in a hospital setting. Jason goes on a quick killing spree before shifting focus to other characters. But how does Jason escape the hospital? No one sees him? Are we to assume many more deaths took place as Jason gets from point A  to B?

The hospital sequence begins a staple of '80s horror movies - needless sexual references and mild attempts at titillation. Jason kills a horndog coroner (Bruce Mahler, whom I will forever associate with his role on "Seinfeld" as a Rabbi) and a willing nurse (Lisa Freeman). Which is something I always found to be a weird combination - sex and violence. I suppose the thinking is each causes a rush of adrenaline? On the flip slip I would imagine it can cause confusion for some people as to which of these two things is causing the rush?

The promise of sex and violence continues as the movie shifts its focus to a group of teenagers headed to Crystal Lake. The theme of masculinity is introduced when Jimmy (Crispin Glover) explains a recent breakup with his girlfriend to his friend Ted (Lawrence Monoson). Ted tells him the breakup was probably the result of a sexual issue, and tells Jimmy he is most likely a "dead fuck", a term  I have never heard used before, which I interpret as a boring lay. This ties sexuality and masculinity together which really hits at a man's pride and self worth. Jimmy is going to have to have a sexual experience on this trip if for no other reason than to prove himself as a man. I had a little difficulty distinguishing the rest of the teenagers, due to lack of personality, but they include Paul (Alan Hayes), Sam (Judie Aronson), Doug (Peter Barton),  and Sarah (Barbara Howard). They all have hooking up on their minds.

Two other characters not associated with the horny teenagers are Trish (Kimberly Beck) and her younger brother Tommy (Corey Feldman), who we can assume will be the heroes of the story because they aren't part of the visiting group of teens at the lake. Tommy is presented as something of a video game whiz and Trish is the closest thing we get to a standard "all-American girl"

In Maslin's review she summed up the character development by commenting "there is nothing to do during the second half of the film but watch them die." Can't we basically describe all slasher movies the same way? What separates a good slasher movie from a bad one is character development. If the audience can identify and relate to some of the characters, giving us someone to root for, audiences will enjoy the movie. "Friday the 13th" didn't do that for me.

One of my biggest problems with "Friday the 13th" is the structure of the movie. It is almost too much set-up and not enough payoff. The movie sets all the chess pieces in place with the teenagers and our anticipation of their demise. The majority of the characters that die however have no idea that Jason is after them or that other characters have previously died. That means the majority of them aren't working towards stopping Jason. It is as if the story goes from act one to act three. The characters gaining an understanding of what is after them and actively working to save themselves would have been a second act. Once this became obvious to me, I lost interest. It's not as if the characters are that interesting that they alone could carry the movie.

The only thing the movie would have going for it is the suspense of how this franchise would end, if we believed the "Final Chapter" moniker. What would be a suitable ending to this story? How would Jason meet his end? And which character will be the one to end this "chapter". The movie isn't even smart enough to tease us and create cliffhangers around who could be the character to kill this villain. Could it be this character or that character? That's what happens when there is a lack of a second act.

The movie's screenplay was written by Barney Cohen, whose credits include "The Happy Hooker Goes to Washington" (1977) and one episode apiece for two animated series that are special to my generation - "He-Man and the Masters of the Universe" (1983 - 1985) and "Thundercats" (1985 - 1989). Not to mention the TV movie, "Sabrina the Teenage Witch" (1996). With such a pedigree it may be easy to understand why the storytelling is a bit weak.

Director Joseph Zito went on to direct "B" action movies, some of which starred another unstoppable force, Chuck Norris. This "Friday the 13th" sequel is his best known movie and nearly nothing about it indicates a talented visionary was behind it. Zito and his cinematographer know enough to keep the action in frame. Some defenders of this movie will get mad at me and say I'm not being fair. No one watches a movie like this for its directing or its screenplay. First of all, you just insulted the movie and don't even realize it.  Secondly, I hate this defense that someone doesn't "understand" a movie. It suggest a movie is above criticism. If you only understood it, you would like it. Why even bother talking about movies unless you're only going to say something positive? Every movie can't be good. There has to be some metric to measure quality.

Another problem with "Friday the 13th" is Jason doesn't look scary. The character essentially looks like a middle-aged man in a hockey mask. And when his mask is taken off, he looks like he belongs in the "Goonies" (1985), which coincidentally enough, Cory Feldman would appear in. Michael Myers looked more menacing and creepy with his built and mask. Jason looks like he could lose a few pounds.

Being unable to create suspense, all the movie really has going for it, is the promise of sex and nudity. The movie is so desperate to show nudity there is a long sequence where the characters find a 8mm nudie film from what looks like the silent era. I entertained the idea this was done to demonstrate how movies have always been exploitive when it comes to sex. But am I giving the movie too much credit?

Looking back on the movie 40 years later, we can see how some of the clichés of the genre still exist today but the movie also feels dated in its approach and visuals. Contrary to my opinion there are some "critics" that feel in retrospect, this movie is one of the better ones from the franchise. Taking their own retrospective look at the franchise on the website Film Frenzy their review states the films "seem less worthy of controversy in the wake of the truly sadistic torture-porn cycle that erupted over the course of the 21st century." Is that the legacy of "Friday the 13th"? The violence depicted here caused other writers to raise the stakes and gives us torture-porn horror movies?

"Friday the 13th" showed some early promise and I was willing to go along with the characters on this adventure, even if it was going to go over familiar terrain. But the lack of interesting characters created a lull in my viewing experience. When it came apparent there was no second act, I lost all interest. I can't imagine people will be scared watching this but there will be moments you may want to look away from the screen because of the gore.