Tuesday, January 1, 2013

Would Jason Kill a Child?

Friday the 13th: Part IV
It seems like every board I go on that debates the Friday the 13th films, this subject is discussed. Most people side with the notion that Jason would not kill a child. I am not sure why people come up with this conclusion, since most of those people will agree that Jason is a mindless killer who's driven out of vengeance and evil (whether possessed or an embodiment).



It's quote obvious that a movie would never depict Jason killing a child out of ethics, but what about in "movie land." It also seems that a good majority of fans also say that Jason would never harm an animal either and that is completely untrue. Since the end of Part II was probably a dream, this makes Muffy the dog definitively dead. The corpse in the woods was obviously Muffy and Muffy's last encounter was with Jason. In the original script to Part III, Jason was to have eaten Harold's rabbit. Jason eats animals. That "Jason never hurts animals" is just Kane Hodder BS. Now, I don't think Kane was a bad Jason, he just had the misfortune to have portrayed crappy Jasons. But even though Kane is a fan of the character, I think it's pretty cocky to say Jason does this or that, ignoring his previous actions.

To avoid a long-winded digression, I will get back to children.

In Part IV, Jason crashes through the window and attacks young Tommy Jarvis. This is the only proof that you need that Jason would harm a child. The only reason Tommy lived was that his sister Trish beat Jason in the head with the business end of a claw hammer. Once they got upstairs later on, Jason also attempted to lunge for Tommy. If Jason had no intention on killing him, he wouldn't have even bothered.

I have read some hilarious excuses for Jason grabbing Tommy through the window. Believe me, Jason was not intending to grab him and take him to a baseball game. He was going to kill him.

The only other time where Jason came close to killing a child was in Part VI. I do believe he would have killed Nancy if given a chance. However, Jason was being hunted and he knew it. Jason left the children's cabin because of Tommy's arrival, not because he had any soft spot for any of them. In fact, it was children who teased him. Jason has every reason to hate children.

If we want to get specific, Vicky in Part II was 15 years old (well, in real life she was) and he had absolutely no problem killing her. Jason has no problem with killing the innocent elderly, handicap, the pregnant, and innocent bystanders. So, there's no reason to not kill children especially children can be pretty vile.

I will also add that it was studio intentions for Jason to come back in Jason Lives and kill Reggie (Friday the 13th: Part V), which was going to be set directly after A New Beginning. Reggie would still have been a child.

Just my two cents.

Friday the 13th: Part VI

12 comments:

  1. according to later movies Jason kills anything that gets in his way.... so yeah he will.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Dear heavenly Christ how I chuckled when I re-read:

    "I have read some hilarious excuses for Jason grabbing Tommy through the window. Believe me, Jason was not intending to grab him and take him to a baseball game; He was going to kill him."

    This was pretty much my intention of when I first watched TFC as a young lad on old school cable television and the old super-shit quality cropped off fullscreen Paramount VHS for sale tapes, too. And as you noted he lunged at him & he had to make a decision/choice quickly as well, too. She he chased after the usual slasher film "final girl/resourceful heroine" type for a presumed more easy quickie chase & kill. He had no idea that Tommy was a depper thinker then most & loved masks and the Slasher sub-genre of that very same era and could quickly get into his psyche, ect.

    Also out of all of the boxsets and now the first few on BLu Ray and I own and the nicer Delue Editions on standard def DVD, I noticed on the over two year old DVD of Part VI Tom McLaughlin and his editor (the same for Part V) and actor Vinny Guastarfarro (however you spell his surname, please forgive me at this time) talk about it. It is interesting to note that I seem to remember Mr. McLaughlin stating that he believes that Jason personally would NOT harm a child, only that he was morbidly curious because he sense'd her child-look innosence & overall good in her.

    But like you I agree that he probably no doubt would, given a chance. I see of no reaon why he wouldn't. VERY intereting essay/discussion you made her. I enjoyed re-reading it. Intelligent and well thought-out.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If you look at it this way: children picked on Jason, then you can assume he really has it in for them. It's the proverbial "bullied child shoots up school" syndrome.

      Delete
  3. Once again, you're probably right.

    It is not even baseless pop-psychology---just probably good old fashioned TRUE psychology.

    He probably see's children as the youth of teens and 'tweens as thoe that dicapitated his vengeful mother over the summer of 1980 on the shores of Crystal Lake and also as those that let him drowned & also ever talked to him because he was slow & Hydrosophalic, ect. So yeah I don't see him as being particularly close to the kiddies in mentality, either. So I pretty much agree with you.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
  4. By the way Jack:

    If you read these, one of your next big essay posts should be about: "Why do idiots keep asking if Camp Crystal Lake county is supposed to be in Conneticut or California when it is so quite obviously New Jersey?".

    I say that because I fee that I am SO tired of a lot of online genre film/retro slasher forums over the years all across our playfully bickering North American continent asking this questions. I've said it before: "People need to calm the hell down. It has ALWAYS suppsoed to be a rural communnity in New Jersey. The first film was shot there in Blairstown and the film makers allowed a "Stanhope, NJ" truck to be filmed as Enos picks up the soon-to-be-doomed Annie and also Part 2's truck has NJ plates. Also Part 3-D had a fake Green Valley, NJ store bumper filmed inside an again for The Final Chapter/IV, Joseph Zito requested NJ state plates for all of the native California cars."

    And yes I know that it is quite obvious that parts 3-throuugh-V were filmed in SoCal becaue of the ore dry & humid climate & obvious lack of vegitation, however in a mild defense of the film makers, they filmed vegitation & shrubs whenever they could. Also Parts VI & the overrated VII returned behind the Mason Dixon Line to film in the south, and there is a lot of green in those pictures, making it look more like the north east/New England territory.

    Just my own proverbial two cents.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I did one of those (not so vulgar, haha) a few years baCk. I shall revamp it.

      Delete
  5. Sounds cool my good man!! And I shall be the first to read & commentonit, nach. Heh heh ;-)

    ReplyDelete
  6. Quick edit my good man:


    I had amost forgot to mention that also yet another connection to The Garden State as most of the film makers made mention: Part 2's (1981) pick-up driving doomed camper (ya know Saundra's boyfriend) has NJ state tags & plates too.

    Also, in the not-that-good in retrospect from New Line Cinema Freddy Vs. Jason: The writer's note that they had planned to explain with multiple passing of state signs sequence about how the teens made it in record time from the imaginary town of Springwood, Ohio to Crystal Lake country, NJ but it was dropped. So yeah even in there it was to be made mentioned.

    I mention this because I am so sick of genre film message message boards saying that "Okay so Camp Crystal Lake Country is kinda like Springfield on 'The Simpsons', heh heh. Like okay, where the hell state is this supposed to be anyway, duh?" and I'm always thinking without signing up "Oh holy hell folks, its quite obviously NEW JERSEY! A rural community there. Stop asking for fuck sakes! lmao".
    heh heh

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, 1, 2, 3, and 4 all had Jersey signs and plates. Yes, I do read all of these and I just don't have time to respond all the time.

      Delete
  7. Nah it is fine & take your time bro! It isn't brain surgery that we're discussing anyhow so it isn't always important, heh heh. :D

    I'm glad someone else agrees with me as well, too. I have truly NO idea how comparing the F13th franchise to The Simpsons' Springfield locale ever got started, though. I guess our modern age of many online users are very clueless & funny sometimes. PEACE! :)

    ReplyDelete
  8. By the way Jack my good man:

    Just to somewhat re-add to your overly thoughtful, highly intelligent post/essay here:

    I noticed that you too also made mention of the overly idiot discussions & excuses that many fans made for Jason grabbing a then young Tommy in Part VI (TFC). I've noticed that the old Internet Movie Database discussions, still to this day, have an entire FUCK LOAD of those types of shockingly ignorant, idiotic discussions.

    And sadly YouTube is also becoming that way too. It seems that it only takes us human beings a few years to rin things with topical discussions that are WAY off base & off-topic and bring up various cultures & Racial stuff that has nothing to do with nothing, ect. While various franchise message boards have that type of stuff I feel that the IMDB boards were always the worse type of fellow movie fan & collector. Tons of dumb crap like that & excuses are almost always on various movies' desinated boards, there.

    ReplyDelete