This is a debate that seems to have fans very passionately taking one side or the other. Some feel that Friday The 13th 2009 can easily be easily be inserted into the old time line and others feel that doing so would erase too many facts and too much history already established. Some people have already drawn up their own timlines which has the new film stuck somwhere in the old time line.
For instance, putting Friday The 13th 2009 after the old Friday The 13th (Part 1) would change way too much (i.e. how Jason got his mask, Mrs Voorhees head, Jason's age, etc) that the old franchise time line had already established- facts that the proceeding sequels relied on. However, some fans feel that all of those problems can just be called "continuity errors" and ignored.
I personally just can't get behind that notion, I feel that the new movie may have followed the old Part 1, but that's where it ends- the new movie is blatantly a new franchise. Brad Fuller has stated that legally the movie is indeed a sequel, however it's quite obvious that the movie can not fit anywhere but in a new time line. The movie can not work between the earlier sequels for the aforementioned reasons and the fact that movie is modernized (i.e. new cars, GPS, cell phones) and set in the 2000's. It can not fit after Freddy Vs. Jason because Jason is now obviously a completely different entity than FvJ's Jason.
So, if the movie is the new Part 2, what if a sequel is made? Would that be a new Part 3? Where would it end? Why is it so hard to just accept that the old Jason was finally laid to rest? Are us fans that attached to the old Jason that we simply refuse to let him die?
Huh... I just took the movie "as is". It has Jason, that is what should matter. Not whether the movie fits into a timeline that was already quite unstable to begin with.
ReplyDeleteSeems like a topic that will be endlessly debated with no clear answer for any side.