Thanks!
But isn’t that kinda lame? In the first Freddy movie, I’m assuming no one even knew who he was 'til he started killing, right? Why do kids have to fear him first?
Anyway, I wanna see the suped-up Jason X some more. That was cool.
Don’t go down that route, otherwise you might start asking questions like why a guy who murdered young children when he was alive chooses to only enter the dreams of teenagers.
It isn’t meant to make sense, just go with it . . .
If anyone doesn’t mind telling me, what is the backstory behind the two characters? I’ve never seen any of the movies, so could someone clue me in?
Thanks.
But I know the answer to that one! Wasn’t he getting revenge on the parents who had found about what he was doing and killed him? I think he was pissed cause they kept it secret or something. So he started killing their kids.
The movie did a decent job at recapping both histories, I thought. Both backstories have been complicated by revelations in sequels that are ignored by subsequent sequels, so I’ll just give you the bare bones version.
Jason was a rather deformed kid that drowned when his camp consuelors were too busy partying to supervise him and the other kids. His mother was killed after she went on a killing spree against pot-smoking oversexed teenagers. He then rose from the grave (and grew into the mammoth we know and love) for revenge against teenagers in general when they dare to approach his camp. He’s super-strong and can’t be permanantly killed, wheich is why Freddy used him, since he can come back from pretty much anything.
Freddy Kreuger was a child murder that was arrested, and then released on a technicality. The local parents took matters into tehir own hands, and burned him alive. He came back to murder their children in their dreams. In dreams, he’s more or less omnipotent, but is somewhat vulnerable to lucid dreaming techniques or other psuedo-psychological mumbo-jumbo type stuff. He can also be pulled into waking reality by a sleeper holding him while being awakened, and is a tough, but ultimately defeatable person.
Anyway, I saw the match must be called on account of interference. I say Freddy was winning before the propane tank blew and he turned his back on Jason to deal with the kids. Remember Jason collapsed (“died”, I think, as much as Jason can die) after only what Freddy did to him, Freddy needed the kids to finish him off, and still got the last wink.
I agree with Max Torque; “spoiler” is in the title, you have been warned.
I think I’d give the battle to Jason. It was over before the girl made her coup de grace; Freddy had lost. He had been impaled with his own arm. That’s gotta be a win on points, if anything.
Ah, but Jason was hacked with own machete, you might say. He wasn’t hacked to point of being “killed” though, which I think Freddy was (as much as either of them get killed).
Even if the girl wasn’t there, Jason would have come back in better shape than Freddy, and took him apart.
Did he rise from the grave then? I though he had not quite drowned as a kid, and grew up in the woods.
I could be wrong, this is how I remember it being explained in part 2, but it was very long time ago that I saw it.
So does Freddy vs. Jason make up the official count of the two series? In other words, is this movie both:
Nightmare on Elm Street VIII: Freddy vs. Jason
and
Friday the 13th Part XI: Freddy vs. Jason
This is important to know, as the next Jason movie for example will either be considered the 11th or 12th movie in the series, and I’m sure something cool is cooking for Friday the 13th Part XIII, and I just want to know if i have to sit through one or two more movies to get to it…
Haven’t seen the movie, but am I the only one thinking it’s about 15 years too late? All of the teens who cared about these movies in the 80s have lost interest long, long ago. I would have seen this movie in half a heart-beat in 1989. Now the only way I’d watch it if it were on HBO and I were with a group of friends with whom I could trash talk the movie… after some serious drinking.
It was #1 at the box office this weekend, so it was apperantly not too late.
Does it really matter who won? It’s quite obvious that no matter who “dies”, both will be back in their respective sequels. Both have died so many times (8 times for freddy, 11 times for Jason) and come back that to assume either is down for the count is stupid.
The only question is: Who will kill each dumb teenager and how?
Having seen bits of both series, I’ve always liked freddy a little bit more. You don’t have to be stupid to be killed in a NIGHTMARE movie, just fall asleep(and everyone has to eventually). FRIDAY movies seems to be more of the Stupid Teens who have sex and go swimming in the middle of the night (or should I watch more?).
That and Freddy kills people in Amusing and occasionally disturbing ways. Cheesy, sure, but etertaining.
Actually, I’ve love to see Ash vs. Freddy vs. Jason, but I know it would never happen.
This movie made more money this weekend than the last chapters of each of the franchises did their entire run combined!!!
And it Ruled!!!
My theater was 40% kids, and everyone was cheering during the kills, and people were yelling at the screen at the moron heroines! Plus, during the final scene where Jason emerges from the lake with Freddy’s head, the crowd was out of their seats cheering, and went even crazier when Freddy winked! One of the most enjoyable theater experiences since Star Wars 2 opening night!
My favorite part was when the movie doors were locked, the theatre was hermetically sealed, and the gas was pumped in.
No more movie goers - no more sequels to dreck movies.
Well yeah, but he killed all of them off a long time ago. So why is he still going after teenagers?
Right, because being forced at gunpoint to watch dreck movies must be such a bitch for you. 
As luck would have it, I reviewed all the Nightmare on Elm Street movies last Halloween (the reviews are still in my LJ) in very in-depth fashion, and they’re still fairly fresh in my mind, so I feel qualified to comment on this. But, this isn’t what the “spoiler” in the subject line is for, so I reckon I’ll box it.
[spoiler]In Part 1, Freddy was going after the kids of the adults who killed him. Plain and simple, it was revenge. He’s pretty much doing the same thing in Part 2, with the added twist that he’s trying to be reborn into the physical world by possessing the body of a strangely effeminate teenage boy.
So, by Part 3, there’s only a handful of “Elm Street kids” left. Luckily, one of them is Kristen, who has the ability to pull other people into her dreams. Thus, the remaining kids can whup up on Freddy as a group. In Part 4, however, this works against them; Kristen pulls her friend Alice into her dream when she (Kristen) gets killed. Her power passes to Alice, who Freddy then uses as a vessel to pull in and kill more kids.
You’d figure by Part 5 people would’ve stopped hanging out with Alice, but they haven’t. This is the one where Alice gets pregnant and Freddy uses her unborn child’s dreaming to kill people even while Alice is awake. Man, are they stretchin’. And Part 6 is just a total mess; they make up yet another Elm Street kid, the ability to pull others into your dreams is apparently commonplace, Freddy gets his powers from some weird skele-sperms, there’s this whole thing with Freddy’s daughter… it’s just awful. Part 7 is kind of an aberration that doesn’t fit into the regular chronology very neatly (kinda like Jason X, but it’s better than any of the other Nightmare sequels, IMHO.
Anyway, Freddy’s killing began with limitations, but they’ve played so fast and loose with those limitations that now pretty well anyone is fair game. The old rules no longer apply, and no one really seems to care. Frankly, that’s fine by me; the more they try to concoct some scheme to stick to the rules, the more of a mess the movie seems to be.[/spoiler]
As for why he goes after teenagers rather than little kids, here’s the scoop as I see it: Freddy, as we know, was a serial killer during his life. While alive, he apparently killed very young children, probably because they were easy targets. After his death, he preyed upon teenagers simply because that was how old the Elm Street kids (that is, the children of the Elm Street parents who killed Freddy) were at the time he was able to come back. And he’s stuck with teenagers (mostly) ever since. Odds are, he figured out that teenagers are more fun to kill, and they’re just as easy to kill when you’re a dream-demon as little kids are when you’re alive. So, he goes after teens now.
Cat Fight, I totally agree with what you said. The talking-too-much part was vital to the movie, because it’s a direct parody of all those other movies. My husband and I nearly choked from laughter when the female lead got to the line about how things had been like this “ever since my mom died”. Of COURSE her mom died! She wouldn’t be allowed into the film without meeting that criterion.
And yes, the goalie line was really funny.
The idea that they were going to give Jason mouth-to-mouth was hysterical, as was the fact that their plan included duct-taping Jason down, putting him in their van, and taking a little road trip. That’s one I haven’t seen before. 
I know! It was the same in my theater.
The audience literally erupted with laughter when the scene with the skinny dipping girl came on, and everytime the teens did something stereotypically horror movie-esque. There were gasps and screams when someone got hacked to bits, and tons of cheering when Freddy and Jason finally fought. It was a great experience.
I only wish I could have seen this movie when I was like, 10. Because as much as I love it now, back then it would have been hands down the coolest thing on the face of the planet ever.
But that’s not how most serial killers work. I don’t believe for a second that Freddy targeted young children because they were easy targets or would change his entire M.O. purely for the sake of convenience.
Freddy kills teenagers because teens are always the targets in movies like this, simple as that. You can try to apply logic to it as you’ve done, but it falls apart with even a cursory examination because slasher movies have never made sense, with the longer franchises having nothing in the way of consistent logic or continuity. For me, it helps to think of each film as an entirely seperate entity that just happens to feature characters that have appeared previously in other films.
And oh yeah, there was a Nightmare on Elm Street part 2? I always thought they skipped right to part three . . . 
A common misconception! Having sat through and analyzed all of the Nightmare movies thoroughly, I can say definitively that Part 2 is not the worst in the series. That dubious honor belongs to Part 6. As I put it in my review of Part 6:
However, I do find it very odd, in retrospect, to see just how much blatant homoerotic imagery there is in Part 2. You have to wonder what they were thinking. Someone was on a mission, methinks; it can’t be an accident.