Ok, ok, enough Jason X already. How many times does he have to get mentioned on here. I thought folks were up in arms when I did it. Now you're even gonna' post his picture on here? I thought I'd wait an additional week, in order to ensure that Jason gets all the attention he can possibly muster. Because, hey! Any publicity is GOOD publicity. Hmm... Of course, poor Terence basically had to go and make room for his Jason X discussion by not devoting his time to the underground underdogs that "can't get publicity because the media ignores them in order to talk about the mainstream stuff." Hmm.. I'd say that it stops and makes you think, but I'd probably be accused of ripping off the phrase from some underground 1920s film called: "Stop to Think", about two college roommates who deal with the trials of college and boyfriends, while smelling roses and drinking coffee.

Terence's comments on that picture itself was interesting though.. It's a promo picture, meaning that it's not actually from a specific scene in the film. NOW you're going to tell me that the actor was told to POSE for it? .. man.. those AWFUL sell-out bastards.. I bet they stole that idea from that movie, too. I mean.. REALLY.. who wants to see an action character in an action, or dynamic pose.. that would be artistic expression, and we all know how bad THAT sucks, right? Oh wait...art is good, right? Oh...but not when it comes to photography, or creating an action figure-like pose. (I gotta watch that, because I need to be 100% sure I don't commit hypocrisy, because that would make ME "the man".)

It's interesting though that some folks have decided that "Friday the 13th" was SO sneaky that they robbed everything from another film. I haven't bothered to watch the other film because, duh!, apparently I've already seen the upgraded version of it...done by someone with a special-effects budget. Here's another case where a sneaky movie breaks laws unbeknownst to the public, and isn't caught until one of the PCR reviewers notice the duplicity. Hopefully this one has a successful court case to back up any "nay sayers."

As noted though.. I haven't seen the film, but I'll take everyone's word for it. I mean, sure, murder was invented by this other flick. Killing with a machete has NEVER been shown anywhere on the face of the planet. Wow, and you mean teeny-bobbers died in the other movie like EVERY slasher-flick in the entire world at that time? Gee whiz.. you're right, it WAS a total rip-off. Here I was thinking that the storyline--a boy drowns at summer camp and his mom goes on a killing spree in his name--hadn't been used before, and now I learn that someone else has already done it. Not only that, but in the same movie apparently, the boy takes over where the mom left off, and was left dead somewhere, but managed to be revived at the beginning of the next one, so he's basically an undead zombie on a killing spree.

Oh wait.. you mean it's NOT copying that? You just meant the methods of death? Oh well, gee whiz. I suppose that if anyone ever flipped a coin in a film, it would be BLATANTLY ripping off some underfunded movie SOMEWHERE. Murder in a film. Hmm, just how many murders are doable by an undead zombie? You mean the movie industry is not allowed to show any murder scene that's been done before? Well, I've got news for some folks...independent flicks have folks shooting each other in it. Head wounds, chest wounds, leg injuries, etc. Boys, girls, adults, etc...in bed, at the front door, in a wheelchair, on crutches, in a car, in the front driveway, on a bike, etc., it's all been done already. THOSE cannibalistic bastards have already ripped each other off to hell and back again.

Gee, I guess all this TOTALLY devalues any opinion I may have ever had for any of the Friday the 13th movies.

I mean, how could I possibly be so naive as to like something FOR WHAT IT IS rather than for what kinda artsy-fartsy, avant-guarde, underground, unliked, undistributed, unmarketed, underfunded, unknown, full of world issues, piece of crap that it is.

Yeah, I'm sure all that underground stuff is mind-expanding and stuff, but that's because there's not enough within the movie itself, and your mind is forced to compensate for the lack of budget. Also, suspension of disbelief is ALWAYS at an all time high when there's little money involved.

Status doesn't dictate what I like. I could care less who filmed what, or what world view was being portrayed in it, or how underfunded it was. I simply go see a movie to determine if I like it or not. Most of the time, with higher budget films at least, there's almost ALWAYS something redeemable about it, even if it's simply because I get to make fun of the "A-Team" bad guys, or the bad CGI or whatever. You can do that if the budget is there.

That's because this is a form of entertainment for me, period. In fact, I'd just be pleased by the fact that it's a slasher-movie coming out. When one comes out successfully, the next one is put into the gate. You all DO realize that by showing support for the genre, you actually HELP similar movies in the underground become ABOVE ground if they want to? That's because of the formulas used to determine what type of movie should get Hollywood support next. Kinda' like the "Blair Witch" thing. Of course, that would make them sell-outs...so nevermind, forget I said that. Obviously, once they moved past a fan-base of 12 people, they've sold-out rather than sticking to their vision.

And gee whiz.....we wouldn't want THAT.

Mike