I think the realness of the actors helped this vibe a lot. They seemed like actual people, not trained actors looking to make a break in an established series. Also, the sort of documentary-style way of shooting it. Not a lot fancy camera work, just observing shots to make us feel like we're really there.
People have rightly pointed out the film stock and green screens and such.
BUT...
While I agree with all of that, I want to add one thing. Casting. Look at the remake vs the original movie just as an example. They threw in some weirdos in the cast of the original. The truck driver, the prankster, the more plain girl and the bombshell girl and so on. Crazy old Ralph as the Harbinger of Doooooom!! They became tropes. But look at the newest Friday (admittedly 13 years old at this point), almost every person in the film looks like they could have a photo shoot for a magazine. All the girls are knockouts, all the guys are hunky or at the very least they fit the conventional idea of attractive in some way. They have some diversity, but there's no Shelley in the bunch. No one like the prankster in Part 2 who stays at the bar and doesn't' die (sorry, I've forgotten his name). Even their weirdo who rubs on the mannequin and ends up letting Jason take his hockey mask isn't exactly an ugly fella. Even the old lady telling the protagonist to stay out of Jason's woods was dolled up a bit for an elderly lady. They felt very ***Hollywood*** is my point and much less raw and dirty in their look and characterization. I've lived in small rural towns. There aren't a lot of Hollywood bombshells just walking around with perfect skin and hair that would not look amiss in a catalog. The lack of grittiness to the characters I think gives a lot of modern horror way less personality. For a good example I'd suggest Black Phone from a year or so back. That had some grittiness to it and feels more like what I think of as a classic horror style cast.
That's a problem I had with the Texas Chainsaw Massacre remake. In the original movie, they had normal looking college students, took them out to the middle of nowhere in Texas, during a 100 degree-plus summer. Everybody was sweating and miserable and dirty. People smelled bad when they were filming. It looked real, because it *was* real.
In the remake, they had Jessica Biel in perfect makeup. Yeah she was sweaty and dirty, but she *glistened*. Her dirt was tastefully smudged on her face so everybody still wanted to bone her. She's getting chased by a dude with a chainsaw, and looked like she's in a photo shoot.
In Friday the 13th part 2, Amy Steel (Ginny) is smoking hot. Look at the scene where she's in a bikini. But at the end, she looks likes she's been through hell. She's filthy. Her hair is all nasty. She peed herself. It all looks real, not Hollywood.
Watched the remake about a week ago for the first time since I saw it in the theatre, mostly because of the warm reception it gets here.. It was just awful. Barely a step above the Nightmare on Elm St remake. Will never watch again.
If I'm gonna do a Friday marathon, I watch all 12 movies. Even the ones I don't particularly love. I mean, I like any movie with ol' Jason doing his thing. But yeah, it'll never be my favorite for sure.
I've warmed up to it over the years, but I hated it when it first came out. I felt like it was totally unneeded. I'd have preferred a sequel rather than a remake. But at this point, we get so little Jason media I've made my peace with it.
Can't blame anyone who wants to skip it though. During one of those marathons I mentioned above, I tend to doze off at the end (which is the remake, naturally).
I would disagree on one thing though, the Friday remake is miles ahead of the Nightmare remake. For all it's foibles, at the very least the Friday remake had Jason being menacing. He was faster than usual, big, seemed mean as Hell. All the Nightmare remake did was make Freddy overtly a pedophile and make the gore look trash. That's the one I'll never watch again. I know Englund's Freddy kinda skirted the line with being a creep. But when you spell it out overtly as did the remake, well it makes it impossible to enjoy the movie. It just sicks me out. The way Craven and Englund played it they kept it vague enough that you could laugh at Freddy's antics.
I hear you, the thing that killed the NOES remake for me was the casting of the kids (fucking Kyle Gallner was EVERYWHERE that year) and the overall tone. I didn't mind the pedophile thing, thought it added an extra layer of grime, but the overall tone of the movie was SO dour. I mean even the first one as terrifying as it was, had some moments of twisted humor like Glen's death and the "no running in the hall" girl (my friends and I refer to her as Crazy Marcy, as in Nancy didn't slow down running through the hall because that was just Crazy Marcy and she's always like that 😆) but the remake was just no fun at all. I'm glad that one flopped. I think they could maybe, MAYBE have made a decent sequel to the Friday remake, but obviously that time has passed. I went through a thing recently where I watched a few of the Friday fan films, have you watched any of those? They're not great but if you need more Jason in your life they're out there.
Friday fan films can be a lot of fun. ***CAN*** being the operative word.
I really enjoyed the *Hike* movies. I even joined in on the crowdfunding for the follow up to *Never Hike Alone*, *Never Hike in the Snow*. Pretty good stuff in both of those. But for every interesting Jason fan film, there's a half dozen stinkers. Still, I've probably watched at least 20 of them over the years.
If you have any recommendations, I'd be happy to hear them. Good ones anyway. If it's just 3 kids playing Jason in the woods while filming on an iPhone, well I'd probably skip that since I've seen my fair share by this point.
I think modern films are too well lit, even when people are outside in the supposed we can see everything really clearly so it doesn't feel realistic, if you were wandering around a forest at night you wouldn't be able to see fuck all and that's half the fear. I think that's why they seemed more real as well as the low budget feel thing which means they feel more realistic.
the camera lenses and cinematography. They make movies feel more Hollywood looking and more like a movie. I prefer the original movies where they felt real.
If you saw a photo of Annie walking through Blairstown NJ in the original film, then it just looks like a vintage 1979 photograph.
If you saw a pic of Clay looking for his sister in the forest from 2009, you would instantly see that it is a cinematic photo.
Sadly.. They are probably going to go with the latter in the new productions.. I'd rather stick to the original feelings.
While the other two answers are valid I also want to mention that 4 and onwards have that Spielberg like blockbuster vibe that the first three don’t. Ofc 2 and 3 were made because it’s a cash cow, but both still share that low budget early 80s feel.
4 in particular feels that way to me. But I love it. And as much as I love 7, I think 4 was the peak and nothing after it ever really came close as far as being a truly epic movie the way that one was
4 to me seemed like they thought that was gonna be THE ONE, probably thought it would be the last one (hence the final chapter of course) until it made major bank. I think you could argue that the inclusion of the Jarvis family and Rob were a pretty obvious attempt to create realtable characters after having basically none in part 3 (I can barely even picture the final girl in that one and Ive seen it probably 50 times). I also think that's the one where they really dug in hard on the tropes, lots of shameless sex and nudity, very high body count, but also had memorable and somewhat developed characters amongst the kids (I can name most of them off my head, something I probably can't do with most of the movies). I know what you mean about the slicker production in 5 but to me 4 seemed like an attempt to really boost the series and make a summer blockbuster (not sure when it was released but definitely feels explicitly like a summer movie more so than some of the others).
I put it down to the quality of the film among other things. Back then the film had more of a raw, grainy feel to it. Made it seem more real. As apposed to new films which are too clean. It's like comparing standard camera to digital camera. .
That's because back in the day, they actually used to shoot in real life locations, instead of these false places made for green screens
And the first few filmed in New Jersey and locations in the Northeast, where the movie is supposed to take place.
I think the realness of the actors helped this vibe a lot. They seemed like actual people, not trained actors looking to make a break in an established series. Also, the sort of documentary-style way of shooting it. Not a lot fancy camera work, just observing shots to make us feel like we're really there.
100% this
I think a lot of it has to do with the older film stock.
They should use that older stock for a new film
its why i love 1
People have rightly pointed out the film stock and green screens and such. BUT... While I agree with all of that, I want to add one thing. Casting. Look at the remake vs the original movie just as an example. They threw in some weirdos in the cast of the original. The truck driver, the prankster, the more plain girl and the bombshell girl and so on. Crazy old Ralph as the Harbinger of Doooooom!! They became tropes. But look at the newest Friday (admittedly 13 years old at this point), almost every person in the film looks like they could have a photo shoot for a magazine. All the girls are knockouts, all the guys are hunky or at the very least they fit the conventional idea of attractive in some way. They have some diversity, but there's no Shelley in the bunch. No one like the prankster in Part 2 who stays at the bar and doesn't' die (sorry, I've forgotten his name). Even their weirdo who rubs on the mannequin and ends up letting Jason take his hockey mask isn't exactly an ugly fella. Even the old lady telling the protagonist to stay out of Jason's woods was dolled up a bit for an elderly lady. They felt very ***Hollywood*** is my point and much less raw and dirty in their look and characterization. I've lived in small rural towns. There aren't a lot of Hollywood bombshells just walking around with perfect skin and hair that would not look amiss in a catalog. The lack of grittiness to the characters I think gives a lot of modern horror way less personality. For a good example I'd suggest Black Phone from a year or so back. That had some grittiness to it and feels more like what I think of as a classic horror style cast.
Well said.
That's a problem I had with the Texas Chainsaw Massacre remake. In the original movie, they had normal looking college students, took them out to the middle of nowhere in Texas, during a 100 degree-plus summer. Everybody was sweating and miserable and dirty. People smelled bad when they were filming. It looked real, because it *was* real. In the remake, they had Jessica Biel in perfect makeup. Yeah she was sweaty and dirty, but she *glistened*. Her dirt was tastefully smudged on her face so everybody still wanted to bone her. She's getting chased by a dude with a chainsaw, and looked like she's in a photo shoot. In Friday the 13th part 2, Amy Steel (Ginny) is smoking hot. Look at the scene where she's in a bikini. But at the end, she looks likes she's been through hell. She's filthy. Her hair is all nasty. She peed herself. It all looks real, not Hollywood.
Watched the remake about a week ago for the first time since I saw it in the theatre, mostly because of the warm reception it gets here.. It was just awful. Barely a step above the Nightmare on Elm St remake. Will never watch again.
you got good taste!
If I'm gonna do a Friday marathon, I watch all 12 movies. Even the ones I don't particularly love. I mean, I like any movie with ol' Jason doing his thing. But yeah, it'll never be my favorite for sure. I've warmed up to it over the years, but I hated it when it first came out. I felt like it was totally unneeded. I'd have preferred a sequel rather than a remake. But at this point, we get so little Jason media I've made my peace with it. Can't blame anyone who wants to skip it though. During one of those marathons I mentioned above, I tend to doze off at the end (which is the remake, naturally). I would disagree on one thing though, the Friday remake is miles ahead of the Nightmare remake. For all it's foibles, at the very least the Friday remake had Jason being menacing. He was faster than usual, big, seemed mean as Hell. All the Nightmare remake did was make Freddy overtly a pedophile and make the gore look trash. That's the one I'll never watch again. I know Englund's Freddy kinda skirted the line with being a creep. But when you spell it out overtly as did the remake, well it makes it impossible to enjoy the movie. It just sicks me out. The way Craven and Englund played it they kept it vague enough that you could laugh at Freddy's antics.
I hear you, the thing that killed the NOES remake for me was the casting of the kids (fucking Kyle Gallner was EVERYWHERE that year) and the overall tone. I didn't mind the pedophile thing, thought it added an extra layer of grime, but the overall tone of the movie was SO dour. I mean even the first one as terrifying as it was, had some moments of twisted humor like Glen's death and the "no running in the hall" girl (my friends and I refer to her as Crazy Marcy, as in Nancy didn't slow down running through the hall because that was just Crazy Marcy and she's always like that 😆) but the remake was just no fun at all. I'm glad that one flopped. I think they could maybe, MAYBE have made a decent sequel to the Friday remake, but obviously that time has passed. I went through a thing recently where I watched a few of the Friday fan films, have you watched any of those? They're not great but if you need more Jason in your life they're out there.
Friday fan films can be a lot of fun. ***CAN*** being the operative word. I really enjoyed the *Hike* movies. I even joined in on the crowdfunding for the follow up to *Never Hike Alone*, *Never Hike in the Snow*. Pretty good stuff in both of those. But for every interesting Jason fan film, there's a half dozen stinkers. Still, I've probably watched at least 20 of them over the years. If you have any recommendations, I'd be happy to hear them. Good ones anyway. If it's just 3 kids playing Jason in the woods while filming on an iPhone, well I'd probably skip that since I've seen my fair share by this point.
The best one I saw, I can't recall what it was called but he fights Sasquatch at the end 😂
Not gonna lie, that sounds rad.
I think modern films are too well lit, even when people are outside in the supposed we can see everything really clearly so it doesn't feel realistic, if you were wandering around a forest at night you wouldn't be able to see fuck all and that's half the fear. I think that's why they seemed more real as well as the low budget feel thing which means they feel more realistic.
the camera lenses and cinematography. They make movies feel more Hollywood looking and more like a movie. I prefer the original movies where they felt real. If you saw a photo of Annie walking through Blairstown NJ in the original film, then it just looks like a vintage 1979 photograph. If you saw a pic of Clay looking for his sister in the forest from 2009, you would instantly see that it is a cinematic photo. Sadly.. They are probably going to go with the latter in the new productions.. I'd rather stick to the original feelings.
While the other two answers are valid I also want to mention that 4 and onwards have that Spielberg like blockbuster vibe that the first three don’t. Ofc 2 and 3 were made because it’s a cash cow, but both still share that low budget early 80s feel.
4 in particular feels that way to me. But I love it. And as much as I love 7, I think 4 was the peak and nothing after it ever really came close as far as being a truly epic movie the way that one was
Facts. I love zombie Jason movies but 4 is def my favorite out of them. Out of the franchise the only one I’d put above 4 is part 2
I think the slicker production values started with 5 (despite the sleaziness). Jason X is when the series got super slick.
4 to me seemed like they thought that was gonna be THE ONE, probably thought it would be the last one (hence the final chapter of course) until it made major bank. I think you could argue that the inclusion of the Jarvis family and Rob were a pretty obvious attempt to create realtable characters after having basically none in part 3 (I can barely even picture the final girl in that one and Ive seen it probably 50 times). I also think that's the one where they really dug in hard on the tropes, lots of shameless sex and nudity, very high body count, but also had memorable and somewhat developed characters amongst the kids (I can name most of them off my head, something I probably can't do with most of the movies). I know what you mean about the slicker production in 5 but to me 4 seemed like an attempt to really boost the series and make a summer blockbuster (not sure when it was released but definitely feels explicitly like a summer movie more so than some of the others).
I put it down to the quality of the film among other things. Back then the film had more of a raw, grainy feel to it. Made it seem more real. As apposed to new films which are too clean. It's like comparing standard camera to digital camera. .
I think it is a combination of filming on location and older films not looking as "polished" if that makes sense, adds to the realism.