Ladies and gentlemen I am a new man today. Inspiration and motivation has come to me in the most unlikely of avenues. The launch of NoTearsPlease has been giving me a consider amount of stress due to my lack of confidence in my ability as a writer to produce content worth reading…
Why would someone come to NoTearsPlease when they can go to Bloody Good Horror, or Bloody Disgusting, or a number of other websites.
While doing research for the upcoming episode of our video reviews for the site I stumbled across a little gem on the internet. A piece of writing so bad that I feel like I can take solace that no matter how inaccurate or sub-par my writing will be at times…. it will NEVER be this bad.
As a horror fan I cannot sit by and not comment about this particle article… even if I’m 8 years too late.
Ladies and gentlemen, I give to you Mr. Bill Medic, and his review of Freddy Vs Jason (2003)
Mr. Medic decided back in 2004 to write an analysis of Freddy Vs Jason… it was up to him to shed some light on the “oh so subtle” child molesting tones of Freddy Vs Jason.
… Let’s just do this old school at take this one paragraph at a time.
Victor Salva isn’t the only horror filmmaker promoting child-molestation these days. In Freddy Vs. Jason, the latest sequel to both A Nightmare on Elm Street and Friday the 13th, charmer Freddy Kruger is clearly meant as a stand-in for a child-abuser. In an early scene, a little girl tells the teenaged heroine, “Freddy likes children. He especially likes girls.”
Victor Salva, director of the Jeepers Creepers series, was convicted and served time while filming Clownhouse for molesting one of the actors. I am not going to go into the analysis of this, and frankly I’m looking forward to Jeepers Creepers 3. Dude has issues, this doesn’t have anything to do with Freddy Vs Jason and really has no purpose even mentioned in this so-called review.
But Medic, I sense this is going to be a point that I’m going to have to make VERY clear to you more than once during this review. Freddy Kruger isn’t a “stand-in” for a child abuser… Freddy Kruger IS a Child Murderer. That’s the entire basis of his character. The defining characteristic of Freddy is that he is The Springwood Slasher.. he murdered children and got away with it to because of a technicality.. that is why the parents of Elm Street rose up and set fire to his home with him inside.
He swore vengeance of the parents with the lives of their children in the one place they can’t be protected.. in their dreams.
This is the basis of the ENTIRE SERIES!!!! How can you have the audacity to review movie, even mention moments in past installments and not know basically the whole focal point in which the series is based around? This would be like reviewing a Jaws movie and being upset that there’s a Shark in it.. or looking at a World War 2 movie and being upset that there is Swastika’s everywhere…. We are less than three lines into this movie and already I can tell that we’re not going to get along Bill.
In fact, in the very first scene, we see Freddy Kruger corner a girl no older than nine. She screams. Then, as Freddy moves in on her, the child drops to her knees, much like a woman about to perform fellatio. There is no reason given for her dropping like this. It hardly seems a common response to fear. The usual instinctive response to fear is to try to move away from the threat. By dropping to her knees, she is actually moving toward her attacker. We have to assume the filmmakers deliberately chose to sacrifice credibility because they were eager to suggest sex in the midst of this violent attack on a child.
… The girl is 9. She’s in a basement with a guy sharpening blades and the image you get from seeing her wince with fear is fellatio? Bill, I think we have to talk about some deep-seated issues you may have when it comes to little children. And the usual instinctive response to fear is running away? Of course, it isn’t like we actually have a phrased known as “frozen in fear”… you might want to get a refund on your psych major Mr. Medic, because there are a whole lot of different responses for fear… in fact I’m willing to wager if you put 100 small children in that position, you’re going to get quite the shock at how many of them would just not be able to move at the sight of this terror.
And please don’t tell me what to do, I have no fantasy of being fellated by a 9-year-old girl, so no.. her knees buckling under fear does not instantly make me assume the filmmakers deliberately suggest sex in the midst of the violent attack.. because if you happen to know ANYTHING about this series, you would realize that Fred Kruger (who isn’t burnt in this scene so this is obvious when he was just a run of the mill child murderer) is about to abuse and kill this girl. That’s the true terror behind the character of Freddy.
There’s nothing particularly new about horror films using their villains to represent sexual predators. Slasher films too often present a symbolic rape for the enjoyment of the audience. In other installments of Friday the 13th, Jason attacks scantily-clad beauties, and this installment is no different. Within the first few minutes, we see a woman running from Jason while her breasts are on display. Psychiatrists would say the filmmakers here are (intentionally or not) using “classical conditioning” to promote rape. The view of breasts makes men in the audience feel aroused and feel enjoyment while watching the woman attacked. The most likely psychological effect is to cause men to associate attacks on women with feelings of enjoyment and arousal, rather than the normal feelings of anger and compassion for the victim. When they later hear about actual attacks on women, or see one, or commit one, they will be more likely to, on some level, enjoy it and feel sexually aroused in addition to feeling their normal responses.
I would really like to see your research notes Mr. Medic. I’m once again willing to put money that if you talk to an actual Psychiatrists they would struggle to justify your claim that these horror movies are using classical conditioning to promote rape. Let’s look at this Classic Condition as it’s described is basically the Pavlov’s experiment. Where dogs would get a treat and hear a bell… Pavlov was able to get the dogs to salivate eventually just by the sound of the bell, because he conditioned the dogs to associate the bell with the treat…
So Medic, you’re trying to tell me that because filmmakers show me boobs while a girl is being impaled… I will “get aroused” eventually by just the impaled because I will associate it with boobs.
Um, I really don’t think it works that way. It would be foolish to try to argue that the amount of T&A in horror movies are there for any other reason than gratuitous sex and has become part of the campiness of the genre. To try to make a point that the INTENT behind showing these breasts is to provoke an association between breasts and violence… um I think you’re reaching there sir. I like boobs. I also enjoy watching Jason beat someone to death using their friend as a melee weapon… the day I end up getting a hard on because of seeing a grisly death on film is the day I seek professional help and I am fairly certain the cause would NOT be horror movies.
If you know anything about film and decide to talk to someone who understands filmography, you’ll get an answer a lot more down to earth, and dare I say accurate. The cheesiness of the scantily glad girl running from Jason in the opening is meant to be a self-parody of the series. That’s the issue here, both series were a bit of a joke by the end where there was more cheese and camp than legit fear. This seen is meant to be a parody of that cheesiness that we miss so much from 80’s horror.
But of course, you didn’t know Freddy was a child murderer, so how could I expect you to understand subtle tones like this… NEXT!
This typical promotion of rape is bad enough. But Freddy Vs. Jason is even worse for two reasons. First is the age of the victims. The horror movie ethic used to be that young adult women were fair game, but children at least were off-limits. Now even defenseless children are under attack by the filmmakers.
First.. the age of the victims chronologically BEGAN with the children and only became teens because the children Freddy wanted to kill when he was mortal grew into teenagers. Children were never off-limits in this series.. like I keep saying Freddy was a Child Murderer, that’s his thing! Also, the promotion of rape. If you actually decided to watch the Dream master. Amanda Kruger (Freddy’s mom) reveals his origin. Freddy Kruger is the bastard son of 100 maniacs, Kruger was a nun at an asylum and ended up being locked in overnight with 100 inmates who raped her, and that’s how Freddy came to be.
Not quote the promotion of Rape if you take a look at it.. in fact, the scene where you see her locked in the room is probably one of the most disturbing images of the entire series… once again, not that you’d know this since you still are in shock that he’s a child murderer.
The second reason has to do with style. The other slasher movies were usually meant to be scary. We were asked to associate violence against women with feelings of fear as well as arousal. Freddy Vs. Jason, however, is presented in a cartoonish style, and I couldn’t find a single scare. The film resembles nothing so much as one of those comic books that offers Superman Vs. the Hulk or Batman Vs. the Flash. Like these comic books, Freddy Vs. Jason offers two well-known characters testing their super-powers against one another. Jason has super-strength (like the Hulk) and the power to survive anything (like Wolverine). Freddy also cannot be killed, and he has the power to control dreams.
Ah yes, I love it when people who have no idea what they are talking about try to make something sound hip and cool. I don’t know about you guys but when we think about classic heroes clashing and fighting in comics, Superman Vs Hulk comes to mind and DEFINITELY Batman Vs The Flash… Batman Vs The Flash…
Also, the super powers. Um, Jason cannot be killed because “hell would not take him” not because he has a healing factor. Jason is essentially a ‘roided Zombie. That’s a bit different from a mutants healing factor.. and Freddy can EASILY be killed. That’s the whole point of Mr. Kruger is that he’s a demon of dreams, but if you get him in the real world he can be vanquished just like any other man. (Albeit in FvJ there’s a bit super human elements but I’ll touch on those when the video review is done. FvJ is NOT a good movie, but it’s just for reasons other than Mr. Medic would like to explain)
Freddy Vs Jason wasn’t meant to be played up as a straight horror, it was more of a action-satire of the genre. So yes, comic-book-ish was the exact setting they were going for.
Alright alright I’m sorry. I’m knit picking now. This particular part isn’t really offensive, it just made me laugh a little. I’ll move on now.
Jason wears a mask while displaying his powers. Freddy, in this installment, looks like the man-in-a-mask that actor Robert Englund actually is. (In A Nightmare on Elm Street 5, one attack scene actually depicted Freddy Kruger as a comic book character.) And like comic books, Freddy Vs. Jason is aimed primarily at immature males who cannot get dates. (Englund once said he believed the reason his character was so popular was because, “I kill that girl who wouldn’t go to the prom with you.”)
First, I really want to know where this quote comes from. I have never heard it before, nor was I able to locate it anywhere online. I’m not overly confident that such a quote exists. Anyway, even if there was such a line this whole line is offensive. Freddy Vs Jason bring primarily targeted at immature males who cannot get dates. Mr. Medic I don’t know how old you are, however I’m willing to bet you were well out of your teens when that article was written. Hell in my experience with teens.. y’know since I was one when this movie came out is that it is the immature ones that actually GET the dates.
The way high school works, the dumb, immature start sports captain is the one that gets the date, not the too-smart-for-his-own-good obese kid in the corner… even if he is nice, and funny, and cari… *ahem* sorry.
Critic Fred Topel wrote, “This isn’t a horror movie with a human protagonist against a monster. It’s a movie where the monsters are the protagonists.”(1) Indeed, the film’s opening (which includes the attack on the child) is narrated by Freddy, increasing the audience’s identification with the child-abuser rather than asking audiences to see things from the child’s perspective.
I know this isn’t you writing it Bill, but I just wanted to give an alternative view on Topel’s quote here. I wouldn’t consider both monsters to be the protagonist. If you look at the script the protagonist of this would be leaned more towards Jason, with Freddy as an antagonist. Freddy is the puppet master using an image of Jason’s mother to lure him to Springwood, then confronting the monster when he no longer needs him. Jason isn’t the chivalrous type obviously and will kill everything around him but this film plays him up as the manipulated pitbull that doesn’t know any better. His only instinct is to kill, so in the end the intended victims are able to cut the puppeteers stings and watch as the battle ensues.
Anyway, I just wanted to put that viewpoint out there. I can’t argue that this movie really is not about the human characters at all (even if they tried to shoe-horn in a convoluted story about Laurie’s mother.) This movie is about the two titans clashing.
The film not only suggests sexual assault on children, it portrays such crimes as the work of a cool and fun superhero, not the scary act of a villain. It trivializes crimes against children by putting them in the context of a goofy cartoon masquerading as a horror movie. This film encourages us to respond to child-abuse with laughter rather than outrage or demands for justice.
To be fair, attacking children is only a small part of the film. Most of the film has our two homicidal superheroes killing teenagers — which isn’t anything to be happy about, either, though it is what we are used to. The child-molester element may take only a minute or so of screen time, but why is it here at all?
There are plenty of movies and novels that offer fun scares and gross-outs without attacking children. This film does not deserve our money.
Back to this again? Really? Actually to the credit of the series they seem to go out of their way to make sure Freddy is referred to as child murderer.. not molester (it’s the ignorant audience at large that draws that connection.) There are movies that are supposed to teach of that Child murdering is a bad thing but seriously… do we really NEED a movie to tell us that?
If you do, Medic, I seriously hope you have someone screening the films you watch in future. See this is what really burns me. Nightmare on Elm Street, and Freddy Kruger in general is NOT intended to be some kind of highlight of the child murders.. in fact even in the original you only find out 3/4’s of the way through the movie what Kruger did, and it’s only told as exposition by Nancy’s drunken mother after a lot of teens die.
Freddy Kruger is a cautionary tale about the darker side of vengeance and a cautionary tale about taking law into your own hands. The parents of Elm St burned this man alive and covered up the murder. This action was done with such a degree of hatred and rage, that it manifested within Kruger himself and through demonic intervention he was able to make good on his vow that he will continue his murders in the dreams of the children so the parents could not stop him.
That’s the point… it was the anger and rage of the parents that brought this pure evil into the world.
The issue in this isn’t OMGZ… HE’S HURTING THE CHILDREN!!!!….. It’s more about caution towards letting anger and vengeance dictate actions. Instead of just finding another way to deal with Kruger, they scorched him and made the problem that much worse.
*gasps* OMG, THIS MOVIE ABOUT THE CHILD KILLER COMING BACK IN THE DREAMS OF THE CHILDREN DEPICTS POSSIBLE CHILD ABUS.. OHHH NOOOOO..
Thank You Bill Medic. No matter how bad and unsatisfied I am with my writing, I know I will never and can never sound as uninformed as you did in this body of work. I just wish I saw this 8 years ago when you posted it, when it was relevant.