Editorials
[It Came From the ‘80s] ‘Friday the 13th Part VIII: Jason Takes Manhattan’: 30 Years After Jason’s Maiden Voyage
With horror industry heavy hitters already in place from the 1970s, the 1980s built upon that with the rise of brilliant minds in makeup and effects artists, as well as advances in technology. Artists like Rick Baker, Rob Bottin, Alec Gillis, Tom Woodruff Jr., Tom Savini, Stan Winston, and countless other artists that delivered groundbreaking, mind-blowing practical effects that ushered in the pre-CGI Golden Age of Cinema. Which meant a glorious glut of creatures in horror. More than just a technical marvel, the creatures on display in ‘80s horror meant tangible texture that still holds up decades later. Grotesque slimy skin to brutal transformation sequences, there wasn’t anything the artists couldn’t create. It Came From the ‘80s is a series that will pay homage to the monstrous, deadly, and often slimy creatures that made the ‘80s such a fantastic decade in horror.
It took the eighth entry in the mega-popular Friday the 13th series to take Jason Voorhees out of his beloved slaying ground, Crystal Lake. Granted, Jason wasn’t even in two of those movies, and he technically made his first kill in Alice Hardy’s apartment – outside Camp bounds – in Friday the 13th Part II. Even still, after six films that included the unstoppable killing machine, it became clear that the easiest way to survive would be to simply avoid going near the vicinity of Crystal Lake. So, what if Jason Voorhees hitched a ride out of Crystal Lake and wound up in the most densely populated area possible? Thirty years ago, he did just that when Jason Takes Manhattan released into theaters on July 28, 1989.
After the release of Friday the 13th Part VII: The New Blood, there were three different story ideas for where its sequel could go by the cast and crew. Director John Carl Buechler envisioned a rematch between Tina Shepard (Lar Park Lincoln) and the killer, Lincoln wrote a version that had Tina working as a psychologist for troubled girls, and costar Kevin Spirtas wrote a version where he had been the killer all along. Instead, the execs tapped Friday the 13th: The Series writer Rob Hedden to write and helm the eight entry. Hedden’s first order of business was to get out of Crystal Lake, coming up with two options: Jason on a cruise ship and Jason in New York City. Those options were combined into one story, but it was the lower budget that meant production couldn’t really afford to shoot much in the city and forever skewed Jason’s actual taking of Manhattan. Nevermind that, save for certain scenes and shots, most of Manhattan was really Vancouver in disguise.
In a way, it’s fitting that most of the runtime is spent onboard the SS Lazarus- it probably took the crew a while to figure out how to transport the passengers from a lake to New York City via boat anyhow. And it gave plenty of time for Jason Voorhees to find new ways to slaughter everyone on board. Unfortunately, the MPAA was still not a fan of Voorhees’ work, and any gore was pretty much cut out entirely. Which makes Jason Take Manhattan the least bloody (and tamest R-rating) of the bunch. Good thing Kane Hodder reprised his role of the horror icon.
The series has tweaked and changed Jason’s appearance a lot over the years, from hockey masks to clothes, but the biggest change in this sequel was to the face underneath the mask. Handled by special makeup effects creator Jamie Brown (Superman), it was Hedden who decided to add toxic waste to the mix. In the climactic showdown between final girl Rennie (Jensen Daggett) and Jason in the sewers, she throws toxic waste in his face, melting some of the mask and the rotted flesh beneath. It was specifically designed to have the chemicals react with the makeup to give that bubbly, melty effect. Jason was also consistently coated in slimy to give that waterlogged, melted aesthetic, too. Yet, none of it was as cool as his rotted face from The New Blood.
The standout kill of the entire film, of course, is the decapitation of Julius Gaw (V.C. Dupree). Once the remaining survivors make it to land in the third act, Julius challenges Jason to a boxing match on a rooftop. He wears himself out as the undead killer takes punch after punch (Dupree really did let loose on Hodder), and Jason knocks his head off in one swing. Three dummy heads were constructed for various tasks- closeups, flying through the air, etc. If you think this death is goofy, well, it could’ve been much cheesier. Hedden wanted this boxing match to be set inside Madison Square Garden.
Jason Takes Manhattan was heavily marketed around the icon being in New York City. From trailers to artwork that had him slashing through “I Love New York” logos (that stirred up its own controversy), the expectation that this would feature an urban set slasher led to utter deflation at the truth. This, paired with the film’s release in close proximity to A Nightmare on Elm Street 5: The Dream Child, meant Jason Takes Manhattan was one of the summer’s biggest disappointments. Between the MPAA’s overzealousness against gore, the budgetary limitations, the lack of Jason’s ability to take anything except a long boat ride to the sewers of New York City (Vancouver), and the marketing woes that followed, his boxing match with Julius seems representative of the film as a whole. Poor Jason really took a beating, ultimately. 30 years removed; Jason Takes Manhattan is a maligned sequel that also demonstrates the “anything goes” spirit of the decade. At least it opened the door for Jason to venture into space and nightmares over a decade later.
Having grown up in a religious family, Christian movie night was something that happened a lot more often than I care to admit. However, back when I was a teenager, my parents showed up one night with an unusually cool-looking DVD of a movie that had been recommended to them by a church leader. Curious to see what new kind of evangelical propaganda my parents had rented this time, I proceeded to watch the film with them expecting a heavy-handed snoozefest.
To my surprise, I was a few minutes in when Denzel Washington proceeded to dismember a band of cannibal raiders when I realized that this was in fact a real movie. My mom was horrified by the flick’s extreme violence and dark subject matter, but I instantly became a fan of the Hughes Brothers’ faith-based 2010 thriller, The Book of Eli. And with the film’s atomic apocalypse having apparently taken place in 2024, I think this is the perfect time to dive into why this grim parable might also be entertaining for horror fans.
Originally penned by gaming journalist and The Walking Dead: The Game co-writer Gary Whitta, the spec script for The Book of Eli was already making waves back in 2007 when it appeared on the coveted Blacklist. It wasn’t long before Columbia and Warner Bros. snatched up the rights to the project, hiring From Hell directors Albert and Allen Hughes while also garnering attention from industry heavyweights like Denzel Washington and Gary Oldman.
After a series of revisions by Anthony Peckham meant to make the story more consumer-friendly, the picture was finally released in January of 2010, with the finished film following Denzel as a mysterious wanderer making his way across a post-apocalyptic America while protecting a sacred book. Along the way, he encounters a run-down settlement controlled by Bill Carnegie (Gary Oldman), a man desperate to get his hands on Eli’s book so he can motivate his underlings to expand his empire. Unwilling to let this power fall into the wrong hands, Eli embarks on a dangerous journey that will test the limits of his faith.
SO WHY IS IT WORTH WATCHING?
Judging by the film’s box-office success, mainstream audiences appear to have enjoyed the Hughes’ bleak vision of a future where everything went wrong, but critics were left divided by the flick’s trope-heavy narrative and unapologetic religious elements. And while I’ll be the first to admit that The Book of Eli isn’t particularly subtle or original, I appreciate the film’s earnest execution of familiar ideas.
For starters, I’d like to address the religious elephant in the room, as I understand the hesitation that some folks (myself included) might have about watching something that sounds like Christian propaganda. Faith does indeed play a huge part in the narrative here, but I’d argue that the film is more about the power of stories than a specific religion. The entire point of Oldman’s character is that he needs a unifying narrative that he can take advantage of in order to manipulate others, while Eli ultimately chooses to deliver his gift to a community of scholars. In fact, the movie even makes a point of placing the Bible in between equally culturally important books like the Torah and Quran, which I think is pretty poignant for a flick inspired by exploitation cinema.
Sure, the film has its fair share of logical inconsistencies (ranging from the extent of Eli’s Daredevil superpowers to his impossibly small Braille Bible), but I think the film more than makes up for these nitpicks with a genuine passion for classic post-apocalyptic cinema. Several critics accused the film of being a knockoff of superior productions, but I’d argue that both Whitta and the Hughes knowingly crafted a loving pastiche of genre influences like Mad Max and A Boy and His Dog.
Lastly, it’s no surprise that the cast here absolutely kicks ass. Denzel plays the title role of a stoic badass perfectly (going so far as to train with Bruce Lee’s protégée in order to perform his own stunts) while Oldman effortlessly assumes a surprisingly subdued yet incredibly intimidating persona. Even Mila Kunis is remarkably charming here, though I wish the script had taken the time to develop these secondary characters a little further. And hey, did I mention that Tom Waits is in this?
AND WHAT MAKES IT HORROR ADJACENT?
Denzel’s very first interaction with another human being in this movie results in a gory fight scene culminating in a face-off against a masked brute wielding a chainsaw (which he presumably uses to butcher travelers before eating them), so I think it’s safe to say that this dog-eat-dog vision of America will likely appeal to horror fans.
From diseased cannibals to hyper-violent motorcycle gangs roaming the wasteland, there’s plenty of disturbing R-rated material here – which is even more impressive when you remember that this story revolves around the bible. And while there are a few too many references to sexual assault for my taste, even if it does make sense in-universe, the flick does a great job of immersing you in this post-nuclear nightmare.
The excessively depressing color palette and obvious green screen effects may take some viewers out of the experience, but the beat-up and lived-in sets and costume design do their best to bring this dead world to life – which might just be the scariest part of the experience.
Ultimately, I believe your enjoyment of The Book of Eli will largely depend on how willing you are to overlook some ham-fisted biblical references in order to enjoy some brutal post-apocalyptic shenanigans. And while I can’t really blame folks who’d rather not deal with that, I think it would be a shame to miss out on a genuinely engaging thrill-ride because of one minor detail.
With that in mind, I’m incredibly curious to see what Whitta and the Hughes Brothers have planned for the upcoming prequel series starring John Boyega…
There’s no understating the importance of a balanced media diet, and since bloody and disgusting entertainment isn’t exclusive to the horror genre, we’ve come up with Horror Adjacent – a recurring column where we recommend non-horror movies that horror fans might enjoy.
Looking for New Episodes of “Chucky” on Peacock? Here’s What Changed
‘Mountain Man’ – Joe Manganiello Will Battle Zombies in Upcoming Horror Movie
‘The Blair Witch Project’ – Original Stars Release a Statement Asking Lionsgate for Residuals & Recognition
‘Trap’ – Official Trailer Previews a Wild New Horror Experience from M. Night Shyamalan
‘The Exorcism’ – Russell Crowe Stars in Horror Movie Formerly Titled ‘The Georgetown Project’
You must be logged in to post a comment.