EDITORS’ INTRODUCTION
Thisspecialissuecelebratesthecomplexity,artistry,andculturalvalueoftheFridaythe
13thfranchise,anditdoessoagainstfourdecadesofreviewerswhohavedismissedand
decriedit.Indeed,thefirstessayoftheissueshowsprettystarklyhowwrongmainstream
filmreviewerscanbeabouthorrorfilm.In“‘It’sworthrecognizingonlyasanartefactof
ourculture:’CriticsandtheFridaythe13thFranchise(1980-2001),”ToddK.Plattssurveys
thosereviewsofthetenfilmsinthemainFridaythe13thfranchisethatappeared
inVariety,theLosAngelesTimes,andtheNewYorkTimes.Whatisapparentfromthis
fascinatingsurveyisthatmainstreamfilmcriticshavelittleinsightorimaginationwhenit
comestohorrorfilms.Toanyonewhoknowsthesetenfilms,inalltheirdiversity,itis
stunningthatcriticscanfindnothingtosaybutthesamethingaboutfilmafterfilm.It
seemsthesereviewersweren’twatching:theyhadthepurportedslasherformulasofixed
intheirheads(whileallthetimesayingthefilmsthemselvesdidnothingbutpurveythat
formula)thattheyfailedtoseehoweachfilmactuallyservedupinnovations.
Awatershedmomentinthehistoryofslasherfilmsandtheirreviewers,andFridaythe
13thinparticular,wastheinfamouscampaignlaunchedbyGeneSiskelandRogerEbertin
their1980SneakPreviewsTVbroadcast;inthis“specialepisode,”SiskelandEbertdevoted
almostthirtyminutestoexcoriatingwhattheycalled“women-in-danger”films.[i]Fridaythe
13th(1980)wasExhibitA–theprimeexampleofthisharmfulsubgenre,which,Siskeland
Ebertproclaimed,waslittlemorethanaviolentandnastybacklashagainstwomen’s
liberation.SiskelandEbertreturnedtoFridaythe13thmorethantoanyotherfilminthis
episode–threetimes–inordertoillustratetheirmajorpointsofdiscomfort.Theyshowthe
sceneinwhichAnnie(RobbiMorgan)getsaridetocampfromastranger,which,Siskeland
Ebertargued,illustratedhowthesefilmspunishwomenforanindependencethatwouldbe
celebratedinmen.TheyshowthesceneinwhichMarcie(JeannineTaylor)goestothe
bathroomrightafterhavingsexwithJack(KevinBacon)inordertodemonstratetheir
claimthatthefilmlinkedsexwithviolenceandconveyedthemessage,“Actthisway,young
women,andyou’reaskingfortrouble.”Andtheyendedbyscreeningtheopeningflashback
sceneofthefilm,theoriginalmurderoftwocampcounselors.Siskelusesthissceneto
supporthisassertionthatthewomen-in-dangerfilmcanbasicallybeboileddowntoone
image,“awomanscreaminginabjectterror.”
Generally,thediversityandcomplexityoftheessaysinthisspecialissue,alongwiththe
criticaltraditiononwhichitbuilds(whichyoucanseeinourbibliography),beliethe
argumentSiskelandEbertmake.However,CoryHasabeardconductedafascinating
overviewofthekillsintheFridaythe13thfranchise(all177ofthem!)andcomesupwith
someresults–aboutthegenderofthevictim,thegruesomenessofthedeaths,victim
penetration,victimobjectification,andhowlongthevictimisshowntobeinterror–that
maywelladdsupport,afterthefact,towhatSiskelandEbertclaimedin1980.[ii]Critics
writingaboutFridaythe13thshoulddefinitely,goingforward,reckonwithHasabeard’s
data,analysis,andconclusions.
SiskelandEbertclearlyfail,however,torecognizetheartistryofFridaythe13th.This
omissionisallthemorestrikinginthat,inthelastpartoftheirshow,theyshiftfrom
castigatingFridaythe13thandother“women-in-danger”filmstolavishingpraise
onHalloween(JohnCarpenter,1978).ThereviewersadmireCarpenter’sfilmforits
“artistryandcraftmanship”andforensuringthat“yourbasicsympathiesarealways
enlistedonthesideofthewoman.”SiskelandEbert’spraiseofHalloweenonlyhighlights
theirrefusaltoseeFridaythe13th’scomplexity,includinginthescenestheythemselves
adduceasevidenceofitsawfulexploitativeimpulses.Theydon’tacknowledge,forinstance,
thatthekillerofFridaythe13thisawoman,notasexuallyfrustratedman,thatthefilm
actuallygoestosomelengthstoelicitsympathyforAnnieand,later,forAlice(Adrienne
King),orthatthesceneinwhichMarcieisstalkedinthebathroomactuallyinvolvesa
seriesofcomplexandshiftingpoint-of-viewshots.FraserCoffeen’sessayinthisspecial
issuetracestheevolutionofthepoint-of-viewshot(specifically,thekiller’spoint-of-view
shot)withinthehorrorgenreinordertodemonstratehowFridaythe13thupends
audienceexpectations.SiskelandEbertareperhapsthefirsttoidentifywhatcriticslike
CarolJ.CloverandVeraDikawillsoonexplorefurther–thatinthesefilms,“weviewthe
scenethroughtheeyesofthekiller.”It’salmostasif,Ebertcontinues,“theaudienceis
beingaskedtoidentifywiththeattackersinthesemovies,andthatreallybothersme.”But
itisworthcomparingthediscussionSiskelandEberthaveaboutthesceneinwhichMarcie
isstalkedinthebathroom(17:30–19:35)toCoffeen’sanalysisofitsactualcomplexity.
“Artistrycanredeemanysubjectmatter,”Ebertsays.Butnotifyoustubbornlyrefuseto
seeit,notifyourpriorassumptionsblindyoutoit.
Hereisthe“WomeninDanger”episodeofSneakPreviews.YoucanseeSiskelandEbert’s
discussionofthescenefromFridaythe13th,inwhichMarcieisstalkedinthecamp
bathroom,at17:30-19:35.
To watch the video, click on the image.
Filmcriticshave,ofcourse,consistentlyfoundvalueintheslashersubgenreingeneraland
theFridaythe13thfilmsinparticular.Perhapsnocritichasdonemoretoshapethe
conversationaroundtheslasherfilmthanCarolClover,whotookfilmsthatwere,asshe
putit,“atthebottomofthehorrorheap,”andlaunchedacomplexanalysisoftheirgender
politics.[iii]Clovercoinedtheterm“FinalGirl”todescribethecharacterwhois“chased,
cornered,wounded;whomweseescream,stagger,fall,rise,andscreamagain”–whois
“abjectterrorpersonified.”Yetshesurvives.[iv]TheFinalGirlis,Cloverargued,bothfear
personifiedandtheheroofherownstory,thusservingastheambiguouslygenderedpoint
ofidentificationforbothfemaleandmaleviewers.ThroughtheFinalGirl,theslasherfilm
constitutes,Cloverclaims,“avisibleadjustmentinthetermsofgenderrepresentation.”[v]
Notsurprising,CloveradducestwoFinalGirlsfromFridaythe13thfilmstomakeher
argument–AlicefromthefirstandGinny(AmySteel)fromthesecond.[vi]
Thecontributionstothisspecialissuejoinanongoingandvibrantcriticalconversation,
then,aboutgenderintheslasherfilm.[vii]Andtheyjointhisconversationbyexploring
theFridaythe13thfilms,whichhave,toadaptClover’sphrase,foundthemselves“atthe
bottomofthe[slasher]heap,”languishingintheshadowof“better”films
likeHalloweenandTheTexasChainSawMassacre(TobeHooper,1974).Dustin
DunawayusesR.W.Connell’sMasculinitiesandJohnBowlby’sdescriptionofrelationship
attachmentstylesinordertoexploretheevolvingformationsofmasculinityinthefirst
fourFridaythe13thfilms,arguingthatPart2andPartIIIdoubleddownonthemasculine
typesfeaturedinthefirstfilm,whileTheFinalChapterdidsomethingnew.Dunawayends
byconsideringJasonasconventionalmasculinity’sabjectnegation.EthanRobles
continuesDunaway’srecognitionofthedistinctivenessofTheFinalChapterbutlooksnot
atTedandJimmybutattheimportantcharacterofTommyJarvis(CoreyFeldman).Indeed,
Roblesarguesthatthis1984installmentrepresentedthefirstincarnationofthe“Final
Boy”intheslashersubgenre.Finally,DavidRuisFisherdetailsthenarrativepotentialin
queeringtheFridaythe13thfilms–includingtakingupthecentralfactthatthefranchise
wasboomingduringthe1980s,attheheightoftheHIV/AIDSepidemic–andhowsucha
readingcreatesaconstructiveformofrepresentation.
Thenextsetofessaysinthisspecialissueofferreadingsofspecificentriesinthefranchise,
highlightingtheirnarrativeandaestheticinnovations;inmanycases,theseessaysconsider
howvariousFridaythe13thinstallmentsevinceanintriguinggenerichybridity.Wickham
ClaytonhasalreadyofferedanimportantanalysisofthecomplexityofFridaythe13thPart
V:ANewBeginning,[viii]andherehearguesforthedistinctivenessofPartIIIinthewaysit
presents“uncomfortabledeath”and,atthesametime,acomplicatedpolitics.Brian
FanellithentakesupFridaythe13thPartVI:JasonLives,exploringhowthisentryis
distinctiveinthewaysitdrawsontheconventionsofUniversal’sMonstermoviesfromthe
1930sand40s,mixingaGothicseriousnesswithasignificantcomedictouch.KevinJ.
Wetmore,Jr.alsoexploresthefranchise’sgenrehybridity,readingFridaythe13thPart
VIII:JasonTakesManhattanasverymuchakintothehigh-schoolsexcomedy/romance
(thinkTheBreakfastClub).Despitethefactthatittakesplace(mostly)onashipand
(partly)inManhattan,thisinstallmentiseverybitahigh-schoolfilm,Wetmore
argues.StellaCastelliappliesavaudevilleaestheticframeworktothetitularcharacters
inFreddyvsJasonand,indoingso,demonstrateshowtherelationshipbetweenthesetwo
iconiccharactersreadsaspurelyperformative.Lastly,extendingbeyondthefilms
themselves,CaitlinDuffyexplainshowFridaythe13th:TheGameincorporatesand
challengesnarrativeelementsofthefilminordertoexpandthestorytellingpotentialofthe
cinematicfranchise.
Thenexttwoessays,likethosebefore,eachtakeupaparticularFridaythe13thfilm,but
theybothdosointhelargercontextoftheecologicalimplicationsofthefranchise,
somethingthatdefinitelywarrantsfurtheranalysis.Fridaythe13thquiteclearlyand
repeatedlyassociatesJasonwithnature:heisassociatedwiththewater,withstorms,with
forest.Inhisbrilliantreadingofthefilm’srootsinMarioBava’sABayofBlood(1971)[ix],
AdamLowensteinarguesthatbothfilmsevinceanarrativedrivetoclearthelandscapeof
characters:“Thosehumanswhoselivesdisturbthelandscapearemethodicallyremoved,
untilonlythelandscapeitselfandatokenliving(orperhapsundead)presenceremains.”
Lowensteincallsthisthe“pleasureofsubtractivespectatorship,”anditencouragesthe
audienceto“integratethemselveswiththelandscape.”[x]Inthefirstfilm,Mrs.Voorheesis
theforceof“depopulation”–butthenJasontakesoverthetask.Jasonseemseerilybound
withnatureandinimicaltothehuman,embodyinganecologicalcritique.
J
asonJ.WallinexplorestheconnectionofJasonandnatureinaclosereadingofFridaythe
13th:TheFinalChapter,notingthatthe“risingsenseofdreadevokedthroughoutthebody
ofthefilmiscomposedlargelythroughthe‘inhumangaze’ofthecamerawithdrawnunder
thecoverofthewoods”–astrategyused,ofcourse,innumerousinstallmentsofthe
franchise.Wallinprovocatively,andconvincingly,coinstheterm“eco-stalker”andgoeson
toconnectthestrainofmonstrousnaturerunningthroughoutTheFinalChapterwith
consumerculture.MatthewJoneslocatesFridaythe13thPartVI:JasonLivesasasimilarly
ecogothictext,beginningbypointingouthowthisparticularentryinthefranchisewas
releasedintheimmediateaftermathoftheChernobylnucleardisaster.Jonesreassessesthe
iconicslasheras“aforceofmonstrousnature,theresultofmaterializedfearsstemming
fromenvironmentalpoisoningandmutation,”readingJasonLivesasa“collectiveecological
nightmare.”
ThelastsetofessaysaddressthefranchisemoregenerallyinrelationtoUSculture.Wade
NewhouseoffersaninsightfulanalysisofhowtheFridaythe13thfilmsdrawonmythsof
frontierviolenceandfemalesurvivalthathavelongbeenapartoftheAmericantradition.
NewhousespecificallyreadstheFridaythe13thfilms,especiallytheirFinalGirls,asa
continuationofMaryRowlandson’s1682captivitynarrativeandofCharlesBrockden
Brown’sWieland(1798),oneofthefirstgothicnovelspublishedintheUS.Kom
KunyosyingandCarterSoles’essayalsoreadstheFridaythe13thfilms–andJasonin
particular–withinenduringAmericantraditions,specificallythefigureofthehillbillyand
themorerecentlyemergentfigureofthe“berserker,”whichhasbecomeapowerfulsymbol
oftheRight.BrennanThomasexploreshowFridaythe13thPartIII,despiteits3D
gimmick,isatopicallyrelevantfilmexploringsocialissuesreflectiveofapost-Vietnam
America,specificallytheera’sdisenfranchisedanddisplacedyouth.Andfinally,Erin
HarringtonconsidersthereverberationsofthefirstfourFridaythe13thfilms,read
alongsideTheBaby-sitters’ClubSuperSpecial#2.Thisunlikelypairing,Harringtonargues,
discloseshowbothhavedemonstrablycontributedtoshapingviewsofAmerican
adolescence.
Someoftheseessaysarepersonal,someareacademic,someareboth,buttheyeachoffera
newwaytothinkaboutanimportanthorrorfranchisethathasbeengoingstrongforforty
years.Wehopeyouenjoythem!
Notes:
[i]EbertalsopublishedanarticlethatcoveredtheargumentsheandSiskelmadeontheir
show.[ii]Forothercontentanalysesoftheslasherfilmgenerally,seeCowanandO’Brien,Linzand
Donnerstein,Sapolsky,MolitorandLuque,andWeaver.[iii]Clover,21.[iv]Clover,35.[v]Clover,64.[vi]Clover,38,39-40.[vii]SeeDika,Lizardi,Pinedo,andRieserfordiscussionsofgenderintheslasherfilm.[viii]Clayton,37-50.[ix]Turnock(pp.183-96)alsoanalysesFridaythe13th’srelationshiptoBayofBlood.[x]Lowenstein,138.
Bibliography:
Budra,Paul.“RecurrentMonsters:WhyFreddy,MichaelandJasonKeepComingBack.”Part
Two:ReflectionsontheSequel,editedbyBudraandBettyA.Schellenberg,University
ofTorontoPress,1998.
Clasen,Mathias.WhyHorrorSeduces.OxfordUniversityPress,2017.
Clayton,Wickham.“UnderminingtheMoneygrubbers,or:HowILearnedtoStopWorrying
andLoveFridaythe13thPartV.”StyleandFormintheHollywoodSlasherFilm,
editedbyClayton,PalgraveMacmillan,2015,pp.37-50.
Clover,CarolJ.Men,Women,andChainSaws:GenderintheModernHorrorFilm.Princeton
UniversityPress,1992.
Conrich,Ian.“TheFridaythe13thFilmsandtheCulturalFunctionofaModernGrand
Guignol.”HorrorZone:TheCulturalExperienceofContemporaryHorrorCinema,
editedbyIanConrich,I.B.Tauris,2009.
Cowan,Gloria,andMargaretO’Brien.“GenderandSurvivalvs.DeathinSlasherFilms:A
ContentAnalysis.”SexRoles,23,1990,pp.187-96.
Dika,Vera.GamesofTerror:Halloween,Fridaythe13th,andtheFilmsoftheStalkerCycle.
FairleighDickinsonUniversityPress,1990.
Ebert,Roger.“WhyMovieAudiencesAren’tSafeAnymore.”AmericanFilm,vol.6,no.5,
March1981,pp.54-6.
Hills,Matt.“Para-Paracinema:TheFridaythe13thFilmSeriesasOthertoTrashand
LegitimateFilmCultures.”SleazeArtists:CinemaattheMarginsofTaste,Style,and
Politics,editedbyJeffreySconce,DukeUniversityPress,2007,pp.219-39.
Kvaran,KaraM.“’You’reAllDoomed!’ASocioeconomicAnalysisofSlasherFilms.”Journal
ofAmericanStudies,vol.50,no.4,2016,pp.953-70.
Linz,Daniel,andEdwardDonnerstein.“SexandViolenceinSlasherFilms:A
Reinterpretation.”JournalofBroadcastingandElectronicMedia,vol.38,no.2,1994,
pp.243-46.
Lizardi,Ryan.“Re-ImaginingHegemonyandMisogynyintheContemporarySlasher
Remake.”JournalofPopularFilmandTelevision,vol.38,no.3,2010,pp.113-21.
Lowenstein,Adam.“TheGiallo/SlasherLandscape:EcologiadelDelitto,Fridaythe13thand
SubtractiveSpectatorship.”ItalianHorrorCinema,editedbyStefanoBachieraand
RossHunter,EdinburghUniversityPress,2016,pp.127-44.
Nowell,Richard.BloodMoney:AHistoryoftheFirstTeenSlasherFilmCycle.Bloomsbury
Publishing,2010.
Petridis,Sotiris.“AHistoricalApproachtotheSlasherFilm.”FilmInternational,vol.12,
no.1,2014,pp.76-84.
Pinedo,IsabelCristina.RecreationalTerror:WomenandthePleasuresofHorrorFilm
Viewing.SUNYPress,2016.
Rieser,Klaus.“MasculinityandMonstrosity:CharacterizationandIdentificationinthe
SlasherFilm.”MenandMasculinities,vol.3,no.4,2001,pp.370-392.
Rockoff,Adam.GoingtoPieces:TheRiseandFalloftheSlasherFilm,1978-1986.McFarland,
2011.
Sapolsky,B.S.,F.Molitor,andS.Luque.“SexandViolenceinSlasherFilms:Reexaminingthe
Assumptions.”JournalismandMassCommunicationQuarterly,vol.80,no.1,2003,pp.28-
38.
Turnock,Bryan.“TheSlasherFilm.”StudyingHorrorCinema.Auteur,2019,pp.181-201.
Weaver,JamesB.III.“Are‘Slasher’HorrorFilmsSexuallyViolent?AContent
Analysis.”JournalofBroadcastingandElectronicMedia,vol.35,no.3,1991,pp.385-
92.
