Freddy vs Jason (2003) from Johnny Web (Uncle Scoopy; Greg Wroblewski)
Man, I dropped a bundle on this match. Kruger was a heavy favorite, but I bet on him to cover the spread, and the underdog Jason won a hard-fought contest - by a head, if you catch my drift.

Rumor has it that Kruger bet a bundle on Jason and took a dive. Isn't that just so typically evil? I should have suspected a problem when I saw Kruger talking to Pete Rose.

My money will be on Jason in the upcoming Rocky vs Jason, cuz Stallone is gettin' old.

NUDITY REPORT
  • Opening sequence - a nude skinny dipper, played by Odessa Munroe. Breasts and buns.
  • Shower sequence - clear breast view, but shot from an overhead camera, so neither face nor lower body are seen. The character is played by Katharine Isabelle, but some sources said that the the shower scene was performed by a body double.
  • Later, there was a brief look at a camper's breasts.

DVD info from Amazon

  • Audio Commentary with Ronny Yu, Robert Englund, and Ken Kirzinger

  • Deleted and Alternate scenes with commentary (including original opening & closing)

  • Behind the Scenes Coverage including screenwriting, set design, make up, stunts and photography

  • Visual Effects Exploration

  • Storyboards and Galleries

  • Ill Nino "How Can I Live" Music Video

  • Script-to-Screen & Trivia viewing modes

  • Cutting Room Floor - make your own fight scene

  • Killer sound bites

  • Weblinks

  • Full-screen and widescreen anamorphic formats

  • Number of discs: 2
I suppose that everything you need to know about this movie can be summed up in the Yahoo summary. Critics Grade: C. (Yahoo scores rarely go any lower) . Members score: A- (Yahoo scores rarely go any higher).

It is not the kind of movie which Newspaper critics love. A formulaic genre movie with no real attempt at crossover appeal, it is a shallow Hollywood trifle to the more intellectual reviewers. The British reviews were scathingly harsh, averaging less than one star out of four, according to The Guardian's summary. Audiences don't care about the same things. They go to movies like this to see teenagers get carved up in new and nasty ways by super-villains, and then to see buckets of blood flow when the baddies turn on one another. This puppy took in $82 million at the box office.

Some of the genre film websites really liked it, citing as reasons:

  • the excitement of the final battle scene between the monsters
  • buckets of blood and guts
  • the comedy provided by Freddy's wisecracks and a stoner dude. ("Whoa, that goalie dude is pissed"). The stoner seemed to think he was in "Freddy vs Jason Mewes".

The Critics Vote

  • James Berardinelli 2/4.

The People Vote ...

  • IMDB summary. IMDb voters score it 6.6/10, Yahoo voters score it an A-.
  • Box Office Mojo. It was budgeted at $30 million for production, and the distribution/advertising costs are estimated around $25 million. It did $82 million at the box office.'

And in the UK ...

  • General UK consensus, as estimated by The Guardian: less than one star out of four (2.1 out of 10). Mail 2/10, Telegraph 2/10, Independent 1/10, Times 2/10, Sun 1/10, Express 4/10, Mirror 1/10, BBC 2/5
The meaning of the IMDb score: 7.5 usually indicates a level of excellence equivalent to about three and a half stars from the critics. 6.0 usually indicates lukewarm watchability, comparable to approximately two and a half stars from the critics. The fives are generally not worthwhile unless they are really your kind of material, equivalent to about a two star rating from the critics, or a C- from our system. Films rated below five are generally awful even if you like that kind of film - this score is roughly equivalent to one and a half stars from the critics or a D on our scale. (Possibly even less, depending on just how far below five the rating is.

My own guideline: A means the movie is so good it will appeal to you even if you hate the genre. B means the movie is not good enough to win you over if you hate the genre, but is good enough to do so if you have an open mind about this type of film. C means it will only appeal to genre addicts, and has no crossover appeal. (C+ means it has no crossover appeal, but will be considered excellent by genre fans, while C- indicates that it we found it to be a poor movie although genre addicts find it watchable). D means you'll hate it even if you like the genre. E means that you'll hate it even if you love the genre. F means that the film is not only unappealing across-the-board, but technically inept as well. Any film rated C- or better is recommended for fans of that type of film. Any film rated B- or better is recommended for just about anyone. We don't score films below C- that often, because we like movies and we think that most of them have at least a solid niche audience. Now that you know that, you should have serious reservations about any movie below C-.

Based on this description, this is a C+. Many genre sites loved it and the box office was excellent, so it clearly had both popular and genre-specific cult appeal. God only knows why. At any rate, I'm not the right guy to judge it, because violence and gore don't really interest me, so really good violence is not that much better than mediocre violence. The guys who love violence said it was really good.

Return to the Movie House home page