Worst to First: Ranking the Sequels of 1988


11. Friday the 13th Part VII: The New Blood
Rotten Tomato Score: 30%
Domestic Gross: $19,170,001 

Place in Franchise: 7 of 10 (not counting Freddy Vs. Jason or the 2009 remake)
Years Since Last Movie: 2
Actors Replaced: Kane Hoder took over the role of Jason.  They brought in a new crop of kids for him to kill.
Summary: Friday the 13th started as a Halloween rip-off and the series followed a similar trajectory.  In 1984, sensing that the slasher craze was waning, the decision was made to kill of Jason once and for all.  But when The Final Chapter made enough money, they attempted to continue the series with a new killer in A New Beginning.  Fans wanted Jason back, so the sixth movie in the series was called Jason Lives.
But where do you go after killing your slasher and bringing him back from the dead?  The series would struggle with that question for years.  In 1988, the answer was to give one of the kids Jason stalks telekinetic powers.  Originally, Paramount was hoping to cross over Friday the 13th with the Nightmare on Elm Street franchise.  But New Line’s series was growing more popular while Jason’s relevance was fading.  Without Freddy to prop up interest in the series, they decided “why not make ‘Jason vs. Carrie’?”
The idea was to make a different kind of Friday the 13th, but Part VII performed just about as well as all the other movies in the series.  Future installments would grow increasingly desperate as Jason went to Manhattan, then to hell and finally into outer space before finally getting to square off against Freddy once both of their franchises were more or less kaput.  Like Halloween, Friday the 13th was part of a slasher movie reboot trend, but there hasn’t been much activity since the 2009 remake.

Next: Critters 2: The Main Course

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
jeffthewildman
6 years ago

None of the sequels were anywhere near great. A few were passable. I did like Rambo III better than First Blood Part 2, because it wasn’t overrun with all the jingoism that was so prevalent in that one.

jeffthewildman
6 years ago
Reply to  lebeau

Right. Although I did like it better, It’s not a movie I feel the urge to go back to. Of the four Ramboes, First Blood is the only one I re-visit every once in a while.

jeffthewildman
6 years ago
Reply to  jeffthewildman

You are correct about it being off the charts in terms of violence. It wasn’t the comic book violence of the 2nd and third either. It was stretch that R rating violence. I’d rank it lower than First Blood and very slightly ahead of III. But on the whole, Rambo could’ve stayed retired. Yeah, the speech at the end of First Blood is one aspect that should’ve been left out. It did indicate that jingoistic cartoon direction the series would take from that point on. ,

robbushblog
robbushblog
6 years ago

The only sequel in this whole thing that I like is THE DEAD POOL. What a year of stinky sequels!

robbushblog
robbushblog
6 years ago
Reply to  lebeau

I count 15 sequels from 1998, with slightly better choices overall. There are quite a few stinkers though.

robbushblog
robbushblog
6 years ago
Reply to  lebeau

I can’t wait until we do 2017 and cover its 40 sequels!

robbushblog
robbushblog
6 years ago
Reply to  lebeau

Ha ha! Lebeau, Jr.?

robbushblog
robbushblog
6 years ago

2017 had 21 sequels in the top 50 of highest box office grossers.

jestak2
Editor
6 years ago

Now this is a really thin crop of sequels. The Dead Pool is watchable, and some people find it at least better than the previous Dirty Harry film. I will probably get to Return to Snowy River some day, as I have always liked the first film in the series. Since I’m not really into horror films none of the horror franchise installments are familiar to me. And the remainder are mostly films that would induce me to turn the TV off if I stumbled into watching them—there aren’t even any of them that qualify as cheesy-fun movies.

Craig Hansen
Craig Hansen
6 years ago

This might be the worst batch of sequels that I have ever seen – and the fact that they all come from the same year is mindboggling. I would agree with what a couple other readers stated before, The Dead Pool is the only film on this list that is at least watchable. Far from great, but at least watchable. Oh, that reminds me, the bandmembers of Guns N’ Roses make a quick cameo, in the funeral scene if I remember correctly. You cannot miss Slash’s black tophat in the crowd.

Craig Hansen
Craig Hansen
6 years ago
Reply to  lebeau

A better year, sure, but no Guns N’ Roses cameos in funeral scenes either.

Craig Hansen
Craig Hansen
6 years ago

I have a deep, unbiding love for the original Arthur film; it’s such a sweetly charming comedy, and Dudley, Liza and John Gielgud are delightful in it, the Oscar wins and nominations (Gielgud, Dudley, Best Song and Screenplay) were all well earned in my eyes. Its one of those personal favorites that I always return to every few years. To be honest, I’ve always heard what a lousy movie Arthur 2: On The Rocks was and have just always avoided it like the plague. I figure why tarnish my appreciation for the original? Would it be hyperbole to suggest Caddyshack… Read more »

Craig Hansen
Craig Hansen
6 years ago
Reply to  lebeau

I didn’t learn about the original plan for Ramis to write and Rodney Dangerfield to star until more recently, and I have to admit at least on paper I kinda do wish that had happened. Who knows, maybe it would have worked, maybe it wouldn’t have. But I do know that Dangerfield was on fire in the original Caddyshack. Also, nothing could ever be worse than the actual Caddyshack II that we got, so there’s that too. What do you think Lebeau, could a sequel starring Rodney, written by Ramis, have possibly worked? What’s your opinion on that?

robbushblog
robbushblog
6 years ago

The only good thing about CADDYSHACK II was Dyan Cannon. She was sexy in it. That’s it though. It has no other quality.

0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x