Type in any movie or show to find where you can watch it, or type a person's name.

User Reviews for: Friday the 13th Part 2

Gimly
/10  6 years ago
_Friday the 13th_ creators couldn't have known what they were about to unleash in the now-infamous Jason Voorhees, and even though _Part 2_ is certainly not the strongest example of the character, it was the first time we got to really see him do his thing, and that's huge.

_Final rating:★★★ - I liked it. Would personally recommend you give it a go._
Like  -  Dislike  -  0
Please use spoiler tags:[spoiler] text [/spoiler]
LarZieJ
8/10  3 years ago
"I told the others, they didn't believe me. You're all doomed. You're all doomed."

Ted gets it. Just stay in a bar until everything blows over. Have yourself a good time, drink a few nice tasting beers and just enjoy your evening. You will not have to deal with Jason.

Anyway Friday the 13th Part 2 has Jason making his debut as a killer. He's not the Jason we know today which is what I love about this one. He has watched the the Town that Dreaded Sunshine and thought it would be a good look to use a sack to cover his face. He kept his love for final jump scares. His kills might have been more brutal but we never know because most was lost in the editing room. He has his best battle with a final girl in Ginny (Amy Steel). Getting kicked in the balls and being attacked with a chainsaw? Goo Ginny!!! Anyway I do get why Jason got more dangerous in the sequels. Jason didn't make Ginny wet her pants but a few little rats did.

Friday the 13th Part 2 has more teenagers being horny, having character, doing teenage stuff and all having a blast before their lives were cut short.

Part 2 is still such a fun rewatch and I love how Ginny battles Jason and thinking things through (acting like she's Jason's mummy). And we are all happy that Muffin survived! Am I right?

Ps. Crazy Ralph won't be there to warn any more teenagers.
Like  -  Dislike  -  0
Please use spoiler tags:[spoiler] text [/spoiler]
JPV852
/10  3 years ago
Since I already watched the first film last month, decided in celebration of the day, re-watched Part 2 and still highly entertaining though pretty tame by today's standards. Thought the cast was also a bit better than the first. Still has scenes that make little sense (how exactly did Jason find Alice?) but was fun nevertheless. **3.75/5**
Like  -  Dislike  -  0
Please use spoiler tags:[spoiler] text [/spoiler]
$hubes
4/10  2 years ago
Bad awful and awful bad...like the original, I can't even give this one my _"It's a bit dated by today's standards but still worth watching..."_ defense. Because it isn't. Horribly horribly terrible. Bad acting, bad EVERYTHING. At one time, I thought it was funny to watch the gravity-defying scene where "Mark" gets an axe buried in his forehead hard enough to send his wheelchair-bound dead body bouncing backward down the stairs... **_without once ever flipping over backward_** but now, it's just not even amusing anymore; it's just STUPID. It's completely awful acting, awful directing, awful storyline...awful EVERYTHING. This does not even belong in the _"So Bad It's Good"_ category. It's just atrocious. If there is anything good that CAN be said about this one, it's that it introduced Jason to us...and for all too short a season, Jason was the most terrifying killer to stalk the horror screens. He was the ultimate hunter/killer, wreaking nightmarish vengeance on those campers whom he had witnessed kill his beloved mother. Sadly, however, _Friday the 13th Part 2_ was the beginning - and ending - of Jason's reign of terror; after this, he becomes a parody, a laughingstock of the horror screen. A joke, and something that becomes almost laughable. I wouldn't recommend this to ANYONE; it doesn't fall into any category except "BORING"...so I guess if you're really into boring, uninteresting movies that will make you angry at yourself for wasting an hour and a half, then yeah, give this one a go. Okay, there is that one positive thing that can be said about this: At least it's only an hour and a half that you're wasting.
Like  -  Dislike  -  0
Please use spoiler tags:[spoiler] text [/spoiler]
Wuchak
/10  5 years ago
***Serious retread of the first film with some differences***

I'm fan of the "Friday the 13th" franchise even though I’m not a gorehound and only occasionally watch slasher flicks. It has nothing to do with nostalgia since I didn't become a fan until I I saw 1985's "Friday the 13th Part V: A New Beginning" on TV one night in the late 90s. I think I like these movies because they typically involve young people in a fun camp-type environment in the woods; the presence of an unstoppable killer, who increasingly becomes a hideous monster over the course of the series, adds an air of danger and suspense. Include scores of gorgeous females and various filming locations around North America and you have a fabulously entertaining franchise.

Released in 1981, one year after the first film, "Part II" is basically a retread with different characters, a different killer and a different camp on the same lake, not far from "Camp Blood," i.e. Camp Crystal lake. In reality, the film was shot on an entirely different location; specifically Kent, Connecticut.

It's interesting how none of the films were shot at the same location even though, typically, the location in the story is the general vicinity of Camp Crystal Lake. The locations of the films in the series include northern New Jersey (I), Connecticut (II), Southern Cal (III, IV, V & IX), Georgia (VI), Alabama (VII), British Columbia (VIII & XI), New York City (VIII), Toronto (X & XI) and Texas (XII).

It's the camp-like settings of most of the franchise and the unrelenting monster that is Jason Voorhees that especially sets "Friday the 13th" apart from similar franchises.

Concerning the tone, the first two films are serious in nature with the expected antics of youths on vacation in the woods, but the series introduced a campy element in Part III, which plagued several subsequent entries (V, VI, IX & X) until the reboot in 2009. Not that I'm complaining much, as these films are only quasi-believable anyway; still, I prefer the serious tone. Speaking of which, the only thing questionable about the first film, as far as realism goes, is how the killer is able to throw an adult corpse through a window or hang a body from a door, etc. But I suppose these things can be attributed to the powerful psycho Voorhees gene (or the demon thing disclosed in 1993’s “Jason Goes to Hell”).

Many people find these films scary and shocking and the first two movies have some chilling atmospherics, some of the others as well, but, with the exception of the 2009 reboot, I don't find these movies particularly scary. They're sometimes creepy, sometimes suspenseful, sometimes exciting and always fun & entertaining, but not scary. In fact, I usually bust out laughing at the inevitable death scenes. There are numerous jump-scares, of course, but that's not what I'm talking about.

Part II doesn't overstay its welcome at a mere 87 minutes. It introduces the adult Jason Voorhees, but he's noticeably smaller in stature and more human than in later sequels. A couple of times the main protagonist, Ginny (Amy Steel), is able to deter him fairly easily (like opening a car door or kicking him in the groin). Speaking of Ginny, she's a fine heroine in the manner of Alice in the first film and Pam in Part V. Kirsten Baker plays the requisite hottie, Terry, and the filmmakers don’t fail to highlight her beauty. Unfortunately, the ambiguity of the ending is inexplicable.

GRADE: A-

(If you wonder why I rate a film like this so highly, I'm grading it according to what it is: a slasher flick. No genre is beyond redemption or above contempt and this one delivers the goods).
Like  -  Dislike  -  0
Please use spoiler tags:[spoiler] text [/spoiler]
Back to Top