MovieChat Forums > Jason Goes to Hell: The Final Friday (1993) Discussion > Proves that Jason wasn't just a misunder...

Proves that Jason wasn't just a misunderstood manchild

posted 5 years ago by Wuchak (8077)
13 replies | jump to latest

Some object to "Jason Goes to Hell" on the grounds that Jason is supposedly a misunderstood manchild and this movie changes that. The only films fitting that model are Parts II, XI and the 2009 remake. Parts I, V, VI, VII, and VIII were more in line with the idea of Jason as a force of darkness & evil -- the curse on Crystal Lake or whatever. And Parts III and IV show him killing a pregnant girl, psychologically torturing the heroine, and attempting to kill a boy after slaying his mother, so he wasn't exactly Lenny from "Of Mice and Men" as these critics maintain.

Face it, although Jason may have been an innocent deformed child at one time, the seed of evil (possibly a demonic spirit) entered into his heart at some point and he increasingly became a hideous infernal monster and you have to give this entry credit for trying to fill in the bones with corpse flesh, whether you accept these revelations or not.

[–] GreenGoblinsOck8 (7393) 5 years ago

I still don't like the idea of Jason being a demon. Frankly the only good part of this movie is the end with Freddy.

[–] Wuchak (8077) 5 years ago

Jason's not a demon, as far as Mrs. Vorhees son goes; rather a demonic thing was attracted to Jason and entered him (possessed him) sometime after Jason saw his mother killed and went on his vengeful killing rampage. For comparison, rats are attracted to garbage and flies to excrement. Similarly, the demon-entity was attracted to Jason's hate & murder.

An alternative interpretation is that the demon-thing possessed Mrs. Vorhees after she became bitter and murderous. Once she died it just switched to her son, who copped the same hateful, slaying character as his mother.

When Creighton Duke refers to the diabolic-entity as "Jason" in the movie he doesn't mean it in the literal sense, he means it as the hellish creature that controlled him.

Another alternative is to simply not count Part IX as canonical.

[–] GreenGoblinsOck8 (7393) 5 years ago

Well I frankly don't. Everything in it betrays the previous movies.

[–] bobbydallas (8054) 5 years ago

I do respect part 9 for doing something pretty original with soo many sequels. Having said that.. it is my least favourite F13 film.

I would say part 9 (and maybe Jason VS freddy) are occurances in an alternate universe, not related at all to the previous movies like user commented above me.

[–] Wuchak (8077) 5 years ago

Everything in it betrays the previous movies.

Betrays them or helps explain them? For instance, the demonic-entity inside Jason's carcass would explain how Jason was able to function as a walking corpse, animated by a jolt of lightning or electricity. Such a thing could only be explained by a supernatural element.

But I understand your position; I know people who refuse to accept Part IX as canonical. It's all good.

[–] GreenGoblinsOck8 (7393) 5 years ago

Except why didn't the demon come out and possess others after he was killed in Part 4?

[–] Wuchak (8077) 5 years ago

I considered that (it's a good question). The evil-thing must've developed an attachment to Jason's body -- its "home" so-to-speak -- and consequently was buried with the corpse.

Also consider that the Underworld (aka "hell") is established as a reality in the series -- as implied in Parts IX and XI (wherein Freddy Krueger was in the nether realm) -- and therefore Satan is presumably also a reality. In the bible Satan is shown to have power over weather phenomena, e.g. Job 1:16,19. My point is that the demonic-entity and Satan would've been in league to carry out their directive to "kill, steal and destroy" and thus the devil could've orchestrated Jason's resurrection via lightning in Part VI. Hence, the demon-thing knew being buried with Jason's corpse wasn't the end.

I realize the various creators -- the writers/directors -- made everything up as the series progressed (they kept making sequels because they kept making money). I'm just theorizing based on the evidence of the franchise as a whole, trying to make it make coherent sense.

[–] GreenGoblinsOck8 (7393) 5 years ago

Part 5 wasn't Jason though. Part 5 was some paramedic whose son died at the beginning of the movie. Jason didn't come back til Part 6.

[–] Wuchak (8077) 5 years ago

I meant Part VI and edited the post; thanks for the correction.

[–] GreenGoblinsOck8 (7393) 5 years ago

It just occurred to me though with what you have said in this topic, you're implying that Jason was being controlled by a demon and therefore wasn't responsible for any of the deaths in the entire series. You're also implying that this movie Jason Goes to Hell isn't even really about Jason at all. But about a demon taking his form. In a way that is kind of betrayal to fans of Part 2-8.

[–] Wuchak (8077) 5 years ago

you're implying that Jason was being controlled by a demon and therefore wasn't responsible for any of the deaths in the entire series.

I'm not implying anything myself, I'm just theorizing based on the implications presented in the franchise itself, and especially the radical evidence revealed in Part IX "Jason goes to Hell," assuming we take it as canon.

As I pointed out earlier, the demonic thing was attracted to Jason and entered him -- possessed him -- sometime after Jason saw his mother killed and went on his vengeful killing rampage.

The same principle is at work with rats being attracted to garbage and flies to excrement. Similarly, the demon-entity was attracted to Jason's hate & murder after Mrs. Vorhees was killed. In other words, Jason wasn't just innocently walking along one day and this demonic thing suddenly possessed him; he was ALREADY walking in a dark spirit of bitter hostility & slaying.

Some kind of symbiotic relationship developed between the two, but obviously the demon completely took control at some juncture, probably in Part VI when he was resurrected from the grave via lightning (or maybe Part IV). At this point, since Jason's body was a decomposing corpse the literal Jason was gone for good and his body was functioning (im)purely via the hellish creature. Yet it seems that Jason -- or at least his body -- is resurrected at the end of Part IX. So maybe the creature was able to get Jason resurrected from the Underworld so that it could function with something other than a skeleton with a little flesh & decomposing tissue/organs.

When Creighton Duke refers to the diabolic-entity as "Jason," he doesn't mean it in the literal sense. He either means the hellish creature that controlled Jason or to both in the symbiotic sense.

As noted in my opening post, Jason increasingly became a hideous infernal monster as the series progressed; and this can be attributed to the demonic thing unveiled in this movie.

[–] GreenGoblinsOck8 (7393) 5 years ago

I see what you're saying. But honestly I don't consider Jason Goes to Hell canon. I feel the whole demon thing just doesn't work in connection with the older movies. The magic knife being the only thing that can kill him does betray the end of Part 4 since Jason would've been resurrected by said Demon when he was in the morgue. Though Jason having a sister, niece, and great niece isn't that contradictory since it was confirmed by the writers that it was supposed to be his father's kids through another marriage he had. So really it's more like his stepsister, step niece, and great step niece.

[–] Wuchak (8077) 5 years ago

I'm considering "Jason Goes to Hell" canon -- on this thread, at least -- because the demonic-entity with an attachment to, first, Jason and, then, Jason's carcass would explain how Jason was able to function as a walking corpse, animated by a jolt of lightning or electricity. This can only be explained by a supernatural element as mere physical electricity can't animate decomposed organs & muscles since they would no longer be function-able. This only worked with Frankenstein's monster because the body parts were still in usable condition.

The end of Part IV (and beginning of Part VI) can be explained on this grounds that this is when Jason -- the human being -- died whereas the infernal creature was still alive inside his body. It doesn't leave Jason's body until the beginning of Part IX when it enters the coroner in Youngstown. Since the diabolic thing is supernatural it takes a sacred relic of some sort to kill it, hence the knife.

The demon-entity developed some kind of attachment to Jason in their symbiotic relationship. In a perverse kind of way it preferred Jason as its "home." You could view them as two lost outcasts who found each other and 'clicked,' one natural and the other supernatural. Thus, at the end of Part IX, the creature uses it's 'pull' in the Underworld to get Jason released from Sheol (Hades) and resurrects him. *Voila* the thing has its "home" back.

All the pieces fit and hence Part IX successfully explains what would otherwise be unexplainable in the series. It's no doubt one of the lesser flicks in the franchise, but I respect it for this. Plus it DOES have several highlights which can't be denied, like Agent Marcus in the prologue.