Violet Edit

Please refrain from adding irrelevant and useless information to character's pages as you did with Violet. YouTuber's opinions on kills don't belong in character biographies. Thank you. PurpleFlyingV (talk) 17:13, February 2, 2018 (UTC)

It doesn't matter if other people have put that there it doesn't belong there. Why shouldn't it be there? Because it's not relevant or related to the character in any way. He's just a YouTuber he's just a guy with an opinion he's nothing to do with the film or the character at all. That's why his opinion shouldn't be listed. The page is nothing to do with critic's opinions. It's information on the character ONLY. PurpleFlyingV (talk) 17:56, February 2, 2018 (UTC)

Part 6 is NOT a direct sequel to Part 5Edit

“I basically skipped right past Part V,” McLoughlin said. “I picked up where things left off in Part IV and Tommy was a kid and he was institutionalized, and now, after all these years, he’s gotten out. If you saw Part V and you were still looking at it as a chronological piece, it still made sense. We actually tried to get John Shepherd to play Tommy, so there would be a continuation, but I did not want to approach the ambulance guy [Roy Burns] being Jason—all of that I didn’t make part of the mythology. I really wanted it to be Tommy just going back because he needed to see that he [Jason] was dead—another little borrowing from The Bride of Frankenstein, when the old guy wants to go down and make sure he sees The Monster’s burned bones so he can sleep at night after losing his son. So again, I borrowed—or stole [laughs]—a lot of those influences.” - Tom McLoughlin director of Jason Lives


There, straight from the horse's mouth. Part 6 is not a direct sequel, it was intended to ignore Part 5 completely. PurpleFlyingV (talk) 18:14, February 13, 2018 (UTC)

No it's NOT you idiot. THE MAN WHO WROTE AND DIRECTED THE FILM EVEN SAYS SO. It's a retcon sequel not a direct sequel. Quit being pathetic, I have proven you're wrong, just accept it. How can the guy who actually made the film be wrong and you right? PurpleFlyingV (talk) 18:26, February 13, 2018 (UTC)

Jason X Canon Status Edit

I know that many people hate Jason X. But just because they do, doesn't make the movie non-canon. For one, it's an official movie, made by the people who own the franchise, using real actors and actresses, and released publicly in theaters. So it's not some shaky cam fan film that only 10 people have seen. Honestly, if there was one film I would wish was non-canon, it's Freddy vs. Jason. Because the movie is mostly about Freddy, and Jason is treated like an afterthought. It should be named Nightmare on Elm Street 8: Freddy hires some guy in a hockey mask to be his hands for a while. They also made Jason stupider, much more reliant on his machete, and worst of all in my opinion, fired Kane Hodder as Jason, just because the director thought Jason should be taller than Freddy. Forget the fact that Kane is the one who has given Jason most of his personality, let's just make him tall and stupid.

However, on Jason X and Freddy vs. Jason, Sean S. Cunningham was the executive producer or a producer, which means the creator of Friday the 13th played an essential and integral part of both movies. To put it simply, God himself has decreed that Jason be resurrected by a child murdering piece of burnt jerky, before being frozen and ending up in space. So they are both canon.

That is why I think the non-canon category should be removed. Jason X, no matter how much people may wish it, is canon and part of the Jason Voorhees story.Gphoenix51 (talk) 11:19, March 1, 2018 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.