susprising when you considered she was the focus of number 4.
share*Spoilers*
I thought Jamie was the focus of part 4? Either way, Rachel was a huge part and one of my favorite characters, and I hated that they killed her off.
She served her purpose in #4. Same thing they did to Alice, the survivor of the first Friday the 13th.
shareJust realized how cold that sounds. What I should have said is they needed to add an element of disbelief. If Rachel were around and she knows Michael exists, it would limit his ability to function in the shadows
shareIt just sucks because of the way it's done. Both those characters get great chase scenes, but in their subsequent films, they are so quickly dispatched you don't really get enough of a reaction from a survivor that the killer is back. They react just like everyone else with a quick 2-3 second death scene.
I like how you get to see Kristin dismantle knowing Freddy is back in Nightmare on Elm Street 4 before she becomes one of his victims...hell Nancy gets to the end before she bites it in 3.
She should have died in this movie, but agree it was too quick. If you watch the documentary of making H4 & H5, the actress who played Rachel had a feeling she wouldn't make it through this movie when she first got a copy of the script. She should have died later in the movie, but not survive. Having her live really would have limited what Michael could have done to Jamie.
share