Wes Craven's New Nightmare

[BlakeTyner]

What happens when an evil entity takes the form of movie icon Freddy Krueger? Apparently, Wes starts having bad dreams.

~BT

[Rich]

I think this is the absolute greatest sequel in the entire slasher genre. Wes Craven's New Nightmare is one of the most intelligent horror films I have ever seen. It takes a George Romero style poke at the media, pop culture, and censorship, of course using Freddy instead of zombies.

Wes Craven's New Nightmare is the Bride of Frankenstein of the slasher genre without a doubt.

My favorite quotes are:

1. "Pick a pet, for the rug rat, b*tch!"
2. "Hey Dillon! Ever play [flex blades] skin the cat?"
3. "Come here little piggy! I got some gingerbread for ya!"
4. "Mommy! Where's your mommy, piglet, huh!"

[CanadianFonzie]

this had one of the best ideas for a NOES film, it was all tied up in the end, which I found amazing, plus Heather Langenkamp was lookin' pretty hot in this one

[Rich]

Heather was not just hot, but genuinly beautiful. She still is too. She is such a beautiful woman.

[CanadianFonzie]

I haven't really seen her in anything recently to see if she's cute

I remember thinking she was cute right from seeing the first NOES film

[Rich]

She was featured on the infinifilm edition of the dvd in the making of the movie documentary. She defines beauty. She is a divine exemple of a work of art of nature.

I also find Amandy Wyss more beautiful now then she was when she made the movie. It is strange how that happens, some times.

[CanadianFonzie]

well I gotta find some way to see how Heather looks now than, lol, concidering I don't think I'll be getting the Infinifilm edition any time soon

[Rich]

Check local video stores. Maybe they rent the infinifilm edition.

Honestly, it is a worth while edition to get. The documentaires are awesome. The making of one show a lot of cut scenes. You get the alternate ending. The extras are much better then the Nightmare 1 extras in the box set.

[Wheatjedi]

I love this film soooo much! It's another one that I saw opening night. It's such a unique and interesting idea for a NOES "sequel" (although I don't really think of it as being a sequel). Englund as the "new" Freddy is just wonderful.

[Jigsaw]

This is my favorite NOES movie, and IMO the best Horror movie of the 1990s. It was a very fresh concept back in the day and was pulled off very well. Freddy also looks his coolest here and the movie restored him to his dark and scary roots after his humorous turn in NOES 4-6. I also love the final 20 or so minutes, inside Freddy's underground lair.

[Fan of Freddy]

There's not much one can say about New Nightmare. Craven did an incredible job in making the concept work. The only flaw I think is that the ending is rather cheesy and lame; considering that this thing going around as Freddy is an all powerful ancient evil, you'd think it would have at least given a better fight. Otherwise this film is ingenious.

~F.o.F

[DRE]

I think this is the absolute greatest sequel in the entire slasher genre. Wes Craven's New Nightmare is one of the most intelligent horror films I have ever seen. It takes a George Romero style poke at the media, pop culture, and censorship, of course using Freddy instead of zombies.

Wes Craven's New Nightmare is the Bride of Frankenstein of the slasher genre without a doubt.

My favorite quotes are:

1. "Pick a pet, for the rug rat, b*tch!"
2. "Hey Dillon! Ever play [flex blades] skin the cat?"
3. "Come here little piggy! I got some gingerbread for ya!"
4. "Mommy! Where's your mommy, piglet, huh!"

This is my favorite NOES movie, and IMO the best Horror movie of the 1990s. It was a very fresh concept back in the day and was pulled off very well. Freddy also looks his coolest here and the movie restored him to his dark and scary roots after his humorous turn in NOES 4-6. I also love the final 20 or so minutes, inside Freddy's underground lair.

I totally concur! My feelings exactly. This film just hit all the right buttons with me. If I have one complaint it's that I wish the funeral scene had been filled up with more past Nightmare actors, including Johhny Deep who said he would have done it if Wes had asked.

[Dead Cell]

I always thought this movie started out a little shakey.

First the awesome nightmare sequence to kick it off. Awesome!
Then an earthquake.
Dillon making evil faces in his cereal.
Big cracks appear in the wall that look like 4 claw marks.
Dillon sleep-walking (breakfast wasn't that bad was it?)
Evil phone calls.

And that's all within 10 minutes. After the shakey start though, New Nightmare went on to be one of the coolest ideas to ever happen to horror movie sequels. I feel the sentiment that Freddy had gotten too silly, but using that aspect of the fictional character and weaving it into the story (the demon was set free because the story of NOES had been watered down) was creative beyond words.

Little things like Heather's visit with Wes were wonderful. Another person would say, "This scene is boring. They're just sitting there talking. Nothing's happening. The audience is going to fall asleep," but for me it worked wonderfully.

And again, the scene where Freddy rises out of Dillon's bed, but instead of stalking out right away, he waits. He waits for Heather to accept the role of Nancy Thompson one more time. It's almost as though he's waiting for her to put her armor on (in this case, her costume from NOES 1). It's like killing Heather wouldn't be satisfactory. He needs to kill *Nancy" if that makes sense.

The previous 6 Elm Street movies hinted now and then at some greater mythology behind Freddy's ability to invade the dreams of his victims, but New Nightmare puts it out there in broad daylight for everyone to see. Freddy's lair is a testament to how long he's been around with its stone columns and Roman/gothic design. Very nice touch and it adds a bit of weight to the battle when you know this thing has existed for thousands of years.

Love this movie.

[CanadianFonzie]

Check local video stores. Maybe they rent the infinifilm edition.

Honestly, it is a worth while edition to get. The documentaires are awesome. The making of one show a lot of cut scenes. You get the alternate ending. The extras are much better then the Nightmare 1 extras in the box set.

nope the local video stores around have the exact same dvd as I have :(

[kramerfan]

I thought this one was pretty good and one of the best of the 90s.

[Toejam]

This is one of my favorite NOES films.
It was creative and "Freddy" was Creepy.

[Rich]

Dead Cell that was probably the most intelligent write up on this movie I have ever read. Very good post. Much respect.

[Ron]

I kinda liked how freddy looked and he seemed a tad more evil and a tad less comedic.

[CanadianFonzie]

during that tongue part, I always put my tongue to the very back of my mouth at that part because I wouldn't want my tonge to be cutlike that, ugh lol

[Joshg]

It was good, and probably my favorite movie within a movie horror. Although, I dispise M within a M, so that's not saying much.

[Dead Cell]

Dead Cell that was probably the most intelligent write up on this movie I have ever read. Very good post. Much respect.

Thanks! ;)

It occured to me how New Nightmare really encompasses all 6 of the prior Elm Streets. Mostly it's little things, but it always came across to me as a little tip of the hat to everyone that helped keep the legend of Elm Street alive. Here goes:

Elm Street 1: Obviously this one is paid tribute all over the place, so no need to go into detail here.

Elm Street 2: Re-using Freddy's line, "You are all my children now," during the interview scene.

Elm Street 3: Dillon asks if his mom can join him in a dream; a direct reference to Kristen's ability in part 3. And, of course, Heather tells him, "I think that only happens in the movies," as if to say, "Go watch part 3!!!"

Elm Street 4: Tuesday Night makes a guest appearance! Not to mention Heather taking on the role of a gate keeper that Freddy must get past to enter our world? Sounds a lot like the Dream Master concept.

Elm Street 5: I always kind of thought that Chase's death while driving his truck was like their way of doing the "falling asleep while driving" death the right way. Nothing wrong with Dan's crazy, outlandish Truck/Motorcycle death, but Chase's seemed like they wanted to do it again- and this time get back to basics. Little things like showing Chase yawning and cranking the radio to keep himself awake.

Elm Street 6: Not as big a deal, but there's a gigantic Freddy's Dead poster in Bob Shaye's office.

[Ron]

great observations.

[CanadianFonzie]

those are great observations, hte most of them I noticed, but some of them I never concidered

[Deathscythe]

I have a question, how does Freddy kill Julie when she didn't fall asleep?

Also I hated that hospital staff, Freddy shoulda killed them all.

[Rich]

This isn't Freddy in the movie. This was Freddy in reality, so the rules are different. Remember the scene when Freddy was in the clouds and picking Dillin up on the freeway? Nobody was asleep during that either.

If you have ever seen the theatrical poster to the movie, it said, "This time Staying away wouldn't save Nancy," or something to that effect meaning that those were the movies, but this is reality, and the rule book has been thrown out of the window.

[The 5th Golden Girl]

I watched "Wes Craven's New Nightmare" Saturday night because I was at home with nothing else to do. Viewing the movie again (I've seen in countless times in the past, but I hadn't watched it in a few years) made me realize how upset I feel for Heather Langenkamp by the end. Her life's a mess, and everyone is going to think she's crazy. They might even take Dylan away from her. What can Wes do? Show the cops/hospital staff that it's all a movie script?

I always feel bad by the time the end comes around because even though she's saved herself and her son while defeating the Freddy-ancient-evil-thing, the aftermath isn't going to be good for her.

[Ron]

Well, maybe reminicsent of the first film, it's all a horrible dream :spooky music:

[Rich]

How will the murders in the hospital be explained to the police? Chances are, Heather will get blamed for them and thrown in jail and her son will be sent away to live somewhere else.

[Fan of Freddy]

I think that, while Craven leaves the ending up to the viewer, he wants us to assume that with the demon dead Heather's life will swing back towards something more normal. With Freddy wiped out, she wouldn't be acting crazy anymore, and I don't see why they'd take her son away when she was acting in his best interest from the start. The NOES cast would also more than likely back her up as a few seemed to sense what was going on the whole time. Hell, Wes knew every event that would happen and wrote it all down. He'd be her most powerful friend in that regard.

And honestly, I can't see Heather being blamed for anything in the hospital. She wasn't anywhere near the room her son was in when it happened, and there were at least three witnesses that saw everything that was going on. Unless one of you cares to explain how you can say "She dragged the girl up the wall and killed her on the ceiling, then let her fall to the floor", to a cop without sounding a bit unstable yourself, I like to think that Heather is essentialy in the clear.

~F.o.F

[Rich]

That is a good point, FOF. That blood trail that leads up the wall and to the ceiling would be a tough one to explain. I guess it would just sit in the "unsolved murders" file folder forever.

[nickmeece]

I always thought the WCNN concept would make a cool SCREAM sequel also...real actors being stalked, etc.

Also, has anyone, besides me, noticed that the gloves featured on ALL the NIGHTMARE posters is the NN glove?

To quote AMERICAN BEAUTY, "Look closer..."

Just a little FF (fun fact).

[DarkPumpkin]

I always thought this movie started out a little shakey.

First the awesome nightmare sequence to kick it off. Awesome!
Then an earthquake.
Dillon making evil faces in his cereal.
Big cracks appear in the wall that look like 4 claw marks.
Dillon sleep-walking (breakfast wasn't that bad was it?)
Evil phone calls.

And that's all within 10 minutes. After the shakey start though, New Nightmare went on to be one of the coolest ideas to ever happen to horror movie sequels. I feel the sentiment that Freddy had gotten too silly, but using that aspect of the fictional character and weaving it into the story (the demon was set free because the story of NOES had been watered down) was creative beyond words.

Little things like Heather's visit with Wes were wonderful. Another person would say, "This scene is boring. They're just sitting there talking. Nothing's happening. The audience is going to fall asleep," but for me it worked wonderfully.

And again, the scene where Freddy rises out of Dillon's bed, but instead of stalking out right away, he waits. He waits for Heather to accept the role of Nancy Thompson one more time. It's almost as though he's waiting for her to put her armor on (in this case, her costume from NOES 1). It's like killing Heather wouldn't be satisfactory. He needs to kill *Nancy" if that makes sense.



Brilliant post! Except I have to respectfully disagree with you on what you called "a shaky start." I find it to be quite the contrary. It's an extremely foreboding warning that something bad is going to occur, we just aren't exactly sure what. As a first time viewing, the film is brilliant. Even the trailers for this were ingenious. They were very vague and hinted that something real or even documentary like was occurring. It ties in so beautifully with the original NoES, because it has that lucid, dreamlike quality to it. What's real? What's not?

I always viewed the earthquake in the beginning as the evil of the demon being unleashed. I felt this was brought on in part by the dream Heather has at the beginning of the film. I have always liked the concept that dreaming about Freddy is what gives him his power. Through Heather's dream, she is able to summon the demon into the real world. The "claw marks" in the wall help to support this.

Dylan's "Freddy face" in the cereal attests to the power of the demon. Demons are able to possess people, and we see this gradually happen to Dylan throughout the film. What is supposed to be a harmless, normal activity for a child (playing with his food) instead is the signal of something evil.

Demons are also know for their abilities to possess knowledge about people. The demon would therefore have known about Heather's stalker. It decided to taunt her and terrify her, in effect, giving itself even more power.

I love the scene where Heather is at the reunion on television, and the shot of Robert as Freddy waving his hands in the air. There is a cult of worship to him, and the demon thrives off it. Freddy has become a god and an idol. As a theologian, I love this film because there is a rampant amount of theological and religious undertones to it. I am even planning on writing a research paper on the film and argue some of these points.

Of course, Heather had to become Nancy. It is Nancy that recognizes the demon as the form it manifested in, and that is Freddy. It was Nancy that had the courage to turn her back from Freddy and yet it was Heather that had to have the courage to play Nancy. To give a name to something allows a person to have control over it. When the demon is lurking over Heather and saying "Nancy", this is exactly what he has done. It is Nancy he believes he has control over.

Also, the moment Heather accepts being Nancy, the two souls are now fused together in a way. The demon believes it can claim two souls, so why wouldn't it wait for her acceptance?

Brilliant, brilliant film. :D

[Rich]

I couldn't agree more about the way the film starts. Remember in the original Nightmare, Tina says, "Maybe we are going to have a big earthquake. They say things get really wierd just before." Well, in this case it was the opposite, the quake came first, and it was an omen of bad things to come.

[Kane Lives]

Brilliant, brilliant film. :D


Without a doubt.

I really like this film. I've said before that it's really amazing how many different themes that Wes was able to explore with this one story. I always felt like this film was a little underrated simply because it was attached to Freddy, who by that time, was seen as sort of past his prime. Some at the time probably felt "Oh, another one of those..." and tended to look past some of the more unique elements initially. It also was pretty unconventional for 1994, so I think some of its innovation also worked against it. But, I think it's come to be more understood and respected now.

IMO, this movie did nothing but add another touch of quality to the series that the previous few lacked.

[Deathscythe]

I just wish Englund got more on screen time as himself, I mean he IS Freddy afterall. Not to mention Dillion annoyed me anyway.

[Ron]

I sort of liked the fact that Freddy did not over populate this film and remained more of an enigma. This was a lot better than the Freddy that does a stand up act each installment.

[Dead Cell]

Also, has anyone, besides me, noticed that the gloves featured on ALL the NIGHTMARE posters is the NN glove?

I did, yes, and I always thought that was great that they did that.

Darkpumpkin, I won't dispute your ideas about the themes of the movie. Just that from my perspective, they tried ramming a LOT of scary coincidences into one scene. The nightmare followed by the earthquake- sure, okay. Getting phone calls after her husband has left. Fine. Good. But then Dylan's playing in his food and then sleepwalking AFTER he's left the table? What? And the claw marks? It's like- okay, we know something spooky is on the way. You don't have to cram it down our throats.

[Rich]

I stand 100% behind Darkpumpkin and Peter about what they said about this film. This is a true horror masterpiece and frankly I think Wes Craven's New Nightmare is the Bride of Frankenstein of the slasher films.

[The Dream Master]

I just wish Englund got more on screen time as himself, I mean he IS Freddy afterall. Not to mention Dillion annoyed me anyway.

I could be way off on this, but I'm thinking Craven mulled over the idea of having Englund help Heather/Nancy ward off the demon, but decided to keep the story focused on her instead.

[DarkPumpkin]

I could be way off on this, but I'm thinking Craven mulled over the idea of having Englund help Heather/Nancy ward off the demon, but decided to keep the story focused on her instead.


Wes mentions on the audio commentary for NN that Robert himself is actually being possessed by this demon as well. That's why he paints the picture that looks a lot like our favorite claw wearing villian. This would make sense as to why his screen time is so limited, it's actually a brilliant twist in a way. The very thing that Robert has been on film is now literally trying to take over his life. Not only that, but it's clear that Wes was trying to present this as a mockumentary. In doing this, he needed to convince his audience that Robert Englund was just an actor and that this real demon was running around. If Englund would have had too much screen time, the audience would have been identifying him with Krueger. The film would probably not worked so well as a result.
ADDED:
I did, yes, and I always thought that was great that they did that.

Darkpumpkin, I won't dispute your ideas about the themes of the movie. Just that from my perspective, they tried ramming a LOT of scary coincidences into one scene. The nightmare followed by the earthquake- sure, okay. Getting phone calls after her husband has left. Fine. Good. But then Dylan's playing in his food and then sleepwalking AFTER he's left the table? What? And the claw marks? It's like- okay, we know something spooky is on the way. You don't have to cram it down our throats.

I respect this, I just don't think Wes was trying to cram anything down our throats. Every scene that happens in the beginning minutes has consequences that carry on throughout the rest of the film.

[Shoesalesman]

I quite enjoyed this movie. I watched it drunk the first time, so I had to rent it out recently to catch all that I missed. A neat premise for a flick and leave it to Wes Craven to pull it off beautifully. ;)

[DarkPumpkin]

This is crazy long, but I modified my post into a review. It's spoiler heavy here and there, so be warned:

As you can tell, this blog is going to be an eclectic mix of personal journaling, theological tangents and random reflections on pop culture. I am an active member of the Friday the 13th message board, and there was a recent discussion concerning Wes Craven's New Nightmare (here on in referred to as WCNN). This is a film that divides fans of the series more than any other. Some praise it because it is attempting to take the series in a new direction, while others lament it for ruining the icon they have come to worship.

Personally, I find WCNN to be a magnum opus of a picture. Wes Craven returned to true form after making a string of critical and box failures, including Shocker and The People Under the Stairs. It is also important to bear in mind that WCNN was made before Scream, the film that put him back on the map from a box office standpoint. While WCNN was a box office failure, I believe this was the film that re-earned Wes a coveted spot as a "Master of Horror."

With WCNN, Craven uses his background in mythology to once again craft an ingenious story. Craven wants his audience to believe that Freddy Krueger is really a demon that has manifested itself in the form of the horror icon. With no NoES films in production, the demon has been released from the confines of celluloid and allowed to seep through into the real world. It's an extremely self-referential movie without having all the tongue-in-cheekiness of Scream.

As a first time viewing, the film is brilliant. Even the trailers for this were extremely misleading. They were very vague and hinted that something real or even documentary like was occurring. It ties in so beautifully with the original NoES, because it has that lucid, dreamlike quality to it. What's real? What's not?

The film opens on the production set of a movie. This movie appears to be a new Nightmare on Elm Street film (here on in referred to as NoES). Suddenly, the mechanical Freddy glove springs to life on its own accord and begins attacking crew members. Heather Lagenkamp then awakens from her nightmare. Craven demonstrates once again that he knows how to effectively manipulate an audience. The viewers are left in a very lucid and slightly disjointed state: the beginning was a dream? Is Heather Lagenkamp going to be Nancy or is she herself? We have, in essence, achieved exactly what Craven set out: we have entered a dream state of semi-awareness.

As if this wasn't enough to jolt us, an earthquake suddenly rips through. As a reminder of itself, it leaves cracks in the walls that suspiciously resemble claw marks. I have always viewed the earthquake in the beginning as the evil of the demon being unleashed. It is a very interesting concept that dreaming about Freddy, or in this case, the demon, is what gives him/it its power. Through Heather's dream, she is able to summon the demon into the real world. The claw marks in the wall help to support this. However, we as viewers aren't aware of this at this time. All we know is that it's an extremely foreboding warning that something bad is going to occur, we just aren't exactly sure what.

To further lend credibility to his script, Craven asked his cast members if he would be allowed to incorporate autobiographical elements into the script. We learn that Heather Lagenkamp is actually herself, which makes the audience feel like voyeurs intruding on her world. Heather really is married to a special effects artist in real life and she really did have a stalker. The stalker element will be used to chilling effect throughout the film, but I will save that for a little later.

Heather and her husband have a young son named Dylan. In a nice touch of dark humor, we are introduced to Dylan in pajamas. Heather chastises her son for playing with his food, and it's then we are garnered another hint that something is quite amiss. Dylan has formed a "Freddy face" in his cereal. Does Dylan know about his mom's movies? Is it merely a trick of the eye, a mere coincidence? Heather doesn't seem to notice it so why should we? Again, we are being manipulated as viewers. I believe that Dylan's "Freddy face" in the cereal again attests to the power of the demon. Demons are able to possess people, and we see this gradually happen to Dylan throughout the film. What is supposed to be harmless, normal activity for a child (playing with his food) instead is the signal of something evil.

Heather's husband leaves for the set of the latest movie he is working on. Heather feels reluctant about her husband leaving and even attempts to run after him. The phone rings, and she rushes to it, hoping it may be him. Instead, it is the voice of who Heather believes to be her stalker. Demons are also know for their abilities to possess knowledge about people. The demon would therefore have known about Heather's stalker. It decided to taunt her and terrify her, in effect, giving itself even more power. Perhaps the demon truly has been her stalker all along?

It's the tenth anniversary of the NoES series, and Heather is scheduled to reunite with Robert Englund on a talk show. Heather is very visibly nervous as Robert comes out not as himself, but as Freddy. Once she realizes it is him, she calms down and laughs, but there is still a lingering sense of tension about the whole scene. Perhaps my favorite shot in the whole film is when Robert as Freddy is waving his hands in the air to his adoring fans. There is a cult worship to him, and the demon thrives off it. It's also very crucifixion like: Robert has surrendered himself completely to Freddy, and in essence, to the demon.

Wes mentions on the audio commentary for NN that Robert himself is actually being possessed by this demon as well. That's why he paints the picture that looks a lot like our favorite claw wearing villian. This would make sense as to why his screen time is so limited, it's actually a brilliant twist in a way. The very thing that Robert has been on film is now literally trying to take over his life. Not only that, but it's clear that Wes was trying to present this as a mockumentary. In doing this, he needed to convince his audience that Robert Englund was just an actor and that this real demon was running around. If Englund would have had too much screen time, the audience would have been identifying him with Krueger. The film would probably not worked so well as a result.

Heather is informed that Wes wants to meet with her in regards to a new NoES film he is planning. Wes tells Heather that he needs her to play Nancy one last time. He says he has been having trouble sleeping and his insomnia has produced the script. Heather is confused by all of this and says she has to think it over.

Heather's husband falls asleep at the wheel on his way to race home after Heather informs him that her stalker has returned. He is slashed repeatedly by the very mechanical glove that Heather had dreamed about. Grief stricken, Heather turns to John Saxon, her father from the original NoES as a literal father figure. Dylan's behavior becomes increasingly strange, but everybody tries to chalk it up to grief over his father. In fact, everyone's behavior is being more and more erratic. The nurses suspect Heather is on drugs, Dylan is sleepwalking and Robert is becoming more and more consumed by Krueger. It's also a nice touch on how being known for one sole role can take a toll on a person after time.

Earthquakes begin appearing with more and more frequency, an indicator that the demon is near. Heather goes to open her closet and finds the demon in Freddy form. It attacks her and then whispers "Nancy" before disapearing. Heather than races to the hospital where Dylan has been committed to save him.

The climatic moment comes when Dylan has escaped from the hospital and has returned home. Heather frantically calls John and begs him to help her. While at her house, John refers to her as Nancy. Heather demands to know why John has called her Nancy, to which he replies "Why are you calling me John?" As he goes to get in his car, Heather finally realizes what she must do. She has to become Nancy. It is Nancy that recognizes the demon as the form it manifested in, and that is Freddy. It was Nancy that had the courage to turn her back from Freddy and yet it was Heather that had to have the courage to play Nancy. To give a name to something allows a person to have control over it. When the demon is lurking over Heather and saying "Nancy", this is exactly what he has done. It is Nancy he believes he has control over. Also, the moment Heather accepts being Nancy, the two souls are now fused together in a way. The demon believes it can claim two souls, so why wouldn't it wait for her acceptance?

With this acceptance, John has now morphed into Nancy's father. He tells her, "I love you pumpkin," to which she responds, "I love you too....daddy." With this, she is now clothed in pajamas and her house is now 1428 Elm Street. The demon arises from the bed, cocooned within sheets. It reveals itself as Freddy.

Heather/Nancy takes some sleeping pills that Dylan has left for her and enters the depths of the demon's hell. Snake imagery figures very prominently during these last scenes to great effect. Dylan's innocence, like those of Adam and Eve, has been lost at the hands of this demon. Heather/Nancy is able to slay the demon and things appear to return as they once were. Heather sees a script on the floor and flips to the end, "Heather, thanks for playing Nancy one last time-Wes."

I can understand why reaction to this was so hostile. By 1994, fans of NoES had expected a certain formula: Freddy would make some wise cracks and then dismember and kill his teenage targets in various clever ways. WCNN turned this formula on its heels. This was a very dark and serious film, perhaps even more so than the original NoES. Freddy as the demon still has his humor, but now it is chilling instead of being cheesy. The demon asks Dylan "Hey kid, ever play skin the cat?" as he drags Dylan's babysitter across the ceiling in a bloody fashion (which is also a nice homage to Tina's murder in NoES).

The appearance of Freddy also pissed off a lot of fans. This Freddy sports a claw that is actually fused into his hand, instead of being a metal glove. He also sports what has been dubbed "Gap Freddy" by the haters in that he wears a leather trench coat and long black boots. I am rather fond of this Freddy though, as the face is simply evil at its finest.

I think ultimately people were just confused. They weren't sure what this movie was attempting to be. I believe the downfall is how ahead of its time it was. Now, with films like Scream, there is a movie-within-a-movie awareness, but at the time of WCNN, this was unheard of.

It's not at all a strict sequel. Rather, it is Craven's omega to his alpha. It is his way of finally killing the very thing he created, and he did a brilliant job in doing so.

[Deathscythe]

I was watching this movie last night with my sister and she knew everything that was gonna happen. It turns out we had both seen when we were younger. Kind of weird to have seen this film before all the other Nightmare films.

That, and I happened to like this film more upon rewatching it.

[Harmonic Bond]

I'm in the minority who just doesn't think this movie is worth all of the hype. I think people were so tired of the comedic Freddy stuff, that anything dark was going to satisfy people. In technical terms, the movie is ..... ok. For me, it comes in behind the 1st and 3rd, although I enjoy 2 and FD more as well (because both of those have some sequences I really like). The premise (although above average for the series) is just weak. There never is a strong link as to why this Freddy-like demon is attacking Heather Lagenkamp, of all people. Yeah, yeah, she was in the first movie, but she was hardly the person solely responsible for trapping the demon in the movies. Bob Shaye would have been a slightly better target, in my opinion. However, fictionalizing real people's lives takes me right out of any film. As soon as I knew the plot, my interest dipped. I really, really wish they would have just kept the same premise, but with totally fictional characters.

As far as not adhering to the Nightmare "rules," I think Craven was being lazy here. As we all saw, coming up with creative, non-hokey Nightmare kills became harder and harder as the sequels went on (I happen to believe this is why FvJ only had one lame Nightmare kill). By getting rid of this constraint, the death sequences were easier to pull off ..... and they still ripped one off from Nightmare 1!

Getting rid of the urban mythology, in my opinion, was also a mistake. One reason why Freddy was always so scary, was because he started out like any sick bastard you read about in the paper. He even had an iron-clad boiler room where he took his victims. The idea is so modern and accessible to people now (even after 20+ years). Giving a realistic killer a demon's face was something that just hadn't been executed that well until Nightmare 1. Taking the modern twist away from Freddy (or the demon, or whatever) also took away a lot of familiarity from the viewer. The whole gothic labyrinth lair thing was appalling. It didn't create any of the claustrophobia or dread of the boiler room. Lastly, no ELM STREET, or even 1428 Elm Street. Yeah, yeah, Heather's House turns into the Elm Street House, but there is no haunted house sentiment that you get in practically all of the other movies. It's just a quick nod to edge the story on a bit. Disappointing. The final straw was the god awful ending, where the demon's head zooms towards the screen and morphs into a more generic looking demon. That's quite fitting for this movie, actually, generic.

Ok, so I bashed the movie .... a lot. It's really not all that bad, sort of middle ground for me. Definitely more worthy than a couple other of the entries (cough 4 & 5 cough). Englund was on the top of his game and the kills were pretty good. However, ff they were going for nostalgia, I wish there would have been a redux of Glen's death. Or at least a marionette homage.

[The Dream Master]

This was on Encore Mystery this past weekend, so I stopped to give it a watch because I was bored. Anyway, a few observations:

Shouldn't Lin Shaye be playing herself since she played the teacher in the original? I've seen this movie a countless number of times, but I don't know how that just occurred to me the other day.

Also, I've been looking at the promo material for WCNN, and I gotta ask: did anyone even know this was a Nightmare flick? The US poster doesn't exactly clue you in. I do remember at least one TV spot that featured Freddy prominently, but it sure didn't clue you in on the plot. I remember being confused as hell when it got all post-modern and self-aware. Then again, I was only about 11 years old, but still.

[Esten]

When most people saw ads they thought to themselves "What the hell is that?". Some spots, and one of the rental trailers, featured GAP-Freddy coming out of the closet(*spittake*) and the accompanying "Miss me?" line.


When I got out of the theater on opening day, I was all "What the hell was that?".

[The Dream Master]

Yeah, I remember the "miss me?" line from the TV spot. That's how I found out it was another Freddy movie (sort of).

[DRE]

I remember leaving the theater saying "Best damn Freddy movie since Dream Master!"

And then later, it became my third favorite after the original and Dream Warriors.

[The Dream Master]

I was talking about this in chat the other night, but anyway: I remember the TV spots also showing the mechanical glove running around. So, being 11 years old, I thought the glove itself was the source of Freddy's evil and it was going to allow him to possess people or some shit.

Anyway, I still love this one, too. Probably my fourth favorite behind 1, 3, and 4.

[Deathscythe]

I remember when someone first told me about New Nightmare (I actually typed it out as Night Nightmare >_>), I was thinking "WTF did you just say?".

[Kane Lives]

I was aware that it was a Freddy film and what kind of approach it was going to take, since I had read the Fangoria set visit to the film. I think I saw one TV spot, but I don't really remember what was in it.


I always liked New Nightmare, even the first time I saw it. I saw it three times in the theater. But, it didn't become one of my favorites in the series until several years later. It's now in my top 3 NOES films.

[The Tall Man]

I saw a TV spot for the first time during an airing of "The Omen IV" and I saw Hather and was like "Isn't that Heather Langenkamp?" and then they showed a Freddy-ish shadow (his shadow creeping across Dylan's bedroom near the end) and was like "That looks like Freddy" and then they showed his blades click and that undenyable row of blades... "Holy shit! It's a new Freddy movie". And then finally... "WES CRAVEN'S NEW NIGHTMARE".

"What the hell was that?!"

T.M.

[The Dream Master]

Shit, remember the good days before the internet when you were actually surprised by new movies? I was always waiting for the NLC logo to pop up and reveal a new Freddy flick. I guess if you read Fango and shit you were in the loop, but I didn't start reading it until I was in my teens.

[El Rooto]

People used to be surprised by new movies?

[The Dream Master]

I don't know if you're being facecious, but that's my recollection. These days, we know the exact date when something gets greenlit and everything because of the internet. Unless you actually read trade publications or magazines like Fango back in the day, you never really knew what was going on.

[Kane Lives]

I just happened to see Freddy's face on that cover of Fangoria back in 1994 and bought it. I remember finding out about films through trailers at the theater and TV spots.

I found out about JGTH when I saw a spot for it on TV. Prior to that, I had no idea they were even thinking about another F13th film, since it had been a while since JTM. So, I hear you about the days prior to the internet.

[Ron]

the cool thing about the pre-internet era was that when you saw a trailer it was actually very exciting because you were so surprised.

[Utellme]

How does Freddy die at the end of this film or does he ? this is the only one i dont own on dvd is there any SE dvd of this film or a certain version that has more extras on it ?

[Jigsaw]

Technically Freddy in NN isn't really Freddy, but rather a Demon under Freddy's guise. The Demon presumably dies in the explosion at the end.

As for the DVD, the individual one and the one in the boxed set are the same and an SE has yet to be released if ever.

[Jack Bauer]

NN Freddy was never Freddy? I always thought that he broke the fourth wall and entered the real real world.

[DRE]

Wes was really trying to say that a demon (presumably the Devil himself) took a huge liking to the character of Freddy Krueger because when Wes originally wrote the character he capture the essence of evil in his story. And after Freddy was changed into the comedian over the course of the series, that evil was set free and took form in the real world as Freddy.

[Jack Bauer]

That would explain the Hell like realm.

[The Tall Man]

Wes was really trying to say that a demon (presumably the Devil himself) took a huge liking to the character of Freddy Krueger because when Wes originally wrote the character he capture the essence of evil in his story. And after Freddy was changed into the comedian over the course of the series, that evil was set free and took form in the real world as Freddy.
Actually, Dre, according to Wes' big 'what's happenin'" scene, GAP-Freddy came about because the 'A Nightmare on Elm Street' series had ended, NOT because Freddy had 'become a comedian'.

T.M.

[DRE]

"The problem comes when the story dies.
It happens a lot of different ways, the
story gets too familiar, or too watered
down by people trying to make it easier
to sell, or it's labeled a threat to
society and just plain banned. However
it happens, when the story dies, the evil is set free."



You know what he's trying to say there Tally, it's as clear as red and green. ;)

[Esten]

Whatever Wes was on during that period, I'll be sure to stay far away.

[Natman]

This film, I think, is absolutely brilliant. I think it was a huge step for filmmaking overall. It was a powerful statementon the series, the genre, the industry, and even storytelling itself.

And Freddy hasn't been that cruel or heartless since Nightmare 2, but this is the better film by far.

[The Tall Man]

Natman, but it's NOT Freddy. That's the whole point.

T.M.

[The Dream Master]

I always thought there was a little bit more going on with this flick than other horror films, but it wasn't until I really read up on mythology that I saw what Wes was really up to. It was a really interesting move to take the series in this direction. Would I have preferred a more conventional sequel? Probably. However, once you get past the fact that Freddy really isn't in this, it's a damn fine film.

[DRE]

Simple formalities Tally.

Robert Englund + Make Up + Bladed hand = Freddy Krueger. The only issue I see with those who are Anti "GAP-Freddy" is that he's not kicking off one liners every minute (Although he does say a few) and the lack of the elaborate nightmare sequences of the later films. Not to mention it is a film by Wes Craven, who is generally despised by this faction, for reasons I can totally understand.

[Natman]

Natman, but it's NOT Freddy. That's the whole point.

T.M.

It is and it isn't. It's a demon, but a demon that became Freddy completely. It was never self aware that it was not Freddy, so therefore it was Freddy.

[The Dream Master]

It is and it isn't. It's a demon, but a demon that became Freddy completely. It was never self aware that it was not Freddy, so therefore it was Freddy.

So if I go batshit crazy and start to think I'm Freddy Krueger, does that make it so? :)

Anyway, I've got no problem with people referring to the demon in this flick as "Freddy" as sort of a short-hand. But the bottom line is that it really isn't. Within the universe of the film, "Freddy Krueger" is defined as a movie character in the Nightmare on Elm Street films, and the demon in the movie is just imitating him. It's really not too terribly different from Roy in Friday the 13th Part V.

[Esten]

I equate GAP-Freddy to a 15 year old kid in a bad Freddy Halloween costume. He talks a lot of shit, but he's really just a punk. :X

[The Dream Master]

Shit, the fact that you only have to stab ol' Gappy in the leg to slow him down should be a huge indicator that he's not the real deal. :X

[DRE]

Ah, but in the quantum reverse of that DM, in our REAL world, the man playing the demon playing Freddy is the man who really IS Freddy, so by default...it IS Freddy!

See how the logic works?

[The Dream Master]

No, but you gave me a nice headache trying to sort that out. :lol:

[Esten]

No, but I know how aspirin works. After reading that comment, I need a couple. :D

[DRE]

At least I accomplished something. ;)

[Natman]

It's not Freddy because its outside of the films and in "our world" (wherever the hell that is, I'm pretty sure I don't live there) but it is a sort of manifestation of... of... no. fuck it. I'm done.

Still a great film. And Roy in New Beginning was different because he knew he wasn't Jason, he was a full-on copy cat. There. Now I'm done.

[Ron]

A New Nightmare was in the ANOES boxset. New Nightmare had Freddy. Whether this world, that world, your world, my world, or whatever world this takes place in, rest assured, it was still Freddy. Different? Yes. He was percieved different in each film. When Wes Craven decided to do this film (sidebar, I am NOT a huge Craven fan:X) I loved his decision to not do a straight sequel. With that said, I must also add that Wes Craven isn't stupid. He knew that the character of Freddy had viability and could survive a reinvention...And guess what...he did. A remake is in the works.

[Esten]

He new that the character of Freddy had viability and could survive a recreation.

Even though WCNN is the only film to not even come close to making double it's budget back? :X I wouldn't call that surviving.

[Ron]

I was referring to the remake but...I see what you're attempting to say.

[The Dream Master]

The remake hasn't even been written, let alone released yet, so how is its announcement proof that Freddy can survive a reinvention?

[Kane Lives]

I figure I'll have more problems accepting the character in this remake as Freddy, than I ever did the one from New Nightmare.

[The Dream Master]

Yeah, at least New Nightmare has Englund. :X

[Deathscythe]

...and Heather Langenkamp.

[The Dream Master]

And, lest we forget, it also had The Sax:

http://www.headinjurytheater.com/images/freddy3%20john%20saxon%20made%20of%20holy%20light. jpg

[Deathscythe]

Image ain't working. :(

[The Dream Master]

How about now?

[Esten]

I bet The Sax gets lots of Teh Sex.

The remake hasn't even been written, let alone released yet, so how is its announcement proof that Freddy can survive a reinvention?

When it makes the mad bank, and it most likely will, that'll be proof to New Line and Platinum Dunes. :(

[The Dream Master]

Yeah, I'm sure it'll make alot of money too, but I'm not about to jump the gun and say Freddy can definitely survive a reinvention.

And yeah, The Sax gets tons of teh sex.

[Deathscythe]

Nancy has many, many unknown siblings.

[The Dream Master]

Yah, but they all got raped and killed by Freddie. :X

[Deathscythe]

Dream Master, Freddy never told you what happened to your father.;)

[Ron]

The remake hasn't even been written, let alone released yet, so how is its announcement proof that Freddy can survive a reinvention?

Leatherface did...so I think it's a pretty safe assumption that one of the most recognizable faces in the horror genre will inevitably impact the same way. I assume the same about a 'Friday' remake as well.

[The Dream Master]

The difference is that Leatherface is easily replaceable, but it's debatable as to how replaceable Freddy is. We'll see, I guess.

[Esten]

You can replace Leatherface's actor 30 times in the same movie, and nobody would know the difference. Replace Freddy once, and it's blatantly obvious.

The Freddy everyone knows, is maybe 25-30% Makeup and wardrobe, and over 70% a specific actor(Robert Englund). That'd be the difference.

[The Dream Master]

That's definitely how I feel personally, but I have a feeling kids these days might not give a shit. I'm hoping against hope, though, that the majority of people will see a new guy playing Freddy and say, "pft...that ain't Freddy."

[Esten]

They'll most likely say, no matter what they really think:


"I'm soooo glad they replaced that other guy. It was time for a change. Hold on a second, girl. My phone is ringing.

*clicks phone*

Oh, hey baby. What's up? Just getting out of the movie. Yeah, it was so much better than the original.

....

I saw like 10 minutes of the original on PBS 7 years ago. But, yeah, it was so much better than those 10 minutes. What? Yeah, I'm pretty sure that was Nightmare. It had a guy with claws... or maybe that was some nature show. Well, anyway, I've gotta go. These cocksuckers wanna go to subway to get some sandwiches, then we're gonna go possibly contract and STD from having unprotected sex.

Alright, bye. Love you, too, Mom."

[DRE]

:lmao:


You guys are too much.

[The Dream Master]

I'd laugh, but Esten's probably hit it right on the head. :X

And I'd bet you hear this one too:

"The one with the claws? I thought that was Jason."

:lol:

[Deathscythe]

I'd laugh, but Esten's probably hit it right on the head. :X

And I'd bet you hear this one too:

"The one with the claws? I thought that was Jason."

:lol:

My sister once said to me she has seen all the Halloween...and then claimed that Jamie Lee Curtis was in all of them.

Not as bad as the other quotes..but at least those quotes didn't come from a relative.

[Utellme]

Ive watche NOES 1,2,3,4 next is 5. I was looking yesterday for new nightmare cause i wanted to watch it after 5 then finish up with F vs J.

[Ron]

i usually exclude FvJ when i do marathons...i don't quite know why though.

[alicefan696]

I think New Nightmare was a good movie and Freddy had some funny moments in it like when there was the army of him and when he kept sending his tongue out!

[Utellme]

I just got this on dvd and watched it and liked it.I like Freddy's look also just not sure about those leather pants ?

[Ron]

was he wearing leather pants??i can't remember.

[Jigsaw]

He sure was. That's the only thing I didn't like about Freddy's look in NN, the leather pants. Give him the dirty work pants and his NN look is perfect.

[DRE]

He also has nearly thigh high boots on, I hated those.

[Jigsaw]

The boots didn't bug me. I kind of liked the more "rebel" look the boots gave him. As I've said before, his NN make-up is my favorite. Dig the stripe-like pattern with the evil gaze in his eyes. Kevin Yagher should definitely work on the NN make-up though if he returns to the series.

[DRE]

I love the look as well. The trench coat is the coolest add on to his overall look.

[Jigsaw]

Definitely. I just wish his sweater had been a lot more dirty and filthy-looking like in NOES1 and FVJ. The boneclaw is still my favorite Freddy glove/claw.

[DRE]

My favorite is the blades from the fingertips in Freddy's Revenge, although the Boneclaw would be immediately after the glove.

[Jigsaw]

I liked the FR razorfingers, myself. My favorite gloves/claws are the NN boneclaw, NOES1 glove and FR razorfingers.

[Utellme]

He also has nearly thigh high boots on, I hated those.
Yeah regular black boots with Freddy's same old pants and that would of been fine. None the less still like this film a lot especially the long run time 1:52 minutes.

Freddy's glove from parts 1-6 does it really change anyone have pics of these gloves ?

[Ron]

I'd say the leather pants belong in part 2;)

[Utellme]

It would be cool if someone also posted pics of how the makeup changed from movie to movie along with the glove.

[CrazyChris187]

this is a sick movie freddy is badass in this and the leather pants is righteous heather legenkamp is so hot too i give this movie 10/10 its very awesome i have the original vhs verisn of all NOES films and this one is the best

[The Tall Man]

Freddy's glove from parts 1-6 does it really change anyone have pics of these gloves?
Different glove every movie almost.

1 and 2 used the same glove. That glove was stolen off the set of 3 (despite popular opinion).
3 has a new glove.
4 has a new glove.
5 has a new glove.
6 has a new glove.
7 has a new glove--obviously.
8 has a new glove.

As for these leather pants things, if he was, I've never noticed it other than in publicity stills. I can guaran-damn-tee you that Englund is wearing normal GAP-slacks during the assault in Heather's bedroom and I can post stills to prove it.

T.M.

[DRE]

I also like the FvsJ glove because it maintains the long curved talon like look of the boneclaw.

[Jigsaw]

I liked the blades on the FVJ glove, but didn't care for the glove itself. I didn't like the yellowish coloration it had.

[DRE]

Yeah, I miss the bronzed look of the glove.

[Utellme]

TM you say new glove ,new glove etc but whats the differences and how can you guys tell ?

Makeup i like 1,2,4,7,the best but i cant really tell why i don't know how it differs ?

[The 5th Golden Girl]

Eh, I didn't care for the bone glove. I was disappointed that the utterly awesome metal, robot glove didn't get more play. That thing was beautiful. The fact that it was robotic didn't factor into my opinion, either. I just thought it was the coolest-looking glove.

[The Tall Man]

TM you say new glove ,new glove etc but whats the differences and how can you guys tell?
1 and 2's glove- There is very little of the glove itself. Like it's been ripped open. You can see a large proportion of Englund's palm and fingers. Tanish coloring of the glove itself.
3 glove- Glove is brown in color, less of Englund's hand showing. Far more glove than previous. The tie-bead is more prominent.
4 glove- Very similar to the 3 glove except it's a darker brown color. The thumb of the glove looks very wrinkled and taut, like a sausage.
5 glove- Glove is back to being a tanish color. Blades look thicker in profile.
6 glove- Larger copper plate with soldering spooged across it.
7 glove- If you can't tell this one you're blind.
8 glove- Blades are much more curved, like a bird's, not straight like the previous Real Freddy gloves. The glove itself is a yellow color.

T.M.

[The Dream Master]

6 glove- Larger copper plate with soldering spooged across it.


I think the flying dream sperm must have dripped themselves onto the glove in Nightmare 6 at some point. :X

[Utellme]

1 and 2's glove- There is very little of the glove itself. Like it's been ripped open. You can see a large proportion of Englund's palm and fingers. Tanish coloring of the glove itself.
3 glove- Glove is brown in color, less of Englund's hand showing. Far more glove than previous. The tie-bead is more prominent.
4 glove- Very similar to the 3 glove except it's a darker brown color. The thumb of the glove looks very wrinkled and taut, like a sausage.
5 glove- Glove is back to being a tanish color. Blades look thicker in profile.
6 glove- Larger copper plate with soldering spooged across it.
7 glove- If you can't tell this one you're blind.
8 glove- Blades are much more curved, like a bird's, not straight like the previous Real Freddy gloves. The glove itself is a yellow color.

T.M.
wow that answers my question thanks Tall

[Scarecrow]

1 and 2's glove- There is very little of the glove itself. Like it's been ripped open. You can see a large proportion of Englund's palm and fingers. Tanish coloring of the glove itself.
3 glove- Glove is brown in color, less of Englund's hand showing. Far more glove than previous. The tie-bead is more prominent.
4 glove- Very similar to the 3 glove except it's a darker brown color. The thumb of the glove looks very wrinkled and taut, like a sausage.
5 glove- Glove is back to being a tanish color. Blades look thicker in profile.
6 glove- Larger copper plate with soldering spooged across it.
7 glove- If you can't tell this one you're blind.
8 glove- Blades are much more curved, like a bird's, not straight like the previous Real Freddy gloves. The glove itself is a yellow color.

T.M.

Is there anything NOES relatedf tat you DON'T know, TallMan? :D


- Scarecrow

[The Dream Master]

I bet TM doesn't know Freddy's secret cooking recipies.

[The Tall Man]

I do know one of his secrets is to only get 1/3 of the sugar you toss into your bowl.

T.M.

[Scarecrow]

The key in gredient in his pizza's are, of course, Rick Meatballs...


- Scarecrow

[The Tall Man]

Not sure Scare's getting the uber-obscure FN references. ;)

T.M.

[The Dream Master]

That's because there's only a select few that have braved enough episodes.

And there's only one man that's managed to sit through them all. So far.

The few, the proud, the miserable. :X

[Esten]

And there's only one man that's managed to sit through them all. So far.



A dozen times.

...

I am a sad man.

[The Dream Master]

:bow:

I bow to you, sad man. I hope to attain those heights some day.

[Scarecrow]

Not sure Scare's getting the uber-obscure FN references. ;)

T.M.

Nope.

Only ever saw the few episodes released on DVD years back and some video covers where Freddy seems to be supporting safe sex...


- Scarecrow

[The Dream Master]

:lol:

'Tis true. Freddy is all about saying no to drugs and practicing safe sex. Who would have thought that?

[Kane Lives]

Freddy had a change of heart about drugs between Dream Warriors and Freddy's Nightmares.

[JVM]

Sorry for bumpage, but everyone twas getting offtopic in the JX thread about this moveh.

Anyway, the topic at hand - so is Freddy himself or a demon?

[Jigsaw]

In NN? Freddy in NN is really a Demon under the guise of Freddy.

[Scarecrow]

Although soemtimes I think it's simply dismissed as not really Freddy. In fact, it kind of IS Freddy as well as isn't. The demon was trapped in the story. In the NN storyline all six films were made. IN those six films the demon was trapped AS Freddy. It exosted as him, it went through the evnts of the story as if they were real. So in the NN story the demon always WAS Freddy and when it escapes the story it likes himk so much it stays as Freddy. So in the general fictional universe of 1-6 there's Fredy and in the NN story theres the demon thats always been Freddy.


- Scarecrow

[The Dream Master]

I could almost buy that reasoning, but I look at it this way: Freddy Krueger of the Nightmare on Elm Street series was a very specific interpretation/incarnation of the ancient demon in the film. Once Freddy was killed off, the demon or entity was stripped down to its essence, but it attempted to retain the Freddy persona and gave us a different interpretation of Freddy. In short, he's still an imposter, and I still say he's basically the Roy of the Elm Street series.

[JVM]

^ I'd say calling him Elm Street's Roy is a bit extreme. The demon resembled Freddy almost exactly, I'd say, while Roy resembled Jason in almost no way, only having the hock, which was still incorrect.

[The Dream Master]

I'm not really going by how well the two resembled their respective killers because, once you get down to it, they're both imposters. And if we want to get technical about it, I don't think the Demon looks much like Freddy at all. He's got a red and green sweater, but everything else looks like a designer wardrobe that came from the Gap. The glove's different, the fedora's different, and even the make-up is different. Sure, we know he's impersonating Freddy by looking at him, but we can say the same thing about Roy and Jason.

[Utellme]

[QUOTE=JVM;. The demon resembled Freddy almost exactly, I'd say,

Yeah thats how i see it also.

[Scarecrow]

I still think impersonating Freddy is a kindof flasehood. I mean in the WCNN storyline, this creature has always been Freddy. Sure, that's the form it was forced into. But it was part of these stories. In the WCNN world (a version of ours) anyone watching the NOES films is watching the demon. The Demon did all those things, fought Nancy and Alice, it did all this as this was its form. And when it was freed it so loved being Freddy is kept that form, although altered somewhat. Certainly it's different from the NOES series of just watchign Freddy and that's it, but this guy still WAS Freddy in all the important ways IMO.


- Scarecrow

[Rich]

To be Freddy or not to be Freddy is the question. To me the Freddy of New Nightmare was more of a Freddy then the Eddie Murphy Freddy we got in Nightmares 4-6. Don't get me wrong, there is a place for that version of the character too, but Freddy is really an evil child killing son of a bitch not a comedy act.

[Utellme]

When i view this film it's Freddy to me.

[Rich]

IT's Freddy to me too. As a matter of fact to me the Freddy is this film, and the first three are the "true" Freddy in my brain. The Freddy of 4-6 are more like a Saturday mourning cartoon version of the character to me. Don't get me wrong, there is a place for the funny interpretation of the character, but I have always liked the more serious in tone version better.

[Jus-X]

Although soemtimes I think it's simply dismissed as not really Freddy. In fact, it kind of IS Freddy as well as isn't. The demon was trapped in the story. In the NN storyline all six films were made. IN those six films the demon was trapped AS Freddy. It exosted as him, it went through the evnts of the story as if they were real. So in the NN story the demon always WAS Freddy and when it escapes the story it likes himk so much it stays as Freddy. So in the general fictional universe of 1-6 there's Fredy and in the NN story theres the demon thats always been Freddy.


- Scarecrow

Interesting. Ya know it makes sense being Wes Craven said he was having nightmares in the movie, which inspired him to create the character of Freddy. Maybe instead of thinking the demon took on Freddy's look and persona, Freddy's look and persona was based on the demon haunting Craven? I always thought it woulda been a great scene to watch Freddy off Robert Englund.

I could almost buy that reasoning, but I look at it this way: Freddy Krueger of the Nightmare on Elm Street series was a very specific interpretation/incarnation of the ancient demon in the film. Once Freddy was killed off, the demon or entity was stripped down to its essence, but it attempted to retain the Freddy persona and gave us a different interpretation of Freddy. In short, he's still an imposter, and I still say he's basically the Roy of the Elm Street series.

It's a funny quote, but I woudn't agree. :eek:

IT's Freddy to me too. As a matter of fact to me the Freddy is this film, and the first three are the "true" Freddy in my brain. The Freddy of 4-6 are more like a Saturday mourning cartoon version of the character to me. Don't get me wrong, there is a place for the funny interpretation of the character, but I have always liked the more serious in tone version better.

I like both version. I prefer the Dark Freddy of 1 and 2, but also enjoy watching Freddy shouting and Spence when he was looking for his hearing aid... good stuff! I like the fact NN has both Freddy's in it. Englund's Freddy which appeared on the late night show, and the Dark Demon. I loved watching Freddy pull the kid's babysitter up the wall and onto the ceiling and pulling a Tinakill. It's scary to watch it in 1, but crazier to watch it in 7.

[The Tall Man]

I always thought it woulda been a great scene to watch Freddy off Robert Englund.
And I think "New Nightmare" could have been saved if Englund suddenly appeared in Heather's dream at the end, dressed to the nines as the Real Freddy, and helped her kick GAP-Freddy's imposter ass.

T.M.

[Jus-X]

FREDDY! versus... FREDDY!

Then Tommy Doyle comes in with Michael Myers, then Tommy Jarvis brings Jason Voorhees... and Freddy, Jason, and Michael all go against Freddy!!!

It's like doing back-flips in cream cheese...

[Rich]

And I think "New Nightmare" could have been saved if Englund suddenly appeared in Heather's dream at the end, dressed to the nines as the Real Freddy, and helped her kick GAP-Freddy's imposter ass

Saved? New Nightmare actually brought some credibility to the series by being SCARY, and being a good film. There is a place for the funny character, but Freddy to me is an evil and SCARY character.

New Nightmare is an absolutely brilliant and intelligent film. Freddy is evil and scary as hell in it. The characters are real relatable people.

[nottidelterrore]

I find New Nightmare to be a really boring movie. Sure it's a good movie but it puts me to sleep anymore.

[Timberwolf Entertainment]

Saved? New Nightmare actually brought some credibility to the series by being SCARY, and being a good film. There is a place for the funny character, but Freddy to me is an evil and SCARY character.

New Nightmare is an absolutely brilliant and intelligent film. Freddy is evil and scary as hell in it. The characters are real relatable people.

I actually see both sides of this.

New Nightmare IS a brilliant film. In fact its on a level ABOVE the entire Elm Street series. It's a work of art that stands on it's own.

BUT,

Because of that, it's not really part of the series, and it loses some of the Elm Street style..AND it's not really Freddy. It's a demon that likes to pretend he is Freddy.


So thats where I'm on both sides. I can see the resistance from some fans cause it's simply not the series they love. At the same time I can see how great the film really is.

Wes wanted to call the movie A Nightmare On Elm Street 7: The Accention (I think I spelled that wrong) which is actually a 'swipe' at the series..lol. Bob Shaye in his vodka driven wisdom wanted to call it Wes Craven's New Nightmare because he knew it was a different thing.

[Rich]

Fans like to hold onto their Parts 4-6 just because of time line, but really New Nightmare blows all of those films out of the water. You are right, it does work better as a stand alone film then Elm Street Part 7.

I still say it is the absolute best film since the original. Hell only the two films made by Wes Craven are truely great. Dream Warriors is really good. The rest are okay to just plain fun, but certainly not great. There is nothing wrong with just plain fun. I enjoy Dream Child and Freddy's Dead and Dream Master every once in a while. They simple do not comair to the original and/or New Nightmare and/or Dream Warriors.

[Sean [The Wildcard]]

Wes wanted to call the movie A Nightmare On Elm Street 7: The Accention (I think I spelled that wrong) which is actually a 'swipe' at the series..lol. Bob Shaye in his vodka driven wisdom wanted to call it Wes Craven's New Nightmare because he knew it was a different thing.

I believe it was also at one point called "Freddys New Nightmare."
:shifty:

[The Tall Man]

;337892']I believe it was also at one point called "Freddys New Nightmare."
"Freddy's New Nightmare" was the release title in some European countries.

Fans like to hold onto their Parts 4-6 just because of time line
Yes. They're OUR Parts 4-6 because we made them. They're fan films that aren't part of the continuity. That's why those films don't have the troo Ferdy. :shifty:

How about we enjoy them because they're fine, fun films that we really enjoy? Don't put words or motives in our mouths.

They simple do not comair to the original and/or New Nightmare and/or Dream Warriors.
Sure they do. "Freddy's Dead" is a far more enjoyable and fun film than "New Nightmare". There. I just compared them. Like me to contrast them too?

T.M., Esq.

[CountProphet]

"
Sure they do. "Freddy's Dead" is a far more enjoyable and fun film than "New Nightmare". There. I just compared them. Like me to contrast them too?


Nice Joke, Man! ;):p








Yeah, I know it isn't one.:(


As, for New Nightmare.......believe it or not it is probably my favorite of the entire franchise but, Nightmare 1 does go toe to toe with it at times so, I usually just tie them together.

[The Tall Man]

Yeah, what's up with the continuous contradicting me every time I make the suggestion that "Freddy's Dead" is not a piece of shit?

You don't see me jumping on fans of the original "Texas Chainsaw Massacre" or "Sleepaway Camp".

T.M., Esq.

[Deathscythe]

Yeah, what's up with the continuous contradicting me every time I make the suggestion that "Freddy's Dead" is not a piece of shit?

You don't see me jumping on fans of the original "Texas Chainsaw Massacre" or "Sleepaway Camp".

T.M., Esq.

Off topic but I don't enjoy the 1974 The Texas Chainsaw Massacre myself. Actually I think that whole franchise is overrated.

[CountProphet]

Yeah, what's up with the continuous contradicting me every time I make the suggestion that "Freddy's Dead" is not a piece of shit?

Its me just joshing but, I'll stop. Sorry about the annoyance.:);)

You don't see me jumping on fans of the original "Texas Chainsaw Massacre" or "Sleepaway Camp".


You don't like, Texas Chainsaw? I can actually, understand that it was groundbreaking in the 70s but, the characters had no insight, the first half of the film seems to drag out to long, and the climax felt like it could have been better...

As, For Sleepaway Camp....never liked it.

[Rich]

Sure they do. "Freddy's Dead" is a far more enjoyable and fun film than "New Nightmare". There. I just compared them. Like me to contrast them too?

Freddy's Dead is enjoyable, but in a saturday mourning cartoon kind of way. Wes Craven's New Nightmare is enjoyable as a serious horror film with an intelligent story line kind of way.

[The Tall Man]

See? You just compared them yourself!

Except Saturday morning cartoons don't have women as sexy as Lisa Zane.

[Deathscythe]

as sexy as Lisa Zane.

You better watch out The Tall Man, you know her dad is the legendary Freddy Krueger right?

[Jus-X]

In regards to Freddy's Dead, I find it funny that around this time, everyone had living relatives! Jason had a sister, a neice, and a grat neice. Michael had a neice and great neice. Candyman had a daughter, and then Freddy.

And the movie was called the Final Nightmare, but we know it wasn't. There was a New Nightmare then FVJ. Final Chapter? Final Friday? Nope! Jason X and FVJ! Okay, I'm done ranmbling.

[Ron]

Perhaps they were trying attract the TGIF audience:D

[Rich]

See? You just compared them yourself!

Except Saturday morning cartoons don't have women as sexy as Lisa Zane.

You never saw Wonder Woman in Justice League Unlimited. :shy: :X

[CountProphet]

You never saw Wonder Woman in Justice League Unlimited. :shy: :X


Wans't that a Saturday Night cartoon series?;)

[The Tall Man]

Oh Snap. The Count from downtown with the pwn! Kudos!

T.M., Esq.

[The Dream Master]

I also think this would be a good time for TM to break out those pictures of Freddy's kid's hot ass to settle this once and for all. :X

[CountProphet]

Found them for you. :)

http://img530.imageshack.us/img530/995/lisaz056nb7.th.jpg

http://img231.imageshack.us/img231/9437/lisaz029uw4.th.jpg

[Bill 1981]

Excellent call, Count... :bow:

[The Tall Man]

The Count is on effin' fire today! :bang: Although he linked to thumbnails.

http://img231.imageshack.us/img231/9437/lisaz029uw4.jpg
http://img530.imageshack.us/img530/995/lisaz056nb7.jpg

T.M., Esq.

[Bill 1981]

I concur, TM... I so concur...

[CountProphet]

The Count is on effin' fire today! :bang: Although he linked to thumbnails.

Why thank you, kind sir. May I say your awesome as, well.;)

http://img231.imageshack.us/img231/9437/lisaz029uw4.jpg
http://img530.imageshack.us/img530/995/lisaz056nb7.jpg

You know what? I think, I see it now.:o Lisa Zane is cute and all but, I never found her extremely attractive. Although, now that you mentioned her buttox and now that I see them in the bigger pictures I can see the attraction.:shyface:

Oh my, I feel alittle dirty to be honest! :| I don't really ogle at women much.....

[Rich]

The original Texas Chainsaw was one of the greatest horror films ever made. A film like Freddy's Dead is not even in league. Texas Chainsaw has inspired so many films even to this day. I even see a little bit of it in the remake of Friday the 13th, as well as a little bit of the Chainsaw remake in the Friday remake being that they were made by the same person. :x

Sleepaway Camp are cheesey 80s slasher films that tried very hard to be Friday the 13th films (which is what most slasher films were) but were nowher near as good, but they were fun to watch anyway.

[The Tall Man]

A film like Freddy's Dead is not even in league.
Well this is true. "Freddy's Dead" is watchable.

T.M., Esq.

[CountProphet]

Well this is true. "Freddy's Dead" is watchable.


For about 5 minutes and 33 secs.:X But, your right there are certain things in the film that make it uh...'worhtwhile'. Tracy's dream for example. Now, thats what the Freddy, I remember would do! Carlos's death was ok too, it could have been handled better(alot better!) but, seeing how everyone else in this film perished his was the best. Lisa Zane's character is ok too.....nice hair and....buttox.:shyface:. Theres a few more but, I don't have the time to post it all. Overall, yes I'll admit the film is atleast for me tolerant for a few instances.

Hey, is it me or do the ending credits show scenes that were never in the films?:confused:






New Nightmare Freddy should have gone after Racheal Talalay.....and Platnium Dunes:shifty:.

[The Tall Man]

Hey, is it me or do the ending credits show scenes that were never in the films?
It's JUST you.

T.M., Esq.

[Geddy Peart]

One thing I've always wondered about WCNN is that the last time we see Robert Englund is when he's talking to Heather over the phone and finishes the Freddy painting. After this we hear an answering machine recording saying that he and his wife went away. What do you guys think happened to Robert after this point? Do you think he was freaked over what he'd painted (he looked like he was) and actually left town because of it? Or do you think demon-Freddy needed him in order to make the final transition from the film world to ours?

And if the latter happened (Robert transforming into the demon-Freddy), do you guys think he died when Heather killed demon-Freddy? I wonder about this because John Saxon transforms into Lt. Thompson when the two worlds merged, so could the same have happened to Robert?

[Sean [The Wildcard]]

Geddy, that's actually a really interesting theory.

You could look at it as what was given to us. That being that Robert actually was freaked out and left town for some time with his wife.

OR

You could take the way more interesting approach and assume that the Entity of Freddy actually did need Roberts Body in order to make the final transition, because all scenes we saw involving "the demon" were very short.

[CountProphet]

It's JUST you.


I figured as, much. Guess it was wishful thinking on my part but, I can still swore I saw 2 scenes in there that were never in the films. Well, the ending credits are cool though.

[Rich]

One thing I've always wondered about WCNN is that the last time we see Robert Englund is when he's talking to Heather over the phone and finishes the Freddy painting. After this we hear an answering machine recording saying that he and his wife went away. What do you guys think happened to Robert after this point? Do you think he was freaked over what he'd painted (he looked like he was) and actually left town because of it? Or do you think demon-Freddy needed him in order to make the final transition from the film world to ours?

And if the latter happened (Robert transforming into the demon-Freddy), do you guys think he died when Heather killed demon-Freddy? I wonder about this because John Saxon transforms into Lt. Thompson when the two worlds merged, so could the same have happened to Robert?

That is a damn good post. I never ever thought of that. Heather became Nancy. John became Donald. So, wouldn't Robert become Freddy?

There is another idea too. There are people who believe that thinking about the idea of spirits or ghosts is enough to invite one into yout home. Well, what if thinking of the essence of Freddy, and painint the picture he painted was enough to pull the ura of the character out of the art and into reality? :shifty:

[Darth Sinister]

It's been a few years since I read the novelization, but I think there's a hint that he was very much scared of what he painted upon examining it closer. It is possible that in the story, he was merged with the Freddy demon and freed afterwards. Unlike with John Saxon, this isn't made really clear.

[Jus-X]

I never thought Robert became Freddy, I guess it's plausible. But when I think back to the movie (and its been a while since I've last seen it), I never considered the 2 worlds to merge Mortla Kombat style, but they merged within Heather and her son's head.

I always assumed everyone was dreaming the same thing, but Heather was the only one to stand up and fight, everyone else just backed off. HEather had to play Nancy one more time, so like her character she was a fighter.

[Geddy Peart]

It's been a few years since I read the novelization, but I think there's a hint that he was very much scared of what he painted upon examining it closer. It is possible that in the story, he was merged with the Freddy demon and freed afterwards. Unlike with John Saxon, this isn't made really clear.


I do remember in the novelization, demon-Freddy wanted to personally thank Wes Craven for creating the character and then kill him right after doing so.

And IMO, it only makes sense that Englund would turn into Freddy considering John turned into his character and Heather "became" Nancy again.

Also think about this: If demon Freddy had succeeded in killing "Nancy", Heather would have died as well. Wouldn't this apply to Robert/Freddy as well?

[Jus-X]

I love the theory guys, I really do. But I don't see how it makes much sense. Now I haven't read the novel. But if this theory is true, why is it only Heather/ Nancy and her son knew what was going on? No one else did? Everyone of Heathers friends were there to help her. John, Robert, Wes, Sean Cunningham... they were all there for her.

The fact of the matter was everyone was having the nightmares. Nancy had nightmares of her family in danger. Wes had a nightmare to give him the idea to write a new nightmare script. Robert had a nightmare to inspire him to paint the demon. These people were also there to help Heather keep her grip onher sanity. But John didn't turn into daddy from merging realms, he became daddy in Heather's mind. Nobody turned into anyone, because no one went through what Heather was going through. She saw the transition and became Nancy, no one else was affected like this. So, in my opinon, this was all in Heather's mind. The demon used her nightmares and fears against her and starting bringing her personal nightmares into reality.

If he did this to John Saxon, John Saxon would watch the events fall into place and watch Heather become Nancy without Heather's knowledge of it.

If Robert Englund's dreams came into play, he would see the demon come out of the painting and enter his body.

So in your theories, the worlds merge, which means everyone having nightmares should notice that, but only Heather did? Does it make sense the way I'm trying to explain it? I might not be using the right words to get my opinion across...

[Rich]

Sean Cunningham wasn't in Wes Craven's New Nightmare. Nick Corey had a cameo apprerence.

[Jus-X]

Sean Cunningham wasn't in Wes Craven's New Nightmare. Nick Corey had a cameo apprerence.

You know, I know who I meant... I didn't mean Sean, but also can't think of the name...oh shit, I'm an idiot... I meant Bob Shaye everyone! Bob Shaye! My bad!

[CountProphet]

You know, I know who I meant... I didn't mean Sean, but also can't think of the name...oh shit, I'm an idiot... I meant Bob Shaye everyone! Bob Shaye! My bad!

HAHA!

Not laughing at you just to make it clear. Its just for a moment there I really though, there might have been trivia information I missed about Sean Cunningham having something to do with New Nightmare.;):D

[Ron]

:X:X:X:X:X


That's for confusing Bob Shaye with Sean Cunningham.

[Rich]

Sean Cunningham was on set and did direct a scene in the original A Nightmare on Elm Street to help out Wes. They also worked together on the original The Last House on the Left, so the two have crossed paths in the past.

The thing about Wes Craven's New Nightmare is that it could have been either an early franchise reboot or a completely seperate Freddy Krueger film series dealing with the lives of the makers of the franchise and how the stigmata of the popularity of the films effected their lives.

I have always wished for a Wes Craven's New Nightmare 2 staring Lisa Wilcox, but it never happened and it never will now.

[Jus-X]

HAHA!

Not laughing at you just to make it clear. Its just for a moment there I really though, there might have been trivia information I missed about Sean Cunningham having something to do with New Nightmare.;):D
Well when you have a New Line Movie in mind, Cunningham is normally the first name you assocciate with New Line.

The thing about Wes Craven's New Nightmare is that it could have been either an early franchise reboot or a completely seperate Freddy Krueger film series dealing with the lives of the makers of the franchise and how the stigmata of the popularity of the films effected their lives.

I have always wished for a Wes Craven's New Nightmare 2 staring Lisa Wilcox, but it never happened and it never will now.

You know, that would have been a good idea Rich.

[Ron]

Well when you have a New Line Movie in mind, Cunningham is normally the first name you assocciate with New Line.

Seriously?

[The Dream Master]

Mixing up Shaye and Cunningham is about as uncool as you can get. :X

[nottidelterrore]

After visiting this message board, Cunningham comes to mind every time I buy a bag of Cheetos.

[Jus-X]

Seriously?

Yes, because ever since New Line bought the characters to Friday, the huge topic of discussion was Cunningham's input in producing JGTH. I don't know, but everytime I see the film and frame come together to form the New Line logo, I just think to myself, "Fucking Cunnigham." Ontop of that, being tired, half drunk and posting a comment with Bob Shaye's face in my head, not being able to think of his name, then picturing the New Line logo form on screen... I'm like "Cunningham!"

Mixing up Shaye and Cunningham is about as uncool as you can get. :X

Then I guess I'm grounded from this thread for 18 minutes.

[The Tall Man]

Try 418 minutes.

New Line Cinema was Bob Shaye's baby. In no way sober or drunk does "New Line reminds me first and foremost of Sean Cunningham" not defy logic. Shaye created New Line back in the 60s and sheparded it all this time until he was pushed out recently. Cunningham only had anything to do with three New Line films proper and tenuous involvement in Nightmare 1.

T.M., Esq.

[Jus-X]

I think 226 miunutes is long enough!!!

[CCL News]

I watched NN last night for the first time in a while and I thought Freddy's make up looked shitty when it was exposed to a lot of light. The colors were too dull.

[Rich]

Say what you will about Sean Cunningham, but he pretty much kept the franchise going through the horror genre's dark ages (mainly the 90s). We got Jason Goes to Hell in 1993 and Jason X in 2002 which might not have been the best films in the series, nor were they the most profitable, BUT they kept the character alive in the eyes of the public and made films like Freddy vs. Jason and Friday the 13th (2009) an easier sell.

"Jason X was a piece of business." - Sean Cunningham

He had it made while they were waiting for Freddy vs. Jason to take off. Sean just tried to do some different and interesting things with the series. There is no point in bitching about it anymore, since we got back the classic (Final Chapter-ish) version of Jason anyway.

I really don't think of Sean when I think of New Line. I usually think of Wes Craven and Bob Shaye when I think of New Line Cinema.

[Jus-X]

http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f209/thisgirlbelongstosaint/Jason%20Voorhees/JasonVoorhees-Eye.gif
http://images.rottentomatoes.com/images/movie/gallery/1007899/photo_01_hires.jpg

???

No Rich.

[Rich]

When I said we got back the Final Chapter-ish version of Jason I was referring to Friday the 13th (2009) not Jason X.

The point I was making is that it is pointless to bitch about movies like Jason Goes to Hell and Jason X since we got the human version of Jason back anyway.

By the way, with that picture you provided, they actually did make Jason look very human in Jason X, but that would probably be the regeneration.

[Ron]

One thing I truly loved about this film was it serious nature.

[Rich]

That is what I liked about it too. By the time the series was up to Freddy's Dead, the films weren't even trying to take themselves seriously anymore. Then Wes Craven's New Nightmare came out and Freddy was serious and scary again. People can bitch and moan about it not really being Freddy all they want, but as far as I'm concerned, it is Freddy and it is more Freddy then the character of the three films before it.

[Timberwolf Entertainment]

That is what I liked about it too. By the time the series was up to Freddy's Dead, the films weren't even trying to take themselves seriously anymore. Then Wes Craven's New Nightmare came out and Freddy was serious and scary again. People can bitch and moan about it not really being Freddy all they want, but as far as I'm concerned, it is Freddy and it is more Freddy then the character of the three films before it.

Actually.. I LOVE New Nightmare. There is no bitching from my end. In fact I think its better then the whole Nightmare on Elm Street series put together.. its on a level above it.

BUT..

It's still not Freddy.. in fact him not being Freddy is part of the PLOT of the film. Jeez.. Robert and Heather SAY its NOT Freddy IN THE FILM!!!!

Heather:
Its not Freddy.. its ...

Robert:
Darker, more evil..

..or something like that. (paraphrasing)

He is a demon or evil being who takes the form of 'feared' characters like the with in Hansel and Gretel etc. He took the form of Freddy in the 80s when he was fear by so many people and he thrived on it... but when New Line stopped making the films he got pissed cause he enjoyed assuming the role of Freddy.

So he decided to cross over out of films and try to become Freddy for real. But he is not actually Freddy. In fact in that world Freddy is just a movie character.



Anyway, yea.. its still a great film.

[Jus-X]

When I said we got back the Final Chapter-ish version of Jason I was referring to Friday the 13th (2009) not Jason X.

The point I was making is that it is pointless to bitch about movies like Jason Goes to Hell and Jason X since we got the human version of Jason back anyway.

By the way, with that picture you provided, they actually did make Jason look very human in Jason X, but that would probably be the regeneration.

Well you mentioned both movies. I thought you meant X because Jason regenerated his human tissue and looks tan again with patches of hair like he did in TFC.

[Rich]

Heather:
Its not Freddy.. its ...

Robert:
Darker, more evil..

Actually the conversation goes like this:

Heather:
Actually, it's been giving me Freddy nightmares.

Robert:
Let me get this straight. You're having nightmares about Freddy...as in me?

Heather:
No, it isn't you. He's scarier...he's...

Robert:
Darker? More evil?

And then it goes on. It IS Freddy Krueger but in a different context. It is not the exact same character of the first six films, but he's still Freddy in my book. Hell, for the most part, he's a better Freddy.

[The Tall Man]

Yes, but your book is not what the film is going with. The film is going with "this is a demon playing dress up."

T.M., Esq.

[Timberwolf Entertainment]

And then it goes on. It IS Freddy Krueger but in a different context. It is not the exact same character of the first six films, but he's still Freddy in my book. Hell, for the most part, he's a better Freddy.

He is NOT Freddy. In New Nightmare there is no such thing as "Freddy" he is just a movie character. He is something Wes, Bob and Robert made up. The demon character wants to be this fictional character because it scares people. The demon isn't any one thing, he is fear that takes shape of storybook characters and other things that scare us. For instance the demon as been the 'witch' from Hansel and Gretel etc. You could make sequels to New Nightmare that does not mention Freddy at all if you wanted too, and have the Demon trying to be something else. He becomes his interpretation of Freddy, but not Freddy himself... because there is no real Freddy.

It's not my opinion.. it's a fact. You are simply wrong. I have even talked to Robert at length about this at a Fango convension. ,who even says he was playing a different being. I'm not knocking New Nightmare, in fact I love it. I think it's better than the whole Elm Street series put together and its one of my favorite horror films of all time.

BUT.. it simply is not Freddy. In the 'context' of New Nightmare Freddy isn't even a real thing he is just a movie character. Write all the 'books' you want.. won't change that fact.


Oddly, Ron Moore (Star trek TNG) Did write a FVSJ that was a sequel to NN and not the Elm Series where the Demon takes on the 'real' Jason who is on trial for murder. In this story, there are Friday The 13th films, but they are based on the crimes of a real living Jason. Again, in this story though, Freddy is NOT real and only a movie character. This idea was dropped because the studio wanted Freddy Vs Jason, not Demon Freddy Vs. The Killer that the F13 films are based on.

[nottidelterrore]

It's not my opinion.. it's a fact. You are simply wrong.

That's a rude way of putting it though even if it is a fact.

But yeah, this isn't Freddy in New Nightmare. I still like this movie but I find it boring as hell for the most part. Miko Hughes' character is annoying as shit. If he was my kid & doing all of that screaming and acting up, he'd be headed straight for the orphanage.

[The Tall Man]

This idea was dropped because the studio wanted Freddy Vs Jason, not Demon Freddy Vs. The Killer that the F13 films are based on.
And rightfully so!

T.M., Esq.

[Timberwolf Entertainment]

And rightfully so!

T.M., Esq.

Yea, I agree.. I kinda like the idea as a concept, but its a major cheat as a 25mill "FvsJ" event film.

That's why I'm glad Bob Shaye didn't go with calling New Nightmare "A Nightmare On Elm Street 7" because it really just isn't Elm Street 7. It's a seperate film. I liked how one of the early trailers didn't mention Elm Street or show Englund at all.

[Jus-X]

I think a good NN sequel would be to make the demon a Juinn (The main anatagonist of the Wishmaster series). Wes in the NN movie said the demon was like a genie in the bottle, and that the movies were being made and that's where the demon was held is his proverbial bottle until they stopped making the movies. *Stops and admires movie plot*

But back to the point, make the demon a Juinn (however you spell it) and then have the Juinn from Wishmaster come into the picture and have a battle royale.

[Darth Sinister]

I love the theory guys, I really do. But I don't see how it makes much sense. Now I haven't read the novel. But if this theory is true, why is it only Heather/ Nancy and her son knew what was going on? No one else did? Everyone of Heathers friends were there to help her. John, Robert, Wes, Sean Cunningham... they were all there for her.

Everyone was having nightmares, but the only ones to really know what was going on where the major players. Wes Craven, Robert Englund and Heather Langenkemp, along with Dylan. Craven knew because he studied mythology and a bit about demonology. Heather knew because she talked to Craven about doing another film and thus he explained it to her. Dylan didn't really understand what was going on, since he was too young to watch her films and wasn't there to listen to Craven. He just went by what he saw and what Heather told him. Englund talked to Craven from time to time and because he played Freddy for about eight years, six films and two years on television, he was able to piece things together.

The novelization pretty much follows the film. Only the amount of dialogue from the Freddy demon is different, due to whatever was ad libed on set. The author inserted additional material about his research into the film and played along with the idea that this was real and that Freddy was coming for him. This took place in between each chapter.

Freddy isn't exactly a Jinn in the strictest sense. Or even that. It's just a demon that liked Freddy Kruger and emulated him.

That's a rude way of putting it though even if it is a fact.

It's not rude. It's called being blunt.

[nottidelterrore]

It's not rude. It's called being blunt.

Next time I'll consult a dictionary before I post anything else. Thanks for correcting me. I appreciate it immensely.

Demon Fred was stylish in this movie.

[Jus-X]

I liked his coat.

[nottidelterrore]

Isn't this Freddy also known as "Gap Freddy?" I believe I've heard that before around these parts. I've learned a lot from this place. :)

[The Dream Master]

Yep, good ol' Gappy.

http://img43.imageshack.us/img43/9199/gapfreddy.jpg

[nottidelterrore]

:lol:

That's fucking amazing. Did you just make it? I can't see newz.

[The Dream Master]

Nah, that's a classic from way back at the old place. Not sure who made that one. Had to be one of the Shaye boys though (Boo, Wes, Tally, or Esten).

[nottidelterrore]

Those boys are responsible for many masterpieces.

[The Dream Master]

Yeah, buncha classy guys dere.

[Esten]

GAP-Freddy was mine dere. See dat dere doep limp he got?

[Utellme]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Timberwolf Entertainment

It's not my opinion.. it's a fact. You are simply wrong.

How are we wrong for what we view it as, to me when i watch it.It is Freddy to me.I may be wrong but if so im glad to be.Either way i like this film

[Just Jeans]

How are we wrong for what we view it as

You're ignoring key moments of exposition in order to facilitate your own interpretation of the character. There's no ambiguity in the story: this is not Freddy Krueger, but a demon that wishes to utilize the form of Freddy Krueger to infiltrate our world.

(What happens in New Nightmare is actually pretty similar to what Gozer does in Ghostbusters. What we see attack the city at the end of the film isn't the actual Mr. Stay Puft, but rather a manifestation of Gozer. The same thing applies in New Nightmare. A powerful demon manifests itself in our world in the image of its preferred Destructor form.)

If you'd like to believe that the creature in New Nightmare is really Freddy Krueger, then more power to you. But don't be surprised when people tell you that you're incorrect, because what you're saying flies in the face of everything we're told in the film.

[The Tall Man]

Good explanation dere, Jeans!

T.M., Esq.!

[The Dream Master]

So if the demon in WCNN wanted to be J. Edgar Hoover, it'd show up as J. Edgar Hoover and destroy us?

[Jus-X]

Gozer? I thought Gozer was a man?

[nottidelterrore]

So if the demon in WCNN wanted to be J. Edgar Hoover, it'd show up as J. Edgar Hoover and destroy us?

Or Bill Cosby.

[Utellme]

You're ignoring key moments of exposition in order to facilitate your own interpretation of the character. There's no ambiguity in the story: this is not Freddy Kruger, but a demon that wishes to utilize the form of Freddy Kruger to infiltrate our world.

(What happens in New Nightmare is actually pretty similar to what Gozer does in Ghostbusters. What we see attack the city at the end of the film isn't the actual Mr. Stay Puft, but rather a manifestation of Gozer. The same thing applies in New Nightmare. A powerful demon manifests itself in our world in the image of its preferred Destructor form.)

If you'd like to believe that the creature in New Nightmare is really Freddy Kruger, then more power to you. But don't be surprised when people tell you that you're incorrect, because what you're saying flies in the face of everything we're told in the film.

Yeah i get what your saying Jeans and your right.But i notice that me and Rich view alot of these films in our own way and everytime Rich states that he gets beat on for it. Like you said maybe its something thats gonna happen to us which is cool its all good.


I don't know what Rich's view on this is but mine is like this at the end of F13th's 1-5 to me theres no dreams its cannon its there right in front of my face.To me Jason popping out of lake at the end , real.It may be wrong but this is the way i view things.

[Rich]

Okay so in Wes Craven's New Nightmare, the "monster" was not actually Freddy Krueger, since Freddy was just a movie character. The "monster" actually was a real life entity taking the form of a fictional character (kind of like in Stephen King's It), and in this case, it chose to take the form of Freddy (just like Freddy took the form of Mrs. Voorhees in Freddy vs. Jason).

Then I think that the demon who took the form of Freddy played a better Freddy then most of the actually Freddy characters aside from the original and maybe Part 3. :X

[Jus-X]

I don't know Rich, part 2 Freddy was pretty wicked!

[Timberwolf Entertainment]

Then I think that the demon who took the form of Freddy played a better Freddy then most of the actually Freddy characters aside from the original and maybe Part 3. :X

Now THAT is an opinion, and one that isn't really right or wrong. In fact I kind of agree... though I don't think he played a better 'Freddy" as much as he was just cooler and darker as a character.

The main difference of the two is Demon Fred is on a quest for power and to control fear really, he is grander. He knows what he is and what he wants.He lives and desires fear, not really murder. In fact the film suggest he lived on fear alone until he crossed the line, and only murdered to create more fear. He doesn't get off on murder itself.

Freddy Krueger was on a quest for revenge, at least originally... it wasn't really until Dream Master where he got drunk on power and realized he could rule the dream world and basicly control fear. He was just a child murderer who was given this power, and he didn't even really know how far he could go. He is much simpler than Demon Freddy in that regard. He is a sick murderer who likes to kill, he likes the blood etc. When he first got the power, I'm not 100% sure he really knew all the power he had. The films back this up as each film he gains more and by FD he actually crossed the line.

By FvsJ he knows FEAR gives him the power, but he doesn't get off on fear, he just needs it so he can kill. He uses fear so he CAN kill. Baiscly the opposite of Demon Fred who kills to make fear.

They really are two very different characters.

Which I think why there is some resistance to the remake, because they are changing the character. At the end of the day, you can change is glove, the house, the victims, as long as he still a filthy child murderer. But this sympathy and this 'did he or didn't he' changes the actual character. Jason X was silly.. but under the metal it was still Jason.

[Utellme]

I don't know Rich, part 2 Freddy was pretty wicked!

Heck if anything i thought that was one of the best Freddy's of the series.And the makeup was one of the best also imo.

[Jus-X]

Heck if anything i thought that was one of the best Freddy's of the series.And the makeup was one of the best also imo.

I agree to it being one of the best. They almost go into order for me. 1, 2, NN, 3, 4, 6, 5

[BlakeTyner]

(What happens in New Nightmare is actually pretty similar to what Gozer does in Ghostbusters. What we see attack the city at the end of the film isn't the actual Mr. Stay Puft, but rather a manifestation of Gozer. The same thing applies in New Nightmare. A powerful demon manifests itself in our world in the image of its preferred Destructor form.)


"Let's show this prehistoric bitch how we do things downtown."

That is all.

~Blake

[Rich]

Which I think why there is some resistance to the remake, because they are changing the character

They aren't changing him all that much. All they are really doing is adding the mystery story line of whether he actually did or did not kill any of the Elm Street kids while alive. The rest of the backstory is the same old "parents burned him alive out of revenge and he comes back in dreams to murder the kids of the parents who killed him."

As far as Freddy's character himself, I think they are pretty much going back to the dark and evil character in the films that Wes made (which I could not be more happy about!) rather then the skateboard riding video game playing stand up act.

Fuller did say that alot changed from the script in that Nancy is not going to be gothic as one example, which is why he wishes the thing never leaked. We really just have to wait until the film comes out, because none of us really know what we are talking about until we see it. I am just being opotomistic because of what they did for Chainsaw and Friday. Hell, I wish Platinum Dunes did Halloween instead of Rob Zombie.

[Nancy Thompson]

I don't know Rich, part 2 Freddy was pretty wicked!

Even though it was not my fav Freddy was pretty evil and wicked in there too like when he killed the gym coach and aslo grady. And not forget the pool deaths

[Timberwolf Entertainment]

They aren't changing him all that much. All they are really doing is adding the mystery story line of whether he actually did or did not kill any of the Elm Street kids while alive. .

Thats actually changing the entire character at its most basic level. The things you mentioned are superficial and unimportant changes. You could take away the hat, and you could have the parents run him over with a car instead of burning him, and THAT wouldn't be changing Freddy that much. It's all superficial. He is still a filthy sadistic child killer out for revenge.

By changing it 'to did he or didn't he it 'changes the CHARACTER in a major fundamental way... not minor story points like outfits and methods of murder. With this he may not actually be the killer they say he is and he was driven to revenge, driven to murder.

I'm not really saying if its good or bad, but it is a major character change. Now, if we find out he DID then its just a story change and he still the same bastard we know I guess.

[Rich]

By changing it 'to did he or didn't he it 'changes the CHARACTER in a major fundamental way

I disagree, because even though they are changing a backstory detail, he has still been turned into the same dream demon monster despite the backstory difference, so the character will remain the same.

[Jus-X]

But the character of Freddy in the series as we know it was evil before he became a dream demon. We know he abducted. We know he killed.

The new movie coming out is toying with the notion maybe he's a pedifial, maybe he's not? Maybe he killed, maybe he didn't. That's taking the evil out of Freddy before he became a dream demon. If there was a chance he was innocent, then he's killing the Elm St kids because their parent killed him, and he's moreso killing due to vengance. In the series as we know it, Freddy was simply doing what he did in the dream world as he did in the real world, but he paid special attention to the Elm St kids because of who their parents were.

[Rich]

You are right. In the original Elm series Freddy was just a bad seed. He was evil from day one. In the new interpretation he may not have been evil from day one, but rather turned evil as a result of an injustice. So, it is a new interpretation of a familiar character, yet as the dream demon, I think he is going to be as he was in the first two Nightmares.

I am open to the new idea in the new film. I still have the first eight films on DVD and nothing will ever change that.

[Darth Reaper]

Freddy Krueger was on a quest for revenge, at least originally... it wasn't really until Dream Master where he got drunk on power and realized he could rule the dream world and basicly control fear. He was just a child murderer who was given this power, and he didn't even really know how far he could go. He is much simpler than Demon Freddy in that regard. He is a sick murderer who likes to kill, he likes the blood etc. When he first got the power, I'm not 100% sure he really knew all the power he had. The films back this up as each film he gains more and by FD he actually crossed the line.

By FvsJ he knows FEAR gives him the power, but he doesn't get off on fear, he just needs it so he can kill. He uses fear so he CAN kill. Baiscly the opposite of Demon Fred who kills to make fear.

They really are two very different characters.- Timberwolf Entertainment

I kind of disagree with you here. I think both characters get off on fear. For Freddy, fear isn't just what fuels his power, it's part of what makes murder enjoyable for him. It's part of the rush. In life, the terror that he inspired in others made him feel powerful, and in death it got even better because it actually does make him powerful.

I don't know that Demon Freddy fed on fear. I got the impression that it was simply that the closer he got to escaping from the story, the more influence he gained over our reality.

And, I wouldn't say that he prefered fear over death. In the film he's going after people who are close to Heather because she's the one who can stop him and he wants to break her down so that she'll be easier to defeat. We don't really get a chance to see what he'd once he's free to do as he pleases.

I'd say that ultimately he's evil incarnate and therefore he lives to do evil. I think that's what it's really about. He's perpetuating himself. It starts with fear and it ends with death and destruction. One isn't necessarily more important than the other. They're two steps in the same process of doing evil.


You are right. In the original Elm series Freddy was just a bad seed. He was evil from day one. In the new interpretation he may not have been evil from day one, but rather turned evil as a result of an injustice. So, it is a new interpretation of a familiar character, yet as the dream demon, I think he is going to be as he was in the first two Nightmares.- Rich

But, that misses the point of Freddy's character. It's not about whether or not he's guilty, or whether or not he was always bad, the answer to both questions is yes. The point is that even though he was bad the parents had no right to kill him. They did something terrible and now its coming back to haunt them, and their children pay the ultimate price for their sins. I say that if they really want to stay true to Wes Craven's character they need to stay true to the point of the character.

Also, the fact that Freddy was always bad makes him distinct. Jason is the tortured soul who's driven to violence by mysery. Michael is the living personafication of evil who lives only to destroy. And, Freddy is a murdering bastard who got even worse when his enemies took justice into their own hands ahd crossed the line by murdering him. Suggesting that Freddy is an innocent man who goes bad because he was wronged brings him too close to guys like Jason who are supposed to be simpathetic, and I think that's doing a disservice to the character.

I am open to the new idea in the new film. I still have the first eight films on DVD and nothing will ever change that.

And, in a way I'd say that you're fortunate to feel that way. Lord knows it cuts down on the stress. But, I want more stories with the character that I've come to enjoy, or at least a reasonable facsimile. I can only watch the first eight films so many times before I need a new one. And if they change the character, my time has been wasted. Even if he behaves like the old Freddy after he dies, if he's not the filthy child-murdering son of a hundred maniacs that he's supposed to be when he was alive he's not Freddy, and that will forever taint my ability to enjoy these new films.

[Timberwolf Entertainment]

Demon Freddy fed on fear.

His very 'life' was the fear little kids had when there parents read them a story etc. He would latch on to any story and feed and enjoy the fear. However, the story says that Nightmare on Elm Street was so popular and know by so many people worldwide a created this large awareness of 'one' scary story, where before it may be several diff books/stories in different cultures. (In a way Wes is playing a bit with his Ego saying is creation is the most known 'ghost story/campfire tale')

Anyway, when this one story becomes so known Demon Freddy gets drunk on this mass fear/awareness of "Freddy" and enjoys every minute of it. However, eventually Freddy loses some of his fear when the story becomes more mainstream and watered down to be an easier sell (a swipe at New Line for making Elm Street more commercial and silly) When they kill him off in FD the demon gets even more pissed that he loses that outlet. With his power he influences Wes to write a new script through his nightmares thus giving him an outlet. He also influences Bob Shaye, Heather etc. As he gains larger power and his able to cross over, he kills to create more fear, not so much to kill. Now, I'm not saying he doesn't like it.. he probably does. Much like a Pot Smoker who tries Coke and likes it, maybe he does step up to be addicted to murder as well, but it wasn't part of his world before, its all new to him, he never had this strength or influence before.

That is what I meant about him not getting off on killing. His character wasn't born from that, it was something he needed to do to gain more power. Like Al Capone killing to get more money and create fear over a city. But like Al I'm sure he is still a crazy sadistic bastard.

"Freddy Krueger' gets off on actually killing. in fact he is the complete opposite. He was in the real world and was a sick murdering fuck. Not sure he ever had real 'power' plans other than to be able to keep killing. But when he died and the dream demons gave him that power, he did get drunk on power and fear "I want it all!!" as he says in the FD flashback. He did get off on fear, as can be seen by using a persons fears to torture them in various sequels. But his original intent was just murder. he discovered power later.

Two very different characters who went on opposite journeys.

Freddy.: Real world murderer, crosses over into dreams and uses power and fear to kill again.

Demon Freddy: Dream world fear maker, crosses over into reality and uses murder to create fear and gain power.

Now what if Demon Freddy was not stopped... he may have actually became "Freddy Krueger" and used his power and fear to satisfy his new vice.. killing :) but thats just guessing.

[Jus-X]

But, that misses the point of Freddy's character. It's not about whether or not he's guilty, or whether or not he was always bad, the answer to both questions is yes. The point is that even though he was bad the parents had no right to kill him. They did something terrible and now its coming back to haunt them, and their children pay the ultimate price for their sins. I say that if they really want to stay true to Wes Craven's character they need to stay true to the point of the character.

The parents took the law into their own hands. Freddy was a murdering bastard before he became a dream demon. He finally got caught and arrested. The evidence they found pointed to nobody alse but Krueger. Look at it this way, let's just say, a video was found with Freddy abducting, torturing, and murdering children. The video was entered into evidence, but the defense found out the video was obtained in Freddy's house, and the police got it without a proprely signed search warrent. Due to Freddy's rights, the video was tossed and the prosecution had no other evidence, so he was freed on a technicality. The judge knew he was guilty, the lawyers knew, but it was the police didn't do their job right. It was their fault. Freddy was back on the streets to kill again, and the police department decided to correct their mistake. A lynch mob was formed, and to protect their children they killed Freddy's physical body, unbeknowingst that his soul would live on in dreams.

Now I'm not saying the evidence was a video, but it was as damning as a video. The point is, the Freddy of the movie's doesn't kill because wrong was done to him, he kills because his nature is completely evil, which attracted the attention of the dream demons who gave Freddy his powers. Freddy will kill no matter what, but his abilities were restricted to the dreams of the parent's children until Kristen came around and ruined it for Alice's crew.

So I see it this was, Freddy doesn't kill for vengance, he's not a Jason character. Freddy kills because he enjoys killing and nothing else. He did it in reality, he now does it in dreams. If you take away the fact Ferddy was purely and simply evil before he became a dream demon, it takes away a huge part of Freddy and his nature. you can't just take that away. You can't say he kills because of the parents, he kills because he kills and there's no other explanation.

The Freddy of NN, I have to agree with Darth... never intended on killing people originally. He fed off of fear, and once the fear turned to laughter he had to up his game. So to create more fear he started killing and effecting Heather's child.

[The Dream Master]

Freddy's motives are a bit of a mixed bag, I'd say. He started killing because he enjoyed it. When he first came back, his first motive was to take revenge against those parents that had killed him (but you can bet your ass he also took pleasure in the act of killing still). Then as time went on, he just wanted to kill more and more; then FD comes along and tells us he's been killing because they took his daughter away, which just adds to the layers, I guess.

In New Nightmare, Craven was very much fucking with the concept of Jungian archetypes--the idea that cultures from all over the world create a "shared myth" (despite having never come into contact with each other at times), part of a "collective unconscious" that basically creates stories as a way to deal with different things. For example, there are hundreds of creation myths that share some of the same basic tenants, and so on and so forth. The Demon found in WCNN is basically an archetype of fear that's manifested itself in stories throughout history (such as "Hansel and Gretel"); the stories are meant to contain that fear (in this case, the fear seems to be exclusively related to children being stalked/preyed on by a predator of some sort). The Nightmare on Elm Street series bottled that fear up, but once it was watered down and ended, the genie was let loose with no story to contain it anymore.

[Jus-X]

Freddy's motives are a bit of a mixed bag, I'd say. He started killing because he enjoyed it. When he first came back, his first motive was to take revenge against those parents that had killed him (but you can bet your ass he also took pleasure in the act of killing still). Then as time went on, he just wanted to kill more and more; then FD comes along and tells us he's been killing because they took his daughter away, which just adds to the layers, I guess.


We only think Freddy kills out of vengance because that's what Nancy believed and preached. Nacy didn't personally know Freddy, Freddy never said "Your parents killed me so now I kill you. Ha!" The fact of the matter is, he was only able to enter the dreams of the children of those who killed him. He didn't kill them for his vengance, but instead used them to gain more power. After meeting Kristen and finding our her abilities, he would have used her to bring him people outside of the group of parents that killed him. But Kristen, before dying, passed her power onto Alice who didn't know any better. The whole "I kill because they took you away from me daughter!" I think was just BS on Freddy's behalf. He was trying to find a way to justify killing to his daughter. He killed before they took her away, why would it be any different after they took her away. She was taken away after it was found out who Freddy was, with his weapons and pictures of children and what not...

[Timberwolf Entertainment]

In New Nightmare, Craven was very much fucking with the concept of Jungian archetypes--the idea that cultures from all over the world create a "shared myth" (despite having never come into contact with each other at times), part of a "collective unconscious" that basically creates stories as a way to deal with different things. For example, there are hundreds of creation myths that share some of the same basic tenants, and so on and so forth. The Demon found in WCNN is basically an archetype of fear that's manifested itself in stories throughout history (such as "Hansel and Gretel"); the stories are meant to contain that fear (in this case, the fear seems to be exclusively related to children being stalked/preyed on by a predator of some sort). The Nightmare on Elm Street series bottled that fear up, but once it was watered down and ended, the genie was let loose with no story to contain it anymore.

Did you ever read that FvsJ that had Demon Freddy and "Real" Jason. I was always curious how Ron Moore and Brannon Braga continued with New nightmare Freddy and why he was interested in Jason, who I believe was on trial in that script. I'm not sure I would want to see a 25mill version of that on the big screen, but I wouldn't mind seeing how the story played out in comic form or something since I was a fan of NN.

[Jus-X]

Did you ever read that FvsJ that had Demon Freddy and "Real" Jason. .

Yeah, heard if a shitload of script ideas, this being one of them. Alot of them dealt with real world characters outside of the movies. I think they wanted to use the characters we know and love instead of characters based on real world people. But I agree, I would be insterested to see how the story would have played out with Demon Freddy and "Real" Jason. How they would have met, what the fight would be like, would "Real" Jason talk?