A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010) - Thread IV

[The Dream Master]

Alright, it's coming out tonight, technically, so here's a shiny new thread with a poll to boot.

Also, it looks like some critics have gotten a hold of it after all because Rotten Tomatoes is showing 5 reviews in their database. I'm not reading them though, and a request for anyone who would like to talk about the early reviews: spoil tag that shit or at least give fair warning. I don't like reading reviews early, with a few exceptions.

Expect the OTH review tomorrow around 10:00, but expect some Freddy-related goodness tonight to tide you over!

Also, it goes without saying: keep using spoiler tags for the film itself.

[Jus-X]

I'm seeing it on Saturday with my bud who puts on our movie nights. I'm excited about it... I'm going in with high hopes it will rock... but then again, went in to see Zombieween with high hopes and look what happened dere... took RZH2 to get me to appreciate the first one. :x

[Hockey Mask]

I'll be catching this sometime tomorrow but over at AICN there are reviews on both sides of the spectrum. I do think it will bring in 35-40 million this weekend though.

[Rick]

I was going to take my girlfriend to see the early show tomorrow, but now oney is going to be a little tighter so I may have to wait til next tuesday cheap night.

[Dead Cell]

I'll have a review up here at 2 a.m. tomorrow. Am I really the only one going to the midnight premiere?

[Sean [The Wildcard]]

Was going to see a midnight showing of this, but alas, that is no longer happening.

I actually have no idea if I will be able to see this in theaters.:confused:

[Jus-X]

I normally go to them, but my work schedule has me waking up at 5:30 in the morning. I don't want three and a half hours of sleep then wake up for a 9 hour shift. Fucking re-dickyouless.

[Skye]

I wanted to go see this tomorrow, but alas, Larry has to work till 9 and won't have time to come back here and get to BR for the last showing. We'll hopefully go see it Saturday.

[Geddy Peart]

I'm going to try and see the earliest showing I can tomorrow. I've liked every other reboot PD has put out so far, so hopefully this one will be good as well

[Harmonic Bond]

Not that it particularly matters, but this is being destroyed in the reviews.

[Rich]

Every horror movie does. The more bad reviews it gets, the more likely it will be a good movie.

[El Diablo]

I enjoyed it. It's far from perfect and it does stray a bit from the original but I happen to be one of the few people who attended the early test screenings last October and ended up very disappointed with the cut they had at the time. All of my major gripes have been dealt with, mainly the lack of inventive nightmares (Freddy never showed any real sense of power or manipulation over the dream world in the rough cut). They extended and reshot the ending, which is more violent, and they even managed to give Freddy more of an edgy sense of humor that he seemed to be missing in the early version. I see that some of the critics are already shredding the movie to peices in their reviews, and I agree that it's far from perfect and doesn't hold a candle to the original, but I still feel it's better than some of the lame sequels from the original series and superior to some of the recent horror films that have hit theaters lately.

[The Tall Man]

These pretty much sum it up:

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/44873

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/44864

T.M., Esq.

[Apocalypto]

I really liked it, it's quite a bit better than ANOES 2 (which I liked alot), and much more in line with 1, 3, and New Nightmare than 4, 5, and Freddy's Dead.

The majority of the music was uninspired and forgettable, as expected with Jablonsky, but it's well acted, Haley is absolutely perfect as Freddy, atleast as good as Englund, the way that they explained being in a dream state without actually sleeping when your body is sleep deprived for extreme lengths of time was a very interesting plot device to break down the 'don't fall asleep and you'll be ok' safe zone, and I liked the way Freddy's potential innocence plays out as a moral dilemma for the characters not knowing for sure whether he was guilty or not up until the tail end.

No character in this film is nearly as strong as the original Nancy, but the overall far better acting and how good of a heel villain Freddy was at being such a heartless sinister bastard made me feel for the trauma they were going through and had me really hoping atleast a few of them would make it through the movie.

Visually, the film wasn't as much of an improvement as I would've hoped, I actually think wall bursting Freddy probably looked better in the original, but a solid young cast and an absolute top notch villain with great dialogue and a foreboding presence just about every time he's onscreen made it a very creepy experience throughout, I felt chills several times. Freddy is exactly the character that he needs to be, not at all slapstick funny with a great sinister, twisted sense of humor. It's a perfect depiction of Freddy in a flawed, but satisfying film.

Definitely the best Platinum Dunes movie thus far.

[Fan of Freddy]

OK so I just got back from seeing this tonight at a midnight showing with some friends.

Before I say anything about it, I just wanna throw in here that I have been keeping myself away from the main threads and discussions about this film both here and on other boards. I have for the most part avoided all the clips released. I have tried to keep myself as clean as possible so when I did see it, nothing would be spoiled and I could form a more solid opinion. I would also like to say that I'm not usually one to get mad over films, be them remakes or whatever. Especially with remakes, I can usually find something about them I like and give credit where it's due.

That being said, this movie pissed me the fuck off. I'm still fuming as a write this, so please excuse the rage. This has to be the worst thing to ever bear the name of the franchise; there is no quality to it at all, not even an ATTEMPT to tell a decent story or do anything new and fresh, or even FAMILIAR with the story OR with Freddy. Even Jackie Earle Haley, who I had high hopes for, was a major disappointment. He especially had all the potential in the world to breathe new life into this character and he's fucking wasted on the shitty script he has to act from.

There is so much about this that just pissed me off, can't even properly covey it right now. After I calm down I plan to come back and write a more solid review of it, but right now I just need to go watch the original and cleanse my mind.

Before I go however; a few parting words for the Dunes morons, If by some miracle they ever read this. You guys are fucking slobs. You have zero interest in quality, or in making a product that lives up the reputation of the franchise it comes from, or lives up to what the fans want and know and love. You are greedy money hungry pigs who put out shit under a well known title to just make a quick buck, and you don't deserve the fame and notoriety its gotten you. You guys can kindly go fuck yourselves in the ass with your Fake-Freddy's glove. Goodnight.

[Deathscythe]

snip

I'm glad the first review I see on the forum is one with positive feedback. I will give this film a chance, but regardless of this films quality I will always have the original.

[TheShowstoppa]

Okay... just before I fall asleep myself, I wanted to give my two cents: It was pretty good. It wasn't fatastic, it wasn't the be all, see all of Freddy flicks, and it should have had a few things different.

Jackie Earle Hayley was brilliant in my opinion and just kept getting better as the movie went on. He was the highlight of this film.

The girl who played Nancy fell short. Even though, as we all know, she was to be the focal point, she was underused and the actress did a downright piss poor job with the character. Better casting could have been done.

Kyle Garner was brilliant at points, and in other points fell ultimately short. He didn't reach his full potential until right around the last leg of the film.

The way they treated some of the old throwbacks to the first film were good. Others were just plain horrible. I for one absolutely loathed how they changed up the blood on the ceiling scene. Ultimately, I liked the character of Fred. Fred Krueger is a very likeable guy and JEH shines in a non-make up role. Freddy, though - Started off kinda weary but grew into a badass by the end of the film.

There are some things I absolutely LOVE about the film, and there are others that I just cannot get into. A second viewing will better help me figure out where in the line it falls, but right now - It was pretty good. Definitely watchable, and not a piece of shit like the purists would make you believe.

I will say one thing that pissed me off beyond ANYTHING else was the final jump scare. Not only did the movie have about 50 of them, but the final one was piss poor. In my mind, instead of killing the mother (ala throwback to the original) I figured Nancy could go upstairs lay down and as she closes her eyes you hear a classic "Hello, Nancy," with her eyes popping WIDE open and the glove suspended in air opening up showing that Freddy was still alive. (Ala - Poster art for the original NOES from 20-some odd years ago) fade to black. Roll Credits. MUCH MORE tasteful than the horrible CGI sequence that took place. Seriously - Dunes needs to get a better grip on how to end their remakes. It's driving me insane.

One more thing - The final battle was brilliant. I love how they bring Freddy into the real world and actually have a brawl. So much better than the original. What I didn't like (at all) about it was the reusing (poorly for that matter) of the ending for Freddy vs. Jason. The whole "You're in my world now, Bitch!" and slicking of the throat was tacky and had already been used. Somewhere, Bob Shaye and Robert Englund are going "We might have made a lack luster film in FvJ, but at least we had somewhat of originality."

I think that sums it up. I'm probably going back to watch it again sometime else, but I don't know when.

[Penhall]

I'm seeing this tomorrow. Gonna go to an earlier show so I don't have to deal with the annoying teeny-boppers.

Its a strange feeling, being the night before I see the Freddy remake. A part of me wants the movie to be really shitty and tank at the box office, and another part of me wants it to be good and successful.

I love the Nightmare films and Freddy Krueger. But can I deal with the series continuing without Robert Englund? I guess I'll find out tomorrow. Gonna try to keep as open a mind as possible.

But I will say, regardless of how I feel about the new film, Robert Englund is and will always be Freddy Krueger to me. I don'[t care how well Jackie Earle Haley does or how cool of a guy he may be.

Robert Englund is MY Freddy Krueger. I will always respect and admire the man for bringing the character to life and entertaining and enthralling me ever since I first watched Nightmare on Elm Street with my Mom on cable those many years ago.

[Dead Cell]

Just got back from it.

1. One of my friends had a serious problem with Freddy being *SO* blatantly portrayed as a child molester. Like Tall Man, she never thought of the original Freddy that way, and it bothered her. I gotta' say too, that, they really hammered away on that aspect of his character.

2. The ending was stupid. Really stupid.

3. The way Freddy was killed at the end was really, probably the most uninspired of any Elm Street. Really.

4. Borrowing lines from NOES 4? Okay. Borrowing lines from FvJ? No. Both of the lines they borrowed from FvJ were just as stupid here as they were there. Horrible.

5. The pacing. It's just... there's not much build-up. It just dumps you right into the mix and off you go. And it never stops.

*sigh*
There were a lot of things I did like in this movie, but it doesn't come close to eclipsing the original. I liked all the extra backstory bits we got on Freddy, but I detest the idea that he molested Nancy. I don't like that they made her a victim like that. There was always that line between them in the original series that never got crossed.

The tone was dark. It looked good. Freddy got real dialogue instead of corny one-liners and bad puns. Most of the cast was good. Hm... yeah, I didn't hate it, but somehow it's just not firing on all cylinders for me. Haley was great as Freddy. Nancy was a pale shadow of Heather's Nancy.

I say nice effort, but could've been better. A lot better. Can I change my vote to "average horror movie"?

[jah jah jason]

I really enjoyed the movie. The audience seemed to like it also.

[Apocalypto]

2. The ending was stupid. Really stupid.

But way better than inflate-a-mommy being dragged through the window.

[jah jah jason]

But way better than inflate-a-mommy being dragged through the window.


I totally agree.

[Rick]

I'm going to see this in a couple hours on the matinee.
I'm expecting it to be better then 2, 4, 5 and 6.
If it is, then I'll be happy.
I also hope the ending is better then the original.

[The Dream Master]

Well, I guess I'm about to leave. It's a weird feeling for me personally. Not sure if you'd call it excitement, but there is some extreme curiosity going down right now. It's odd to say I'm about to go watch a new Nightmare on Elm Street in theaters. Will return with review in tow.

[DrSpengler]

Here's my full-blown review. (http://pellecreepy.blogspot.com/2010/04/nightmare-on-elm-street-2010.html)

Reeaaaalllly liked Haley's Freddy. A very different take on the villain from Robert's while still maintaining the core traits. In fact, thanks to the flashbacks, I think that this Freddy is a bit stronger as a character, too, with some extra depth to him.

They remake far too many of the moments from the orignal film and don't opt for enough new kills or freaky dream sequence scares for my taste, which ultimately hurt the movie. Bayer didn't really seem to get that he could do ANYTHING with the dream setting and implemented the same scare tactics over and over again.

There were a few good, original moments (loved the part in the drug store), though.

I'd say its the best of Platinum Dunes' three New Line remakes and I really want to see more of this new Freddy.

[Jus-X]

I love hearing mixed reviews. It's not a one sided hatefest like Halloween was. Still looking forward to the movie tommorow, fuck you all for seeing it before me! :p

[VoorheesGuy91]

If somebody held a 12 gauge shotgun to my head and demanded to know my opinion on ANOES (2010), I would kiss my own ass goodbye. I just don't know where I stand with this entry. I didn't love it, but I didn't hate it. The opening of the film was quite weak in my opinion, however as it progressed I found myself liking it more and more. We don't get much character development, but that came as no suprise. I did feel that way too much time was spent on Kris, she was too old for High School and we all knew that she was going to bite the dust. Nancy was dull and can't even been compared to Heather Langenkamp's character. I did like Quentin on the other hand, he came across as very genuine. At the end of the day, the acting was better than expected. So no complaints there. I was very let down by Jackie Earl Hailey's portrayl. It was not his fault in the least though, the script never allowed him to spread his wings as far as I am concerned. Had there been a quality script, he could have reinvented the character. I did end up digging the look of Freddy, even though he looked like a hamster in a fedora at points.

Just to clarify on something, prior to the release there was a lot of discussion regarding a lack of gore and the possibility of a PG-13 rating. No way folks, this flick was brutal. The red stuff was flowing and I was lovin' it.

This reboot cannot hold a candle to Wes Craven's 1984 masterpiece. Yes, masterpiece. But that was expected, so I was not dissapointed when it came to that. The one aspect that I preferred in this film as opposed to it's predecessor was the backstory. It made a hell of a lot more sense that he was a pedophile and not a child killer in this entry. Not for anything people but most child murderers don't kill children just to kill children, they almost always seek sexual gratification beforehand (I'm a criminology student for the record). That was the one issue that I had with Craven's original. But the background that the kids had with Kruger definitely made his vengeance more undestandable and frankly more believeable.

In the end, ANOES (2010) couldn't avoid the classic Platinum Dunes syndrome. Like the abysmal Friday the 13th (2009), we get a terrible score, horrible pacing, and a climax that felt rushed and left me with a "you've got to be fucking kidding me" feeling. I will say that this film had a TON of potential. It all comes back to the script for me. Perhaps the Dunes boys will have a shot at a sequel at some point in the future. Because if they do, I feel that they could easily right their wrongs and give us an entry that we as fans could hold our heads up high about. So to finally wrap things up, if you go in with an open mind, you may end up being relatively suprised. But if you go in looking for a remake on par with let's say The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (2003), I say...dream on.

[The Dream Master]

I'm sitting in this fancy new theater waiting for this huar to start, and they're playing "Gonna Fly Now." Maybe it's an omen.

[Brett H.]

Can you believe somehow Ebert gave the new F13 a higher rating than this movie? :X

[The Taff]

Some reviews I'm reading and listening to are saying that the movie as a whole sucks, but Haley should be put in a protective bubble and placed off to the side while the movie is being verbally castigated.

I plan on seeing this with Beth sometime down the road, likely when it come sto the dollar theater here at the mall unless Beth pushes the issue enough.

[Apocalypto]

I tend to take anything Roger Ebert says with a gigantic grain of salt, but that actually is shocking.

I enjoyed F1309 quite a bit, but I think this is significantly better.

[Cody]

I couldn't get into it at all at first, nothing seemed to be working, but then I enjoyed it from the Rufus dream on, a character development/plot time-jump or two aside. Flawed, but fine...

[Rick]

I just got out.
I thought it was really good. It was a well crafted movie aside from the bad looking wall bulge and a couple really noticeable cgi blood shots.
The characters were much better written then the Friday the 13th characters.
I didn't notice the wind-chime sounding musical cue from the original and missed that.
Haley was great. I really liked him in the role. I can really get behind him as Freddy.
I really liked the make up, as different as it was.
Freddy was a little low key compared to the majority of the old series, but it was really nice to see him less in your face, less mugging at the camera, and less of the over the top gags and one liners.
I wish Freddy's dialogue had been a little better, but I really thought when he had some decent lines and gave a sadistic chuckle Haley seemed really in the moment.
I wasn't bothered by them shifting the focus away from being a child killer and put more focus on the child molester angle, I always though they gave enough little hints in the original series (despite some who willfully remain blind to them) that this wasn't a shock that they went in this direction.
There are a few things I wish they would have done better with the film, better dialogue for Freddy being one. I don't mean more dialogue, just tweaking what he had to come off more nasty or threatening in some scenes.
I also wish they would have kept him in shadows a little longer then they did. They full on expose his face earlier then I expected given the new make-up job.
The glove. I thought it looked really good but, what the hell was the point? Yah, they showed some shots of the finger blades in progress in his old layer, but there was no real point to it that I could see.
Original Freddy had a reason for it, extra crispy recipe Freddy doesn't.
Perhaps as a child molester he was working his way up to murder and the glove was the weapon he was working on to use when he got to that stage, but that's just a guess since they don't even bother to hint or suggest a possibility of that.
I think it would have helped if they had said that he had started out as a molester but had progressed and murdered at least one child and was targeting the rest when they killed him, or at least said that they found bodies and he was at least suspected of killing as well.
I also remember a scene from the original where Nancy tells her mom that she's going to bed and then pulls the coffee maker out from under the bed. I think that showed a little desperation for the character.
I wish we had seen a little more desperation out of the new version of Nancy.
I got that desperate feeling from Kyle Gallner's Quentin. I think he gave the best performance of the "teen" characters.
Over all I thought it was a really good movie.
It was much better IMO then the majority of the old series.
I liked the characters, I liked the story.
The micro-naps thing was a great idea and worked really well.
I think the entire cast was really good.
Lia D. Mortensen, the woman who played Kris' mother reminded me a little of Ronee Blakley, Marge Thompson from the original.
And Thomas Dekker looks a lot like Casey Affleck.

[Utellme]

Can you believe somehow Ebert gave the new F13 a higher rating than this movie? :X

Yes i can definetley believe it.Its very insulting to the F13TH franchise to even put it up against this movie.Cause it was so boring ive had more fun watching grass grow and paint dry. The worst F13TH is better than this yawn fest it was so boring i have to go take a nap.

There was nowhere near enough Freddy in the movie. His Makeup looked dumb to match the rest of the movie.

My favorite part was the ending credits they were more exciting than the movie.


When does 1984 NOES BD come out ?

[The Tall Man]

Fuller n Form owe me, the movie going public, and Wes Craven an apology. That is all.

Can you believe somehow Ebert gave the new F13 a higher rating than this movie? :X
That doesn't surprise me. Friday 12 wasn't a piece of shit.

T.M., Esq.

[Brett H.]

You guys are probably being too hard on the movie... the lead was in a comic book movie, remember! Comic book movies rule!

[Dead Cell]

I posted a quick review last night and went to bed. Since then I've had the whole day to hash it out in my mind as to what I thought. See, I came away feeling conflicted. I didn't hate it, but I didn't love it. It's much the same feeling I came away from FvJ with. I kept trying to put my finger on what it was that was bugging me, and came to the conclusion that if I had to think about it *THIS* much, it just wasn't that good. I shouldn't have to talk myself into liking something.

The pacing of the movie is the biggest issue for me. It took what could have been a great movie and reduced it to a collection of great moments, if that makes any sense. The individual pieces are greater than the sum of their parts. For example: the micro nap in the pharmacy was great. It was one of my favorite moments in the movie. But it's preceded by a pop-out scare when Freddy yanks Nancy out of the truck. And then right after the pharmacy scene, we get another pop-out scare with Freddy standing in the road. The micro-nap in the pharmacy all on its own would've been enough, but the PD guys just don't seem to know when to reign themselves in. More pop-out scares! More Freddy! More pop-outs! Yeah!

This movie was all pop-out scares with very little in the way of genuine creepiness. Bayer just kept using the same trick over and over.

The pacing aside, Nancy simply wasn't Nancy. I like that they gave her an artistic side. That was nice. But other than that, this Nancy is a pale imitation of the original (no offense to Rooney Mara). And... WTF??? I was just checking for the actress' name on IMDB and noticed that Nancy's name has been changed from Nancy Thompson to Nancy Holbrook? For real? Why the hell would they do that?
Well that just seals the deal. This really isn't Nancy Thompson and she doesn't come across with the strength of character that the original Nancy did. Most importantly, the character arc of the original Nancy in which she learns that it was her own fear that powered Freddy is absent from this new movie. Confrontation is what she's good at. We got that with the new one too. But brute force isn't enough to stop Freddy. Nancy had to get metaphysical with it, and new Nancy never got to that point. It's like they missed the entire point of her character.

Freddy... while I liked Haley's Freddy a great deal, there was one scene in particular that pissed me off. It's when he levitates Nancy and slams her down on the bed, pinning her there so she can't move. I've said it before- Freddy has limits. He's not a god, not even in the dreamworld. He can't just snap his fingers and make you turn into a bug. He has to beat you in a metaphysical confrontation first. Debbie in part 4- sure, it looks like a physical battle, but it's all in her mind. If she simply believed she was stronger than Freddy, she would be. But that's how he works- he preys on people's fears and convinces them that he's really much stronger than them. That's why his defeat in part 1 is so important; it shows us exactly what Freddy's made of; nothing.
In the dreamworld this mental battle is represented by physical attacks. He can't just turn Debbie into a bug. He physically beats her down first. He can't just turn Mark into a piece of paper. He has to slash him first. And the diehard Jason fans here will like this- he SHOULDN'T have been able to bounce Jason around the boiler room like a pinball either. Especially considering how weak he was throughout all of FvJ. And especially considering that Jason had no fear of him.

I really want to like this movie, but the pacing hurts it bad and the script fell short in a few places. The look was great (barring crappy CGI), the acting was good, Freddy was the scariest I've seen him in a while, but the pacing affects everything all throughout. In the original we had many scenes where Freddy wasn't present. In this one, it felt like he was in every scene. Pacing and restraint. The PD guys need to learn what they are.

[VoorheesGuy91]

I couldn't get into it at all at first, nothing seemed to be working, but then I enjoyed it from the Rufus dream on, a character development/plot time-jump or two aside. Flawed, but fine...

I'm with you Cap'n.

[Biosynthnut v.2]

Haven't seen it yet..probably tomorrow.

But from what I'm reading looks like a 60/40 split on the good vs bad aspects of the flick.

What I don't get is TCM, F13, ANOES...all Dunes titles...all Bay productions. Yet somehow the only one so far imo is TCM was by far the best of the remakes.

[Dead Cell]

I honestly wonder how much a hand Michael Bay has in these movies, because from what I've seen of his own works, the man has no sense of subtlety- something that I also found lacking in this ANOES.

Just comparing the wall stretching scene from the original to the remake, for example- the original was just handled so much better. First we see a strange bulge in the wall, a play of light that we can't quite explain. It retracts. Then it pushes forward further this time, and we know what we're seeing- and it's creepy. And then it's gone. Nancy wakes up and sees that the cross on the wall has fallen off; a hint that something really was there.

The remake just lobs a CGI grenade at us. The wall ripples like water, Freddy's face pushes far into the room, wrapping around Nancy, popping the claws, growling, and then disappearing quickly as she wakes up. She doesn't even notice anything's happened.

[The Dream Master]

Well boys, you know where to find my extended thoughts on this one. Going by the poll, I'd say a combination of "an average horror movie" and "worst in the series" would be most accurate. I say this because, as you guys know, I really fucking love this series, but I can't say it was absolutely terrible. Felt kind of like Nightmare 5 with a less interesting Freddy, if that makes any sense. I also surely can't believe they lifted lines from part 4 and FvJ (even went so far as to copy its climax!). Can't complain too much though, as those parts were really among the best this one had to offer. But, that's really what sinks this one--we've already seen all the good shit done before, and it had been done better. It's just all in a shiny new package that comes with a new set of flaws, really. Can't say I hate the end result, but can't say I really like it as a whole, either. Somewhere in between.

[Dead Cell]

Exactly. Good moments, but a sloppy package as a whole.

[Joshg]

"worst in the series"


Worse than Dream Child and Freddy's Dead? :o

I'm not sure I ever want to see this now. lol

[eXile]

I thought it was decent but certainly flawed. I go into Platinum Dunes flicks with low expectations, so I think that helps.

Hayley's acting abilities seem rather under-utilized a lot of the time as Freddy. His flashback performances were great and remind me of his performance in Little Children in which he is able to take a character that by all accounts should be hated and still come across as someone I feel sympathy for, on some level. I never had any gripes about Hayley taking on the role, despite the fact that I grew up with Englund playing the character. Frankly, if Englund had played Freddy in this movie, I'd still have the same complaints about the film as I do with Hayley playing him.

I thought the second half of the movie was MUCH better than the first half. There was way to much focus on the Tina-equivalent character, and the actress who played her gave one of the worst performances in the series (which is saying something). The character of Nancy didn't even come close to Nancy from the original. I'll blame part of this on the actress and part of it on the script.

I thought they showed Freddy "out of the shadows" way too much. I think he would have been more effective as a silhouette with a few glimpses here and there and maybe one full-reveal at some point. As someone else mentioned, there were way too many jump scares and the whole dream-scape aspect of the plot was not really taken advantage of at all. The director didn't really seem to know how to handle some of the suspenseful or visually creepy scenes from the original. The wall scene and the bathtub scene seemed forced and ineffective.

I thought the latter part of the movie was fairly strong, and Freddy was made more detestable as the film went on. I was glad to see that the villain in the story was actually a villain again, and not somebody that I'm cheering for to bump off a crowd of annoying stereotypes (they get that aspect out of the way in the first half of the movie). This is where I think the Elm Street remake significantly outperforms the Friday remake.

I think a different director and stronger actresses for Nancy and the Tina-equivalent character could have made a world of difference for this film. As it stands it doesn't hold a candle to the original, but the fact that Freddy is actually a villain in the film makes it more redeeming to me than most of the later Elm Street entries.

[The Dream Master]

Worse than Dream Child and Freddy's Dead?

I'm not sure I ever want to see this now. lol

Well, it's like I said--I hold the series in really high regard and actually enjoy both of those two (FD much more than Dream Child, but still), so your mileage may vary. I really want to stress that "worst in the series" doesn't equate to "terrible" for me--not with this series.

[Brett H.]

So how many kids did he fuck onscreen to please the h4rdc0r3 crowd?

[The Dream Master]

A huge, whopping zero. The whole FERDY MOLLETOR thing is handled kind of weirdly. I dunno, it's almost insignificant in the grand scheme of things, except in the way it changes the character. From a narrative perspective, it doesn't do a whole hell of a lot in the end.

Fuck me, I can't believe the reviews this bitch is getting. 15% on Rotten Tomatoes? It's problematic, but not THAT problematic.

[Voorheeszilla]

Didn't get a chance to see it, not sure if I'll see it during it's theatrical run. I may, I may not, I haven't decided yet. Also haven't checked out any reviews, & I'm avoiding spoilers just in case I don't see it in theaters & have to wait for the DVD release.

[The Tall Man]

Worse than Dream Child and Freddy's Dead? :o
Nightmare 5 and Nightmare 6 are both competently written and directed. This one can boast neither.

Fuck me, I can't believe the reviews this bitch is getting. 15% on Rotten Tomatoes? It's problematic, but not THAT problematic.
Oh my, yeah it is. In fact, 15% is way too kind.

Some truth in advertising:
http://img30.imageshack.us/img30/7140/notnightmaretruth.jpg

T.M., Esq.

[Harmonic Bond]

For the record, my hunch was that I would like the movie. Can't say that I liked it, at least on the whole, but it does some things right. Some things it does right even better than the original series. For me, something like a 2/5.

What was good:

To be frank, not a lot. Jackie Earle Haley runs circles around Englund when it comes to human Freddy. I echo the thoughts of whoever said that he gave the role sympathy and disdain. A tall task. The set up of Freddy as a villain, with the pedophilia angle makes more sense than the original explanation. It's simply more in line with the motives of a real child killer. For me, the dream sequences were generally dull, but Jesse's (the Rod analogue, I guess) was the goodish, which is ironic, as I find Rod's death the weak link in the original. I love the stalking in that scene, I love how Jesse breaks down, something we don't really see in the original series, causing Freddy to stop and savor the impending kill, and I love the line about the brain working 7 minutes after the heart stops, and they still have 6 minutes to play. You're dead, but the torture STILL isn't over. Very classic. I like how he hung up the bodies of his victims as trophies, although I think a chest of souls revival would have worked better for this purpose.

The bad stuff:
Hayley's Freddy just isn't Englund's Freddy. Didn't think I would mind this, but Englund ("funny" or "not funny") just brings electricity to the role that Hayley did not. Hayley's Freddy is boring. The death sequences were dull. I find the original Tina death sequence to be quite overrated, and they didn't do it anything close to justice here. GIven the extreme tips of the hat to the series (a FVJ send up, really?!), I couldn't believe the Glen death or the marionette death didn't get dusted off for this. Missed opportunities. Everything else was slash and dash, like a Friday movie really. No creativity put into the dream sequences. Like someone else mentioned, Bayer didn't seem to grasp how to really utilize the dreamscape. Also, minor gripe, but how were these kids in 1st grade in 1997 and still in high school. OR, why are old photos of the kids faded polaroids? This is the 90's, not the 70's. Little things like that can take me right out of a film.

That's about it. Not horrible, but not really a Nightmare movie for me. I'm filing this in the New Nightmare category.

[Penhall]

Well, just got back. It was pretty good, not the abortion that Rob Zombie's Halloween films were, but not anywhere near as good as the original. Everything, and I mean EVERYTHING was done better in the original film, IMO.

But the movie was pretty good. I didn't really care for Freddy's look and his voice was annoying, though. And honestly, I didn't think Jackie was that great in the role. Many people are jizzing their shorts over his portrayal, and I didn't think he was THAT good...but he was okay, I guess. I wish he wasn't so damned short and scrawny, though. Englund is by no means a big guy, but at least he was more imposing. But I definitely have to see this again to get a better grip on it.

The CGI stuff was pretty lousy and the pacing problematic at times. Still, though, I'm making it sound worse than it was.

I really liked the "micro-naps" thing, and some of the performances were pretty good. Also had some good suspense and creepy scenes. I was shocked, SHOCKED to hear the Nightmare theme in the beginning of the movie. Too bad it was only used that once, and we got another generic score.

Anyway, worth checking out, but if this is indeed the new Freddy, its gonna take a long ass time for me to get used to him.

[Rick]

Even in the mid 90's freddy would have needed a way to develop the pics of the kids he took in private and it didn't look like he had a computer to print them out on. Poloroid makes sense in that repect.

I can see where Dead Cell is coming from with the wall stretch scene comparison. I don't think "hand-grenade" is the best comparison, but I see what he means.
Actually I think this applies not only to a lot of remakes, but horror and action movies in general these days.
I think it's more a product of the times and a reflection of how studios view this generations attention span.

[Penhall]

I honestly wonder how much a hand Michael Bay has in these movies, because from what I've seen of his own works, the man has no sense of subtlety- something that I also found lacking in this ANOES.

Just comparing the wall stretching scene from the original to the remake, for example- the original was just handled so much better. First we see a strange bulge in the wall, a play of light that we can't quite explain. It retracts. Then it pushes forward further this time, and we know what we're seeing- and it's creepy. And then it's gone. Nancy wakes up and sees that the cross on the wall has fallen off; a hint that something really was there.

The remake just lobs a CGI grenade at us. The wall ripples like water, Freddy's face pushes far into the room, wrapping around Nancy, popping the claws, growling, and then disappearing quickly as she wakes up. She doesn't even notice anything's happened.

You know, its funny because the original effect probably cost a couple bucks to accomplish, and this new version cost God knows how much and was inferior in every way.

I actually think every scene in the remake that they lifted out of the original just did not work...at all.

[The Dream Master]

I agree with that, Penhall. I try not to get too hung up on comparing originals to remakes, but when a remake goes out of its way to not just reference the original, but borrow elements from it wholesale, it makes it difficult. And it's different when the remake manages to at least do it justice, but when you can't even improve on special effects shots that cost Wes Craven $37 to pull off in 1984, there's a problem there.

[The Tall Man]

I rolled my eyes at their pathetic attempt to redo the Tina sequence. It just smacked of ineptness... but then again, I could say the same of the whole film.

Pen, according to Englund, Freddy through the wall in the original cost about 10 dollars to create. And it outclassed that CGI nonsense in every way. I don't think Hollywood understands the idea of subtle... even stretching through a wall, Haley was chewing the scenery like it was made of chocolate.

And "All I Have to Do is Dream"? At best, mildly annoying. At worst, idiotic. And frankly, I couldn't hear it over the end titles as I was too busy booing and throwing shit at the screen.

T.M., Esq.
ADDED:
hrm... I am finding that rocking Nightmare 1, Nightmare 3, and some movie rice is washing the awful taste of Not-Nightmare out of my mouth.

Or maybe it's just the rice.

T.M., Esq.

[Rich]

Tall Man, with all due respect, you are very biased and you have hated this movie ever since it was announced. You were never even willing to give it a chance. I don't even know why you watched it. I could have told you that you were going to hate it.

Personally I think it was a very enjoyabloe film. Jackie was a great Freddy. I loved his voice. I liked how they actually used the line "How's this for a wet dream?" from Part 4. I also didn't mind the new version of the Tina death. He didn't drag her across the room like in the original and New Nightmare. Instead it was more like the scene in The Exorcist where Regan levatated. Despite being an animal lover, I also liked the scene where he says, "I was just petting him" after you saw the claw marks in the dog. I also liked the idea of the micro naps. To me that made a lot of sense.

[Brett H.]

Well, that may be true, but its hard to fault even a biased viewer when everyone else says it is average at best.

[The Tall Man]

Tall Man, with all due respect, you are very biased and you have hated this movie ever since it was announced.
And?

You were never even willing to give it a chance. I don't even know why you watched it.
People would be asking me about it. I should be on top of this sort of shit.

I could have told you that you were going to hate it.
But I didn't ask you.

My thoughts are just as valid as your are, sir.

Did anybody catch a reference to "Crystal Lake"? I think they cut it out of the release version.

T.M., Esq.

[The Dream Master]

That reference was cut out. I think it involved Nancy mentioning Crystal Lake or some shit.

They cut a lot out from what I can recall. I distinctly remembered reading that Freddy killed one of the parents in front of their kid at one point, but that was obviously cut.

[Rich]

Supposedly Nancy was going to say that her mother wanted to send her to Camp Crystal Lake when she was a kid, but she put of a fight because she didn't want to go.

[NW77]

Saw the film & I have to say it was much better than I thought it would be. The first 3 films are better without a doubt, but this film is way better than any Nightmare films after part 3. I like how Jackie brought back the evil & sinister (very mean too) Freddy that was missing since part 1. That the way Freddy should've been in the sequels than the cheesy cornball that quite ruin the franchise later on after part 3. I do agree some CGI & lack of original kills was unnecessary, but that only some minor nitpicks there.


And to some who complain about PD & others only doing it for the money, newsflash: movie is a business & you can't start a business if it doesn't involve trying to make money. I guess there should be no more Batman movies then with how WB want to make it just for the money. :shifty:

[Brett H.]

Ehhh, it's one thing to want to make money, another to be like Eli Roth and come out and say you only make movies, that are decent copies at best, for dollars and complain when people don't want to swallow the movie they shit down your throat. A sentiment also expressed by Fuller.

[Dead Cell]

And "All I Have to Do is Dream"? At best, mildly annoying. At worst, idiotic. And frankly, I couldn't hear it over the end titles as I was too busy booing and throwing shit at the screen.

LOL!! I can just see that!

There was something I forgot about. Freddy's big master plan? He wants to keep Nancy awake as long as possible, so that when she does finally fall asleep, it'll be into a coma. Then he'll have someone to play with forever. *THAT'S* creepy. So what's the first thing he does once he thinks she's comatose? Tries to kill her on the spot! Real bright there, Fred.

[Cody]

Early numbers (http://www.deadline.com/2010/05/freddys-a-dream-nightmare-on-elm-street-sets-record-for-horror-midnights-15m-17m-today-and-40m-weekend-predictions/)

My sources say Friday's opening for New Line/Warner Bros' A Nightmare On Elm Street was $15 million from 3,332 theaters (including $1.6 million from Thursday midnight shows in about 1,000 locations, a new record for a horror flick previously held by the February 2009 rebooted Friday The 13th's $1 million.) This means it could make a non-record $35M for the weekend. (Remember that horror films normally drop between 30%/35% on Saturday from their Friday openings, and 45% less than Saturday for Sunday.) "A Nightmare On Elm Street is a dream that won't stop," a rival studio exec emailed me.

[The Dream Master]

There was something I forgot about. Freddy's big master plan?

I agree with that 100%. It was a different, interesting idea in theory, but it just threw everything by the wayside when he just tried to kill her. Another reason why the whole child molestation angle is just pointless and adds nothing--it would have meant something if it looked like he intended to keep Nancy alive to do some horrible things to her, but nope, he just wanted to kill her like Freddy would always want to do anyway. In the end, I felt like there was no compelling reason why he didn't kill her in the health store, except to prolong the film's running time.

[Rich]

I think that this interpretation of the Freddy character was so full of rage and anger that he didn't know what he waned from one minute to the next. That makes him less predictable. You think you're going to get raped, then out of nowhere he tries to kill you.

Maybe THAT was his plan though. Maybe he led you into a false sense of security. Don't get me wrong, I'm not downplaying the horrible effect that rape has on victims, but my point is that maybe he may have been trying to lead Nancy to believe that she just may walk out of this with her life, and then out of nowhere...SLASH!

[The Dream Master]

No, I think it's just poor writing--it's clear that Freddy is trying to get Nancy and Quentin to find his lair, so that their memories will continue to unlock and continue to fuel him; however, even once this happens, we see no sort of indication that it actually accomplishes anything, so what was the point? Freddy's already been powerful enough to kill 3 people by that point. Secondly, he keeps Nancy alive, going so far as to spare her life in the health store because he claims his big plan is to make her stay awake long enough to go into a coma. He gets her there, and within a couple of minutes, he just wants to kill her, the only reason really being because the movie had to wrap up. It would have made more sense if he would have made Nancy go into a coma mid-way through the movie and tortured her, if in fact, that's what he wanted to do. Instead, we just got a sort of rushed, sloppy climax that rendered so much of the build-up to be pointless.

[Geddy Peart]

I saw this yesterday, but haven't had the chance to write about it until now.

Honestly, I didn't hate it, but I didn't love it either. It's not bad, but it's not good either. Overall, it was a decent horror flick that had a version of Freddy Krueger in it. Nothing about this remake made it feel different from other horror filck. Everything about this film from the score to the plot and atmosphere felt so generic. IMO, there wasn't anything that said "this IS ANOES."

And while Haley wasn't bad, my thoughts from watching the trailers were confirmed: this Freddy Krueger reminds me of Karl Childers. Yeah, he was "mean and sinister", but he also had no real personality. Even when Freddy was more serious in the first 3 movies, Englund still gave him some color with his delivery. Haley's Freddy acted like he couldn't decide if he was bored or angry.

The whole film just seemed so...uninspired. They took what was originally a creative and interesting concept and didn't do much with it. Non of the characters were particularly developed well and what was the point of the glove if Freddy never actually killed any one?

Ok, they "discovered" that he was in the process of building one but it seems like thet just threw that in there as a weak attempt to explain the reasoning behind having it.

Over all, this is the worst of the PD remakes IMO. TCM and F13 breathed new life into the characters and stories of those respective franchises, but their Nightmare just seems like an insincere cash grab.

When f13 '09 was released, I couldn't wait to buy the dvd, but with this, I may rent it when it comes out, but I can't see myself forking over the cash for the dvd.

BTW, even the critics agree that overall, Robbie was better:

You can't talk about the new "Nightmare" flick without comparing Mr. Haley's performance as Freddy to that of original baddie Robert Englund. After all, Englund played Freddy in eight films and a TV series. So how does Earle stack up?

Michael Rechtshaffen of The Hollywood Reporter writes that while there's "admittedly something truly unsavory about Haley's portrayal... there's just no replacing Englund." That said, Mr. Rechtshaffen didn't like the movie as a whole. His bottom line: "Good luck staying awake."

Roger Ebert is not much of a fan of this redux either. He gives the movie just one star out of four and writes that he watched the horror movie with "weary resignation." Ebert doesn't delve into who was the better Freddy, but Michael Phillips of the Chicago Tribune writes that, in the new movie, Jackie Earle Haley is underused. "The role asks criminally little of him beneath all that goopy melted-face makeup."

Owen Gleiberman of Entertainment Weekly gives the movie a "B-," and compliments Haley on his "dour malevolence." Overall, though, the EW critic calls the new "Nightmare" a "by-the-numbers bad dream that plays a little too much like a rerun."

Filmcritic.com's Bill Gibron really liked what he saw, giving the movie four out of five stars and calls Haley "brilliant in the role -- not too comical, always too cruel -- and imbued with a sinister tragedy that is hard to shake." However, Jen Chaney of the Washington Post disagrees. She argues that while Haley "pours every bit of menace he can muster into Krueger," she found his makeup "completely unterrifying." Robert Englund was, in her opinion, "irreplaceable" because he "knew how to have a killer good time."

[Rich]

No, I think it's just poor writing--it's clear that Freddy is trying to get Nancy and Quentin to find his lair, so that their memories will continue to unlock and continue to fuel him; however, even once this happens, we see no sort of indication that it actually accomplishes anything, so what was the point? Freddy's already been powerful enough to kill 3 people by that point. Secondly, he keeps Nancy alive, going so far as to spare her life in the health store because he claims his big plan is to make her stay awake long enough to go into a coma. He gets her there, and within a couple of minutes, he just wants to kill her, the only reason really being because the movie had to wrap up. It would have made more sense if he would have made Nancy go into a coma mid-way through the movie and tortured her, if in fact, that's what he wanted to do. Instead, we just got a sort of rushed, sloppy climax that rendered so much of the build-up to be pointless.

That is a good point, but I still stand behind my possability. The thing is, maybe there will be an extended release on DVD and Blu-Ray where Freddy does spend time torturing her. He definitely acts like he means to commit a rape before trying to go for the murder. I'm sure there will be an extended version. You know Hollywood producers and the clock.

[Ron]

Hated it. Worst of the series.

[Jus-X]

I'm in the theater right now. Previews start in 10 minutes.

Rich, this feud between you and Tall Man is getting old. Both of you should just put eachother on their ignore list. I'm physically tired of arguing with Tall Man, and I'm tired of reading your fights.

I give Tally props for atleast checking it out. With lower expectations it could've increased his chances for liking it... but it didn't. I new it wouldn't, you knew it wouldn't. Stop going him a hard time.

Anyways, after the movie my topic will sway from Tally vs Rich to the movie and if i liked it or not.

[Utellme]

Hated it. Worst of the series.

Agreed 100 % and Co-Signed all though the credits were not to bad.

[Penhall]

Early numbers (http://www.deadline.com/2010/05/freddys-a-dream-nightmare-on-elm-street-sets-record-for-horror-midnights-15m-17m-today-and-40m-weekend-predictions/)

So it looks like it'll do 35 million opening, and we know its gonna drop off huge next week, which probably means 50 million when all is said and done.

A solid box office take, and proof that there is still interest in Freddy. But honestly, would a stand-alone Nightmare film with Robert Englund and the same cast of CW/WB-type actors have done much less?

I know its all about the money (which is fine, thats what its always been about), and the big argument would be that a sequel or non-remake wouldnt do as much business, but I disagree.

Even the successful Friday remake last year didnt do huge opening numbers simply because they started over. All they had to do was call it "Friday the 13th: subtitle" and throw Jason back in the woods and it would have still done that massive opening. Same with the new Nightmare film.

But anyway, I know its pointless to argue about "what could have been..." but its still just a point I wanted to make.
ADDED:
That is a good point, but I still stand behind my possability. The thing is, maybe there will be an extended release on DVD and Blu-Ray where Freddy does spend time torturing her. He definitely acts like he means to commit a rape before trying to go for the murder. I'm sure there will be an extended version. You know Hollywood producers and the clock.

The movie definitely did feel choppy and rushed at times (and badly paced at others) so I'd like to see an extended edition on DVD. Oh and the Crystal Lake reference that was talked about earlier that they cut from the film would have been cool...

[The Tall Man]

I guess there should be no more Batman movies then with how WB want to make it just for the money. :shifty:
Not if they're as horrible as this. Not-Nightmare is just lowest common denominator "filmmaking" and nothing more than a cash grab. Was there a reason to remake "A Nightmare on Elm Street"? Hell no. Did they get a director with any sense of vision for the project? Hell no. Did they improve upon the original in any way? HELL NO (it's embarrassing that this movie had a 27 mil budget and Craven kicked the shit out of it--even effects wise-- with 1/26th of that).

No, I think it's just poor writing-
That's the problem with the film. The script seems as if it were written by troglodytes. If Fuller n' Form felt this script was shootable, then I have to wonder if they're even semi-literate. The "micro-naps" shit? That's ONLY there for them to have Not-Freddy pop up whenever they damned well feel. There are NO rules in the movie and that makes it all the more unsatisfying. And all that other stuff you mentioned? Right on the money. Both endings of the movie make an equal amount of no sense other than "final scare horror movie sense".

T.M., Esq.

[The Taff]

Tall Man, with all due respect, you are very biased and you have hated this movie ever since it was announced. You were never even willing to give it a chance. I don't even know why you watched it. I could have told you that you were going to hate it.

Where is it written in the law of "Fanland" that he has to give something a chance? He could have not gone and continued bashing the movie if he so pleased. That's entirely his prerogative.

I think I'm going to add "With all due respect" to my list of words and phrases that piss me off. Despite implying that you are giving due respect, it is always followed by something disrespectful.

[Voorheeszilla]

Not really disrespectful at all, as he has been bashing the movie for quite a while now, & it's pretty obvious that he was going to hate it no matter what so....yeah....

[Jus-X]

Hmmmm. Where do I start? I guess at the beginning...

I didn't like the character Kris. When she was sad or crying she looked like she had down syndrome. The actress seemed to try too hard. What pissed me off even more was the fact she didn't get naked an fucked. But her death was very cool, but very quick.

Arrested guy, forgot his name. Didn't get a chance to get to know him. His death was over the top, but I liked how it finished in the real world with his cell mate screaming "I didn't do it!".

Nancy was a cool character, but she's known to be strong, not needing anyone help, so for her to turn to someone and rely on them to help bummed me out.

The characters I did like was Quinton and Freddy. Haley nailed the movement. I loved how he played with his glove, as if he were a tiger anticipating sinking his teeth into his prey. I enjoyed the performance, but I just couldn't get passed his eyes. The rest of the makeup grew on me, the eyes was the one thing that bugged me. They were too small. I loved a few scenes being able to see through his cheeck.

Quinton was just a likeable dude. He seemed like someone I'd hang out with. He was down to earth and tryied to remain that way even running from terror.

On the the plot:

To me a child molester has deeper and darker problems than simply a child killer. It would have killed the movie finding out he was innocent of these actions, but we found out he was indeed guilty. This made the character even sicker since he still acted these impulses out my licking Nancy and reacting horny when she says "fuck you." This makes me think more of Freddy in the original using his tongue like he was eating out, even going as far as sticking it through the telephone at Nancy. What I didn't like was the fact Freddy was killed by parents who did not know the facts or get any evidence from the things Freddy did. The original we understand Freddy was arrested, went to court, evidence was shown, and the case was thrown out due to a improperly filled out search warrant. Freddy should have been incarcerated for what he had done, but wet free on a technicality. THEN the parents acted. In this movie, a couple five year olds tell their parents Freddy touched them, and they tourched him without even going to the police. IMO, this made the parents just as bad as Freddy. To me it adds more to the parents actions to watch a guilty man go free because of legality.

Changing Freddy's crimes didn't upset me. But the fact that the parents potrayed an act of evil rather than acting on righteous indignation is a much, much greater of a change... and it upset me.

I also would have preffered keeping Freddy in the dark for the most part of the movie. It didn't seem to flow goig from "Oo, what's he look like" to "oh that's what he looks like" and back to "Um, shadow again be? Why hide his face, I just saw it 10 minutes ago."

Though Haley did a great job walking and moving, some o his dialogue I hated. In the YouTube video with him counting for hide and seek, that didn't bother me after finding out he did that with the kids before death. But listening to him give out a random "fucking" in the middle of a sentance turned me off. I don't blame Haley, I blame the lines written for him.

And one last thing to add, the original Nightmare had old people playing parents and young people playing teens. This movie was reverse. Old people played teens and young people played parents. This made it seem like there wasn't a big age gap between characters, so I couldn't see the tenderness and worry a father or mother would have for their children.

In conclusion, besides the overexagerated wall scene, the rest of the scenes were done very very well. The characters weren't very believable. And the parents were unlikable. All in all the movie was about Freddy, which was the best thing about the movie. Though the backstory seemed flawed and the deaths seemed rushed, Freddy was Freddy; scary, sinister, darkfully playful, and downright a disgusting person, whether his crimes were murder or molestation. It wasn't horrible, but it wasn't great. I give it a solid 6.5 out of 10. Which makes it better than Freddy Dead, which was 6 out of 10, but not that much better. ;)
ADDED:
Typed from my iPhone and hard to spell check and grammer check.

[Apocalypto]

Where is it written in the law of "Fanland" that he has to give something a chance? He could have not gone and continued bashing the movie if he so pleased. That's entirely his prerogative.

I think I'm going to add "With all due respect" to my list of words and phrases that piss me off. Despite implying that you are giving due respect, it is always followed by something disrespectful.

Suddenly, I'm picturing Julie Benz character from Boondocks Saints 2...:)

[The Tall Man]

Not really disrespectful at all, as he has been bashing the movie for quite a while now, & it's pretty obvious that he was going to hate it no matter what so....yeah....
Maybe I was doing so before January, but if you'd read the eulogy I wrote, maybe you'd know why. :shifty:

T.M., Esq.

[Dead Cell]

I had a problem with the vigilante mob too. Like you said, in the original the justice system failed them and freed a child killer, that everyone KNEW to be a child killer. They had evidence (probably that basement full of lethal gloves, etc.) but it all had to be thrown out of court due to a technicality.
So here comes to mob to torch Freddy. Even the police were in on it (Donald Thompson). In a way, being a law enforcer and having seen the evidence and Freddy's work first-hand and, Donald represents the spirit of the law acting where the letter of the law has failed. Even so, the theme of NOES is that Freddy is getting revenge on the parents for taking the law into their own hands.

In the remake, the mob just goes after Freddy. No court. No trial. No police in the mob like Donald. They burn him alive based on what their children have told them (and maybe the big scratch marks on Kris's back). Freddy comes back to get revenge specifically on the kids, seeing how they ratted him out. The parents don't even seem to factor into this equation. So the message here is, don't tattle on child molestors, or you'll die for telling the truth. Great job, PD. I'm sure that's a wonderful message to put out there to your movie-going public.

[Penhall]

I had a problem with the vigilante mob too. Like you said, in the original the justice system failed them and freed a child killer, that everyone KNEW to be a child killer. They had evidence (probably that basement full of lethal gloves, etc.) but it all had to be thrown out of court due to a technicality.
So here comes to mob to torch Freddy. Even the police were in on it (Donald Thompson). In a way, being a law enforcer and having seen the evidence and Freddy's work first-hand and, Donald represents the spirit of the law acting where the letter of the law has failed. Even so, the theme of NOES is that Freddy is getting revenge on the parents for taking the law into their own hands.

In the remake, the mob just goes after Freddy. No court. No trial. No police in the mob like Donald. They burn him alive based on what their children have told them (and maybe the big scratch marks on Kris's back). Freddy comes back to get revenge specifically on the kids, seeing how they ratted him out. The parents don't even seem to factor into this equation. So the message here is, don't tattle on child molestors, or you'll die for telling the truth. Great job, PD. I'm sure that's a wonderful message to put out there to your movie-going public.

Yeah, you know this bugged me too. And the fact that there were no cops in on the murder creates a plot hole: How could they have gotten away with it?

Maybe they had more proof than what their kids said or it'll get into more if they do a sequel...

[Ron]

I won't even bother with a sequel. I gave this a chance and it failed to entertain. I found myself starting to daydream halfway through the movie.

[Utellme]

Not really disrespectful at all, as he has been bashing the movie for quite a while now, & it's pretty obvious that he was going to hate it no matter what so....yeah....

Mang , TM looks really smart now i wish id of listen to him it would of saved me $ 11.00 of boredom.
ADDED:
I won't even bother with a sequel. I gave this a chance and it failed to entertain. I found myself starting to daydream halfway through the movie.

Daydreaming heck i wish it would of excited me even that much.This was the only movie i ever went to i found myself falling asleep.And yes i got a full nights rest the night before.

But hey the credits woke me up i knew the yawn fest was over.

[andrew8798]

Saw the movie today I liked it

[Dead Cell]

My sis and I were talking about the music and how it was forgettable. Right now, only a couple days after having seen it, I can't remember any of the music. Meanwhile, I distinctly remembered at least 4 tunes from the original. I popped in the original just so I could show her the bits I was thinking of, and we wound up watching most of the movie just paying attention to the music. Every scene we were like, "Yeah! There's another great piece!"

- The theme song, of course
- The pumping stalker music when Nancy first meets Freddy in his boiler room
- The chase music when Nancy's running from the police dept. to her house
- The sleepy, dream-like music when she's changing her shirt and making coffee in her room

Those were the 4 I remembered off the top of my head. But just listening to everything else, the movie is so chalk full of great music. I feel like I need to go out and buy the soundtrack now!

PD NOES though? I can't remember any music from it. I know Jablonsky was using a lot of drawn out notes on string instruments (sounded like string- just guessing). It was more like ambient white-noise than a score designed to enhance the film.

[Geddy Peart]

Didn't Sean Connery return to the role of James Bond because the guy who replaced him wasn't well received? I wish they'd do the same with ANOES after this one.

Honestly, I think the story of the remake would have worked for a reboot/stand alone/quasi-sequel with Englund. A new group of kids are being stalked by an unknown boogeyman in their dreams and over the course of the film they learn who Freddy is, what he did when he was alive and in the original series and how the town covered it up. They could briefly touch upon the murders from the original films to give a connection, but a subtle one so this film would be more of a reboot and not a straight up remake. By doing this they could return Freddy to his darker roots, while establishing the character with a new generation. If written properly and executed well I believe something like this could work. And Englund could play Fred

But since PD dropped the ball with this remake, I'm going to go ahead and just say the scenerio above is nothing more than a fanboy's pipedream.

[Penhall]

Didn't Sean Connery return to the role of James Bond because the guy who replaced him wasn't well received? OI wish they'd do the same with ANOES after this one.

Honestly, I think the story of the remake would have worked for a reboot/stand alone/quasi-sequel with Englund. A new group of kids are being stalked by an unknown boogeyman in their dreams and over the course of the film they learn who Freddy is, what he did when he was alive and in the original series and how the town covered it up. They could briefly touch upon the murders from the original films to give a connection, but a subtle one so this film would be more of a reboot and not a straight up remake. By doing this they could return Freddy to his darker roots, while establishing the character with a new generation. If written properly and executed well I believe something like this could work. And Englund could play Fred

But since PD dropped the ball with this remake, I'm going to go ahead and just say the scenerio above is nothing more than a fanboy's pipedream.

Agreed 100%.

And as I said a few pages back, they could've had the same CW/WB type cast and I bet the movie would have had the same 35 million plus opening weekend.

It didn't HAVE to be remade to have a successful box office run.

[The Taff]

Not really disrespectful at all, as he has been bashing the movie for quite a while now, & it's pretty obvious that he was going to hate it no matter what so....yeah....

So fucking what?

[The Tall Man]

don't tattle on child molestors, or you'll die for telling the truth.
Man, if that's not a dynamite tagline, I don't know what is.

Maybe they had more proof than what their kids said or it'll get into more if they do a sequel...
I've got a feeling it's just more piss poor writing. But hey, what do I know?

Mang , TM looks really smart now i wish id of listen to him it would of saved me $ 11.00 of boredom.
My God, Utell! I feel so terrible for you! You paid 11 bucks for this piece of shit?!?!? For 11 bucks to see this, Rooney Mara should have come to your house and blown you!

If I weren't dead broke, I'd pay you back the 11 bucks myself.

But just listening to everything else, the movie is so chalk full of great music.
Nightmare 1 just has an excellent horror movie score.

I feel like I need to go out and buy the soundtrack now!
I can get it to you if you'd like with minimal trouble.

Didn't Sean Connery return to the role of James Bond because the guy who replaced him wasn't well received?
I think that was more of a matter of EON paying Connery an assload of money, but you'll need to get confirmation for the bigger Bond fans around here.

T.M., Esq.

[mirage2130]

Saw the movie last night and liked it. I thought Jackie Earle Haley did a great job as this version of Freddy and found him to be really effective and creepy during the last act. Sure, this wasn't the original movie, but I didn't care.

I did notice that some scenes that were in the trailer were not in the movie, however, such as the scene where Kris is in the attic and Freddy is just looking over the box at her.

Having read the script early on, I already knew that Freddy was a child molester instead of a child murderer and had no problem with it; but still wanted to see how it would be executed in the movie. I have to say that I liked the change, it just seemed to make him more of a creep somehow. Even though a child murderer is horrific as well.

I really have no issue with the way they changed the character, none at all. Although I don't like that they remake every movie today, I'd rather they change it around rather than keep everything the same.

[Dead Cell]

I saw an interview with JEH and he was talking about how Freddy made a deal with "the demons." I was worried that we might have the dream snakies from FD in here, but no sign of them. Was there a scene in the script with the dream demons that got cut?

I can get it to you if you'd like with minimal trouble.
Ah, that's okay. I think I just got a little excited there. Hearing the score in the movie will be enough for me. Thanks though. :D

[mirage2130]

I saw an interview with JEH and he was talking about how Freddy made a deal with "the demons." I was worried that we might have the dream snakies from FD in here, but no sign of them. Was there a scene in the script with the dream demons that got cut?


I don't remember a scene like that, but do remember a scene where Freddy turned into some sort of devil that I didn't see in the movie.

[Jus-X]

Mang , TM looks really smart now i wish id of listen to him it would of saved me $ 11.00 of boredom.

Shit man you shoulda bought the Nightmare Bluray... it had a coupon in it. I paid $2.50 to see it. But then again I didn't 100% hate it. It was atleast enjoyable to me.

[Apocalypto]

I saw an interview with JEH and he was talking about how Freddy made a deal with "the demons."

I've actually been wondering how they'll visualize it if we end up seeing how Freddy returned post-mortem in the sequels...I just can't picture the dream sperm showing up again, with them going for a meaner than ever Freddy in the new series.

[Sean [The Wildcard]]

You can read my full review located at the link to my blog in my sig below; "Running over Cujo with Christine."

Short version: I hated it.

[The Dream Master]

In the remake, the mob just goes after Freddy. No court. No trial. No police in the mob like Donald. They burn him alive based on what their children have told them (and maybe the big scratch marks on Kris's back).

I think that's one of the other good examples of just how poor and thoughtless the script is. I mean how come no one could find Freddy's lair back then when it takes Nancy and Quentin 2 seconds to do so? How do they cover up the fact that they killed a guy in a fiery explosion? Why wouldn't they report Freddy to the police in the first place? I know they mention that they don't want to put their kids through it, but there was ample evidence that would keep them off the stand anyway.

It's just one of those elements in the script that's thrown in with little regard and treated superficially--like the micronaps and even the molestation angle itself. The film seemed to be taking such a popcorn action approach that it had little time to really construct a compelling and tight narrative, and it's certainly the film's biggest problem along with the overall lack of imagination the thing exhibits.

[Penhall]

I think that's one of the other good examples of just how poor and thoughtless the script is. I mean how come no one could find Freddy's lair back then when it takes Nancy and Quentin 2 seconds to do so? How do they cover up the fact that they killed a guy in a fiery explosion? Why wouldn't they report Freddy to the police in the first place? I know they mention that they don't want to put their kids through it, but there was ample evidence that would keep them off the stand anyway.

It's just one of those elements in the script that's thrown in with little regard and treated superficially--like the micronaps and even the molestation angle itself. The film seemed to be taking such a popcorn action approach that it had little time to really construct a compelling and tight narrative, and it's certainly the film's biggest problem along with the overall lack of imagination the thing exhibits.

And the frustrating thing is that these are easy fixes. Its not like they would have to rewrite the whole damned script. Just put a bit more thought into their altered back-story for Krueger.

I'm hoping the DVD will flesh things out a bit more, but probably not.

[Apocalypto]

I got the impression that being back in the school was causing their childhood memories of being in the room to re-emerge, which was guiding them to it.

By Nancy's mom claiming he left before they could confront him, I figured they just buried the body and claimed that's what happened...and I think their course of action was based more on the rage of what they thought he'd done to their children more than what they said it was about.

[The Dream Master]

I think that Nancy recalled it too, but the question is: why didn't she do the same thing when she was a kid? Why wouldn't they take the kids down there to reveal the lair back then?

[Apocalypto]

I think just finding the bruises on their kids and the kids telling them what happened cause them to quickly rush into action with their rage doing their thinking for them, potentially (although it didn't turn out that way) murdering someone that didn't even do what he was accused of.

[Hockey Mask]

Saw this Saturday morning and overall I enjoyed it. Seeing that it had a 15% over on Rotten Tomatoes made me think really horrible Halloween remake kind of things but as the movie unfolded it never really dipped to the 15% fresh rating it received.

Likes:
-Flashback Freddy was good. Better than Englund.
-It seemed they really tried to put a lot of thought into the script. There were still some WTF moments but overall I thought it held up.
-The Kris/Tina death scene was different but acceptable. I thought they paid homage to the original but witht heir own twist on it.
-Liked the micro-nap explanation and thought it worked well.
-Really liked the brain is alive for 6 miuntes after your heart stops beating part but wich they had actually done something with it.
-The dream sequences were decent. I can't believe NOES got a snow scene before F13.
-Loved the way Freddy tapped on the door near the end. It was creepy and I wish they had done that type of thing more.
-Most of the acting was above average.
-Didn't hate Nancy's mother's death scene. Better than the original.

Dislikes:
-Freddy's appearance was off. The whole curved look to him compared to Englund's angular "witch" look wasn't nearly as scary.
-Nancy wasn't too compelling. She didn't have much of an emotional range. BUT I can overlook that considering she has had zero sleep, dealing with multiple deaths and being stalked by a killer I guess that zoned out look is kind of fitting.
-Way too many jump scares. Out of the 20 or so jump out moments about three of them got me. It would have been nice to have a little more suspense and tension built up.
-The bath tub scene got a huge laugh from the audience. It should have been cut.

I hated the Halloween remake. Liked the F13 remake and liked this one too. It really wasn't too bad. It gave it a fresh enough update for a new generation but still remained faithful to the original.

[Darth Sinister]

I think that was more of a matter of EON paying Connery an assload of money, but you'll need to get confirmation for the bigger Bond fans around here.

T.M., Esq.

No, that's pretty much it in the case of "Diamonds Are Forever". But that was all the same continuity. This is a remake/reboot, not a direct sequel to "Freddy's Dead" or "Freddy Vs Jason". In "Never Say Never Again", Connery was in it because he was friends with Kevin McClory who got the rights back to do a remake of "Thunderball" and it would be a springboard for future Bond stories separate from EON and Roger Moore.

[The Dark Vampire]

The UK doesn't get this until next week but is Freddy a child molester in this one or is it like the old ones it's hinted at but never actually said?

That's all I want to know as far as spoilers go as that could make the difference between me watching it and not

[Jenosis]

The UK doesn't get this until next week but is Freddy a child molester in this one or is it like the old ones it's hinted at but never actually said?

That's all I want to know as far as spoilers go as that could make the difference between me watching it and not

Freddy is Pedobear in this

[The Dark Vampire]

Freddy is Pedobear in this

Thanks now I will have to really think about if I bother with it or not

[The Dream Master]

I think just finding the bruises on their kids and the kids telling them what happened cause them to quickly rush into action with their rage doing their thinking for them, potentially (although it didn't turn out that way) murdering someone that didn't even do what he was accused of.

But there's actually a reference in the dialogue to the parents looking for the hidden lair and not finding it so they obviously took some time to validate the story.

Really, this is one of those movies where the story crumbles the more you look at it. Don't get me wrong, the main narrative thrust--Freddy coming back to kill the kids--works okay, and the film is obviously much more interested in that. But many of the moving parts in the backstory really don't work well. It doesn't render the film incoherent, but it does stretch logic pretty often.

And DV, to answer your question: whether or not Freddy did anything is part of the film's story. In the end, it is revealed that he was a child molester.

[The Dark Vampire]

And DV, to answer your question: whether or not Freddy did anything is part of the film's story. In the end, it is revealed that he was a child molester.

I would of preferred them to go with the it was a lie storyline at least that would make more sense to why he wanted revenge but even then the original idea that he was a child killer was more than enough IMO having him as a pedo is taking it one step to far that is one thing where I don't think they should ever go

[The Dream Master]

I can see both sides of the subject, really. One the one hand, it could have been interesting and would have justified the "did he or didn't he" angle they brought up; plus, I think it would have been a genuine shock, even if it came from expecting something different. On the other hand, I'm not sure Freddy would work if he were just some innocent guy that became an evil specter that haunts people's dreams. He's a sick, evil guy, so I think they got it right by not making him innocent in the end.

[Rick]

I don't think it would have worked if they had they made him an innocent victim of lies.
I know some people hate the idea of Freddy being a child molester instead of a murderer, but to not only change that and to make him innocent of the accusations in the end would just be way too much.
Save that story for an original character.
I don't think you can change the character that drastically and have it remain Freddy in any meaningful way.
He needs to be an evil bastard, he's the bad guy.

[Dead Cell]

There was a scene from the trailer that showed what looked like a guy apparently sleep-walking and standing on the rail of a 2nd story deck over a pool. Was this scene cut and reshot? Who was that guy supposed to be? What originally was supposed to happen? I'm guessing Quentin since he had the swimming pool dream.

[The Dream Master]

Pretty sure that was from the original opening scene (aka the "Guitar Hero" opening). Dean was originally going to die by getting slashed across the chest (or face?), then fall over the rail. The diner scene was a replacement because test audiences didn't like it.

[Dead Cell]

Ah, okay. I'd be interested in seeing that as a deleted scene. I can just picture classic Freddy showing up and "shredding" (haha!) on the Guitar. :p

[Apocalypto]

I liked the super punch through the chest...definitely looked like something that could be intended for 3D.

[Rick]

I liked the super punch through the chest...definitely looked like something that could be intended for 3D.

That one and the final scene with Freddy's claws through the mirror and then into Nancy's mom's head and out her face. I wonder if they were both done when the studio had intended or was thinking about 3D converting it?

[The Tall Man]

I can just picture classic Freddy showing up and "shredding" (haha!) on the Guitar. :p
Oh man... if that's not an invitation for the FN clip, I don't know what is.

T.M., Esq.

[Dead Cell]

Oh man... if that's not an invitation for the FN clip, I don't know what is.

T.M., Esq.
Oh dear. Alright, I'll bite. What's this clip from FN? *LOL* I just know this is going to be awesomely cheese. :shy:

[The Dark Vampire]

Oh dear. Alright, I'll bite. What's this clip from FN? *LOL* I just know this is going to be awesomely cheese. :shy:

I think it's this one

http://i415.photobucket.com/albums/pp231/jdj1138/FreddyGuitar.gif

[The Dream Master]

DV, you beat me to it.

:bang:

[Dead Cell]

LMAO!! Is he waggling his tongue when he jumps??

[The Tall Man]

I believe he is.

T.M., Esq.

[Jus-X]

I can see both sides of the subject, really. One the one hand, it could have been interesting and would have justified the "did he or didn't he" angle they brought up; plus, I think it would have been a genuine shock, even if it came from expecting something different. On the other hand, I'm not sure Freddy would work if he were just some innocent guy that became an evil specter that haunts people's dreams. He's a sick, evil guy, so I think they got it right by not making him innocent in the end.

It didn't bother me how they changed Freddy from a murderer to a molester. IMO it made him sicker than he ever was. I would have been very upset to find out he was innocent. That would have flipped the characteristics of the parents and Freddy, which means the parents were wrong and Freddy was right in killing. The original made the parents justified in killing Freddy because they knew he was guilty. So I'm glad he was guilty in the end. If I could change anything in the movie I would have added the trial/technicality story. I wouldve cast someone else as Kris. And I wouldve kept Freddys face in the dark until the end of the film

[Rick]

It didn't bother me how they changed Freddy from a murderer to a molester. IMO it made him sicker than he ever was. I would have been very upset to find out he was innocent. That would have flipped the characteristics of the parents and Freddy, which means the parents were wrong and Freddy was right in killing. The original made the parents justified in killing Freddy because they knew he was guilty. So I'm glad he was guilty in the end. If I could change anything in the movie I would have added the trial/technicality story. I wouldve cast someone else as Kris. And I would've kept Freddy's face in the dark until the end of the film

Yah, I would have liked a trial and an acquittal on some technicality as well. I also would have liked an actual explanation for the glove.
In my initial review I suggested maybe they should have hinted that he was suspected to have moved from molestation onto murder by the time the parents got to him and he had crated the glove for that purpose.
I don't think there was anything wrong with Katie Cassidy as Kris, I think all of the cast gave really good performances.
I think Rooney Mara was one of the weaker of the entire cast though.

[Dead Cell]

It's not Rooney's fault. It's how the character was written, and Bayer kept going on how he wanted Nancy to be a dark, lonely soul. I totally got that from her performance, so no fault of hers that she competently delivered what the director and script asked of her.

[Bill 1981]

TBH, I thought it was okay... Not boring, but not all that scary the previews made it out to be either.

[VoorheesGuy91]

I can see both sides of the subject, really. One the one hand, it could have been interesting and would have justified the "did he or didn't he" angle they brought up; plus, I think it would have been a genuine shock, even if it came from expecting something different. On the other hand, I'm not sure Freddy would work if he were just some innocent guy that became an evil specter that haunts people's dreams. He's a sick, evil guy, so I think they got it right by not making him innocent in the end.

Cheers. It would have made him too tragic for my taste.

[The Tall Man]

Anybody heard Bayer insulting us for hating it yet?

Seems like Fuller's class is rubbing off on him.

T.M., Esq.

[Brett H.]

Enlighten us, mang.

[The 5th Golden Girl]

I was really excited to see this, but my first viewing fell flat. I wasn't familiar with the changes that had been made, so I spent the majority of the movie comparing it to the original which was never going to be a fair fight. I think I'll like it much better on second viewing when I can just watch it and appreciate it as its own movie.

That being said, the movie feels choppy and has some major problems story-wise. Like I said, I lost track of the changes and what-not the movie was undergoing, but I could tell they had to do some reshoots and I assumed it was because a test audience somewhere didn't like the original shots. I'll just put the rest of my thoughts in spoiler tags to be safe.

I hate that the group of kids weren't a group of friends. I do like the idea of them being connected by an unknown past event, but I missed the friendships that should have been there. Characters were dying left and right and no one really cared because no one was friends with anyone else.

Freddy was... eh, I wasn't impressed. He was creepier in the original.

Nancy was horrible, I'm sorry. She should have died. Her boyfriend, Quentin, was great, though. Kyle Gallner was really good... best actor in there, for my money. Nice to look at, too.

Problem #1 for me... like parents in the mid-nineties would really send their kids to a preschool where some weird man lives in the basement.

Problem #2... seriously, no one else could find the cave? They didn't search very well.

Missed Lt. Thompson. Can't believe they cut out that character.

I thought the use of "All I Have to Do is Dream" was creepy and hilarious. The micro-nap thing was interesting.

Jump scares have become embarrassing to sit through, and this movie had far too many for no reason.

I liked it enough to own it, and I think I'll like it better on repeated viewing, but I was disappointed.

[sam hane]

Loved it, everything I hoped it would be. Will gladly be buying the bluray of it when it's released

[The Tall Man]

Enlighten us, mang.
"But these fans on the web should just get up, stretch, breathe, go outside and get some fresh air, maybe get a girlfriend and just get a life.”-- Samuel Bayer, 2010.

T.M., Esq.

[Brett H.]

Hahaha, that's awesome. I love the defense mechanism on these people making mediocre horror movies nowadays. "What?! You didn't like my movie that you spent $10 to see?! Get a life!" It sort of makes me come to grips with idiot fans a lot easier when the artists behind the movies they hate are as dumb as they are.

[The Dream Master]

Yeah, I saw that earlier today. Seems to pretty much be the company line for Platinum Dunes when they experience a huge backlash against them.

[Jus-X]

Doesn't look like these were posted yet... here is some info about cut scenes from the final product for anyone who's enterested:

http://www.bloody-disgusting.com/news/20074

[The Tall Man]

"What?! You didn't like my movie that you spent $10 to see?!
Anybody that paid 10 dollars to see Not-Nightmare deserves Rooney Mara showing up at their door to blow them.

T.M., Esq.

[Jus-X]

Anybody that paid 10 dollars to see Not-Nightmare deserves Rooney Mara showing up at their door to blow them.

T.M., Esq.

Ooo ooo ooo! What do I get for $2.50?

[The Tall Man]

Ooo ooo ooo! What do I get for $2.50?
Thomas Dekker handjob.

T.M., Esq.

[Jus-X]

Thomas Dekker handjob.

T.M., Esq.

Meh... Nevermind.

[Voorheeszilla]

I didn't think the film was bad, not as good as the original, but not a bad remake either. I think Haley did a good job as Freddy, so I was happy with his performance. The new girl portraying Nancy was good, but I definitely wouldn't say she's better than Langenkamp.

[SlasherFreak]

wow...im glad I didnt pay to see this bullshit. This film sucked monkey balls while it stroked a donkey dick.

Horrible, horrible horrible. I knew since my first reading of the script this would be a disaster.
ADDED:
The only thing I can give it credit for, is that it's not on the Zombieween level of horrible. But it's still pretty bad

[nottidelterrore]

The only thing I can give it credit for, is that it's not on the Zombieween level of horrible. But it's still pretty bad

My hopes aren't too high for this but there's no way this can be as horrible as Zombieween. No way. That's in a whole different shitty league. :D

I doubt I'll see this in theaters. Will probably check out the DVD or something.

[Jus-X]

My hopes aren't too high for this but there's no way this can be as horrible as Zombieween. No way. That's in a whole different shitty league. :D

I doubt I'll see this in theaters. Will probably check out the DVD or something.

With lowered expectations you might actually like it. I saw it with high expectations and thought it was okay.

I saw Zombieween 2 with very low expectations and actually liked it as a slasher/horror movie. If it was a standalone movie with no ties to the Halloween series, I wouldn't give it so much shit. But taking Tall Man's logic, the movie has Not-Michael chasing Not-Laurie in Not-Haddonfield.

[Sean [The Wildcard]]

Anybody that paid 10 dollars to see Not-Nightmare deserves Rooney Mara showing up at their door to blow them.

This should be a legitimate case. Someone call up PD and New Line and make this happen. :D

By the way, if you still haven't checked out my review, it's located in my Sig.

[Zombie]

Jesus..... Where do I even start??? This isn't about the movie (not yet at least) but more about SOME of the people here in this thread and other places with their "reviews" and or "opinions". I really don't know why I even try to read through so many post's before posting my thoughts, maybe it's just to get a sense of where everyone is and where some of them are coming from.

Obviously I don't come in and post to much about movies, I do watch them and all, it's just it's so frustrating at times (in here especially) that you have the same people or person pretty much saying the same thing over and over and always using the whole "it's just my opinion which is just as valid as yours". Yes, everyone's opinion is valid but really some and most don't need to make numerous post's about the same thing. I know not everyone will go to the beginning and read the entire thread, so it makes some of you feel like maybe you should state your opinion at least once per page so people will still know how much you or your friends and or critics and other reviewers hated or loved said movie, but really you don't. If people didn't post so many times the same things they've said then there wouldn't be that many useless post's to go through to know what some people thought of the said movie or what not that is being discussed.

I also think people should probably give a little more reason into their post's. I can't remember who, but someone just posted something like "100% Hated and most terrible in the franchise" or something like that and that was it. To me that's not really valid, but whatever...

I already know this is going to end up being like the Halloween 2 thread on where it's a few people who absolutely love/like this movie arguing it out with the few or one person that absolutely hates it and would have hated it no matter what, and it'll just go on and on and on. I've said it countless number of times that I truly think that some of you that completely "hate" these remakes and or reboots are just not going in with the right mind set and or just to into "your ways" and or maybe "your views and opinions" that you all are just going to bash ANY remake or reboot of any movie/franchise that you all like and or cherish and don't think it should be remade in the first place. Hell, even if they made the movie pretty much exactly like the original with the same lines and same scenes pretty much you all are still not going to give it a chance and hate it no matter what. Then everyone (well the one's who are going to hate it no matter what) will complain that the movie wasn't original enough and just went and did the exact same thing.

Yet when a remake/reboot end's up and goes and tries to do something totally different then everyone goes and complains how they (characters, scenes, kills, lines, or whatever) wasn't like the original. There is really no way these type of movies will ever have a chance with some of you people. And that's ok though, you all reserve that right. All though while I do agree that you all have that right, it just doesn't make much sense why you even bother to keep posting about it when you having nothing other than the same thing you've already said. Seriously. It's kind of like "If you don't have nothing nice to say, then don't say it" kind of line, but more in tune of "If you dont have anything NEW and or different to add to the conversation, then don't say/post it" to be honest.

Like I mentioned, it's not just here but other site's as well. I sometimes think that some of the people that post at other places whether it's their review or opinion I don't think some have even seen the movie and just giving it a bad word of mouth just to do it. I don't think that problem lies over here, it's pretty clear pretty much everyone that says they've seen it went in and saw it, but anyways.... Enough of my rambling about this and on to what I thought of it.

I didn't get out to see it till Sunday. I was going to go watch it with my kids Friday night before I took them to their moms for the weekend but their moms family had a bbq/get together going on and they needed them to be there early like right after school, so I just ended up waiting till they came back on Sunday and then we went to go watch it.

I gladly paid $13 for my ticket and $10 x 3 for my kid's tickets since we went to the "XD" (Extreme Digital that has the bigger screens and louder sounds as well as the best most comfortable chairs I've ever sat in at a movie theater).

I will admit that I did have some concerns with it, mainly with the new person playing Freddy. I was all for him at first, but when pics and all started to come out then I started getting worried and wasn't really liking the whole look of him or how his voice was. Even with that though I figured I would still go in and give it a chance. I knew there was a possability that his look and voice could have been altered somewhat from the preview pics and trailers that had came out to the final released film. With that, I ended up being ok with it in the end. The voice was still a little "eh" but I think that's just because it's new. It's almost like how Splinter sounded in the latest TMNT movie that came out that was CGI and how that Splinter did not sound like any of the other ones at all but eventually through multiple viewings it ended up growing on me and I'm sure that's whats going to happen with this version of Freddy, well as far as he sounds and I guess with the look to being more realistic and not like the other one.

I do also agree with the scene that has even shown in the trailers where Freddy comes out of the wall kind of over Nancy's bed. Yes, that was HORRIBLE! I am not against CGI, I understand that it's pretty much here to stay and there are times when it can be done good, this was not one of those times. When CGI is this bad and or fake/goofy looking then that's when I can see why so many people "hate" CGI and can stand by them in these kind of instances.

I don't know if any of you read or listened to the IGN review of this? I don't agree with what they said when they tried to make it sound like this movie pretty much did everything exactly like the original. Yes there were some things or scenes that was from the original but I think that was just a nod to it rather than them trying to copy the original. This felt like a totally different movie as a whole even though there was some things that were the same and or had the same type of story just a different spin on it.

This is one of the things I don't get. Some of you all say that this Nancy was not like the original Nancy and she wasn't "strong" like Heather's Nancy and so on, but I think that's the point of this version of Nancy. She's NOT supposed to be like the original Nancy. See this is one of those things that I think that no matter what the director or writer tried to do, they are in a no win situation. People are going to cry foul if she was to much similar and or like the original Nancy or if she was different people like they have already done already cried foul. I know some of you all are going to say "thats right" and that's why they probably shouldn't do remakes or reboots when it comes to movies like this that really don't need it, but the fact of the matter is it's already happened and was bound to happen now that we're in the times that we are in now.

The best you can hope for is to go in open minded and just try to enjoy it for what it is and try NOT to compare it to the original but instead just look at it as a whole different, brand new movie. No matter how many remakes and or reboots they do, they are not completely wiping out and destroying the original movies. Those originals will still be there for everyone to enjoy and watch. No one is telling you that you have to stop watching them and just watch the newer versions going forward either. All it is really is someone else's take or their version/vision of what they thought it should be like and or how they would like to make it.

I'm not a hard person to please, but at the same time I know I can always watch the originals if I wanted as well as enjoy their remakes as well and just take them as a complete different and or brand new movie. I pretty much said the same thing with Rob Zombie's Halloween's as well. Although I actually perffer his versions over the original Halloweens to be honest. Same with Friday The 13th remake. I like that one much better than the original F13th, but I think the only reason is the first Friday and Halloween were just a little to slow and boring for my taste's. I still like them somewhat but I just like the newer versions better that is all. Of course I liked the later Fridays and Halloweens over the originals as well as those started to get a faster pace and wasnt as slow or boring.

As with this NOES compared to the original NOES it's hard to really say which one I liked more. I think both movies were great. The NOES films were completely different than the Fridays and Halloweens that I never really compared them. These didn't rely and or have nudity and or the body count that the other two franchises have. So I already was expecting there to be very little if any at all nudity and figured there wasn't going to be some huge body count. Even in FvsJ, Freddy didn't have that many kills like Jason did. Some will say it's because he wasn't "strong" enough but if you look at all the other Nightmares, Freddy never really had that many kills anyways in his movies. Heck I think like 5 maybe 6 is the most he's had in any of his movies I believe?

I thought this one was a little more brutal compared to the original and any of the other NOES also. Oh, and the one other thing that I don't get and probably knew this was going to happen. A lot of people would complain in some of the other NOES movies saying Freddy doesn't really use his "glove" to kill people with that much and more people would like him to use his glove more than his mind tricks or all the other stuff he uses besides his glove to kill people and now that the film makers went and GAVE what everyone was pretty much asking for, they go and say there wasn't enough originality to the kills or no dream sequence like kills where it's something outragous or whatever. See another no win situation for the people that made this.

Thats one thing that I did like was that Freddy pretty much just used his glove to damage and kill people with and didn't do stupid kills or stuff like he did in NOEs 5, 6, and so on. Like the "Tina" scene, sure it wasn't all crazy like the original or New Nightmare but it just had that brutal snap to it when Freddy stopped "playing" or toying with her and just ended it. I was even like "Oh!" when it happened because I really wasn't expecting that because of all the other NOES movies and how he would use everything but his glove to kill people with. So that's one thing I appreciated with this newer version/take of NOES.

Also some of the things that people have said about the parents basically being no worse than Freddy for them just going out and hunting him down without any proof supposedly and not going to the police or what not, but put yourself in their shoe's or just imagine if you had a child and you found out that they were getting molested or what not, I'm sure 80% or more of you will have so much rage and anger that your not going to want to go and try to call the cops and HOPE they catch the person and that person actually get's punished for what he/she did. Especially with how they did this movie in modern times where most criminals end up getting off with like a slap on the wrist their first time and or can be completely let go cause of one little tiny mistake or something not signed or whatever it be. Of course you and or others are probably just going to try and band together and try to take the law into your own hand. Especially if it was something like this that all of a sudden just came up. So for some of you "against" what the parents did, I think I stand by them and it was pretty realistic to what probably could happen. Sure maybe us as parents aren't going to go to far and kill someone but go out and probably kick the every loving shit out of them, then yeah. That I can totally see happening. I know I for one would probably lose it if something like that was to happen to my daughters. I wouldn't care who it was and or what would happen to me. I would go and kick their ass not caring what would or could happen to me.

Also I think that was the parents point as well. Its not that they went out to go kill Freddy, but they went out to go beat the fuck out of him and threw the gas can on fire inside to lure him out of the house/building he was in but Freddy ended up staying in there and didn't come out like they had hoped he would have.

Oh, one of the other issue's I kind of had which I did see kind of mentioned was how old the so called "Kids/Teens" looked. I think that's why there was like no nudity in the older films of the teens because a lot of them probably were just in their teens, but in these newer horror movies, we're getting people in their 20's (hell probably in their late 20's as well maybe even into their 30's) trying to look and be a teenager. I'm sorry but that just doesn't work. Also these super hot model looking teens just doesn't cut it either. In the other nightmares and or other older horror movies, the "teens" or even young adults like 20-21'ish olds looked like they were that age and also looked like any normal person at that age and not some super model type person with the perfect looking body and face. I'm not just knocking them for doing that in this movie, I think it's like any new horror movie these days and or even non horror movies. Just any movie that is supposed to have a teen character we end up getting a person that is in their 20's or upper 20's trying to look like a 16, 17, or 18 yr old.

As for everything else, I thought it was good. The thing about the micronaps, I can totally see how that happens as that happens to me A LOT! I can be here on the cpu or sitting in the living room either watching TV or playing video games and I kind of start nodding off and will maybe sleep/nap for just like a min or two and it seems like a long time sometimes and or it keeps happening for like an hour back and forth. Some of it is because of my medication and I'm trying to fight it cause I just can't or dont want to sleep or nap, or I didn't sleep that much the night/day before and been up all night/day and don't want to fall asleep in the afternoon cause then I'll end up being up again all night and even though I'll have a red bull or some kind of energy drink or those new energy shots I will still go through a nodding phase till I can get my ass to actually get up and move around or what not instead of just sitting there. So that I can totally see happening and can totally relate to what they were probably trying to do and or show with those so called micro naps or cat naps.

I really want to see it again. Just posting about it and reading all the other post's has really got me into wanting to go watch it again. I might this weekend like when I go see Iron Man. Maybe go and "sneak in" after Iron Man or if I'm alone then I'll go and just pay to go watch it again. I won't go again with the kids cause that was just to much for all 4 of us. It was a total of $47 for us to go. $10x3 + $13 for my ticket and also a $1 per person since I got the tickets on fandango. I was more than happy with it, but I just don't want to spend another $50 basically to see it again, plus the kids would rather watch a different movie at the theaters. They're not into seeing the same movie again in theaters, only when it comes to DVD/Bluray they can watch it over and over. With that, I definitely can't wait till it comes out on Bluray!!!!

[Dead Cell]

Wow, that was a big post!


Then everyone (well the one's who are going to hate it no matter what) will complain that the movie wasn't original enough and just went and did the exact same thing.

Yet when a remake/reboot end's up and goes and tries to do something totally different then everyone goes and complains how they (characters, scenes, kills, lines, or whatever) wasn't like the original. There is really no way these type of movies will ever have a chance with some of you people.
Yeah, I've noticed this too. People hate that it's different. Then they hate that it's the same. You just can't win. I take it for what it is. I don't mind that it's different with a few homages here and there. However, I can't help but compare recreated scenes to the original, and that's where I find that I prefer the original.

Stretchy Wall: Original
Bathtub Scene: Original
Goopy Floor: Remake
Geyser of Blood: Original
Classroom Nightmare: Original

I do also agree with the scene that has even shown in the trailers where Freddy comes out of the wall kind of over Nancy's bed. Yes, that was HORRIBLE! I am not against CGI, I understand that it's pretty much here to stay and there are times when it can be done good, this was not one of those times. When CGI is this bad and or fake/goofy looking then that's when I can see why so many people "hate" CGI and can stand by them in these kind of instances.
It's not just that the CGI was bad. It also showcases the filmmaker's complete lack of subtlety. They recreated a scene that was meant to build tension and suspense in the original and turned it into a bloated set piece that didn't really do anything.

Some of you all say that this Nancy was not like the original Nancy and she wasn't "strong" like Heather's Nancy and so on, but I think that's the point of this version of Nancy. She's NOT supposed to be like the original Nancy. See this is one of those things that I think that no matter what the director or writer tried to do, they are in a no win situation. People are going to cry foul if she was to much similar and or like the original Nancy or if she was different people like they have already done already cried foul.
Nancy Holbrook is not Nancy Thompson. :p
Keeping in mind that it is a totally different character, I'm okay that she doesn't act like the original Nancy. I'm glad that they changed her last name. Somewhere, someone had the good sense to set this new character apart from Freddy's arch rival. While this new Nancy does show some guts and delivers the killing blow, she's also portrayed as being completely helpless in the dream world and constantly on the run *away* from Krueger; a distinct difference between the two Nancy's. However, a friend of mine that had never seen any of the NOES movies before the remake, said that he likes the new Nancy over the original. So there you go. Maybe it comes down to which one you see first.

The best you can hope for is to go in open minded and just try to enjoy it for what it is and try NOT to compare it to the original but instead just look at it as a whole different, brand new movie.
Even doing that, which I did, the director still relies too heavily on pop-out scares, and the ending is still incredibly lame.

but I think the only reason is the first Friday and Halloween were just a little to slow and boring for my taste's.
I thought the same thing when I first watched Halloween. I had always heard what a horror classic it is, and I was damn near falling asleep. It was boring! However, it's one of those movies that gets better and better with repeated viewings. Now it doesn't feel slow at all to me.

A lot of people would complain in some of the other NOES movies saying Freddy doesn't really use his "glove" to kill people with that much and more people would like him to use his glove more than his mind tricks or all the other stuff he uses besides his glove to kill people and now that the film makers went and GAVE what everyone was pretty much asking for, they go and say there wasn't enough originality to the kills or no dream sequence like kills where it's something outragous or whatever. See another no win situation for the people that made this.
I loved that he used the glove a lot more in the remake. I'm one of the people that thought he forgot how to use it in the later sequels. I don't think he used it at all in FD or DC. But yeah, I know what you mean. I've seen the complaints too.

So that's one thing I appreciated with this newer version/take of NOES.
Agreed.

Also some of the things that people have said about the parents basically being no worse than Freddy for them just going out and hunting him down without any proof supposedly and not going to the police or what not
It changes a couple of the key messages of ANOES; that society in general and the justice system specifically failed the parents whose children had been murdered, and that Freddy was coming back as a ghost to get revenge on the parents for taking the law into their own hands.
The PD NOES's message is that if you're being molested and you tell your parents what's been happening, you're going to get killed. I really don't get why they removed the bit about the trial being thrown out.

In the other nightmares and or other older horror movies, the "teens" or even young adults like 20-21'ish olds looked like they were that age and also looked like any normal person at that age and not some super model type person with the perfect looking body and face. I'm not just knocking them for doing that in this movie, I think it's like any new horror movie these days and or even non horror movies.
Agreed. PD is Michael Bay's baby, and we all know there are no average people in his movies. Just look at the big frat party in Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen.

As for everything else, I thought it was good.
I thought so too. Good, just not great.

[Utellme]

My hopes aren't too high for this but there's no way this can be as horrible as Zombieween. No way. That's in a whole different shitty league. :D

I doubt I'll see this in theaters. Will probably check out the DVD or something.

Both films are awful but at least Zombieween was exciting enough to complain about.NOES 2010 is a sleep fest id rather watch any movie that sucks over it at least i could be excited enough to complain about movies that suck.NOES only thing that excited me was the credits.

Now i can see why they put the coupon in the DVD they knew they would have to eventually beg and brive people to go see this yawn fest.Heck id rather watch My little pony or Smurfs anything with a glimpse of a pule.

[The Tall Man]

Wait a second... isn't the floor of blood Not-Nancy falls into a reference to the same thing from Nightmare 3 with Kristen and NOT the staircase Nancy makes her way up in Nightmare 1?

I think this bit that a pal of mine just said pretty much sums up the remake:
<Evil Scrotom> the whole thing was like a Freddy cover album. It's all your favorites - done by no one with even half the talent.

T.M., Esq.

ADDED: Oh, man, and just now...
<ES> When Freddy yanked out Nancy of that SUV... it was like GTA: Springwood. "I NEED YER CAR, BITCH!"
:lmao: Classic.

[Fan of Freddy]

well, one of my friends wanted to see it, and rather then dump on him how bad it is, I decided to let him sit through it form his own opinion. Seeing it again, I think I didn't "hate" it as much as the first time, but that's probably only because I knew what was coming. In fact knowing that, I think I was only twice as bored this time around.

That being said, I realized I never did come back and give a proper review of why I felt it was so bad. Especially in seeing it again I'm certain of what my biggest issues were; the biggest thing first and foremost was the way they altered the character's story. As much as some people defend the writing in that it was an interesting take on Freddy's back story, it fails horribly. Having an interesting idea for a different take on the character is fine, but it doesn't mean jack shit unless you put the thought into it to make it work, and these film makers clearly did not. It's so incoherent; how in the hell does this calm, nice old groundskeeper at a preschool turn into the evil, sleazy demon we see him as in death? Sure he was supposedly molesting the kids, but the way they portrayed him in life, there was nothing truly "evil" about him; there's no basis for Fred Krueger to turn into "Freddy" in the dream world later on. It's like the character is contradicting himself within his own storyline. They try to hint that he had the glove and used it on the kids in his "lair", but its never seen or explained and it feels like it was just forced in to try and give some "evil" element to him, when it doesn't fit with the personality they were showing us at all.

As if the Freddy character himself isn't bad enough, the motivations the parents had for burning him are even less coherent. So you have "hunch" he's molesting your kids, but rather then being rational and doing a little research on Krueger, maybe get the police involved and have his room searched properly; you know, gather any and all evidence you can so you can say if he's guilty or not, instead you hunt the man down like an animal and torch him in a fiery explosion, all based on a "hunch" that you aren't even 100% about? At least in the original they could justify their actions; they already had all the evidence against him, they knew what he did and even got him into a court room for it, but he walked because someone didn't cover all the bases. So rather then let him go free again, they did the only thing they felt they could to keep their kids safe, and that was to kill him themselves. In the remake, the "I'm doing this for my kids" angle is there, but again, there is ZERO basis for it. How can you say "I'm doing this for my kids" when you don't even know one way or the other if this man is even guilty? Are these parents just so protective that they'll kill the first person they see in cold blood just based off what their 5 year old daughter or son tells them?

Then there's the "oh it was just to keep the kids out of a court room" angle. First of all, its downright stupid on the parents part to think its better for the kids to just make them blank out all their memories until middle school then to take Krueger to court and put him away properly so that they're never hurt again. Second of all, if you had enough evidence against him like you "thought" you did, the kids wouldn't have even had to testify. Even if they did, you've already tried to sell us on the idea that all these kids just magically blanked out everything that happened until like, middle school, so why wouldn't the parents make them blank out the court case as well? Nancy's mom at one point says "I didn't want you to live with this memory!" Well that's fine lady, but what would have been wrong with waiting till after Krueger was in a jail cell to do that? The parent's actions past and present in this movie make no sense and again it just shows the almost astonishing lack of thought put into this script.

The other major thing that pissed me off was the film lifting almost note for note some of the set pieces from the original. In a different movie I could have really appreciated this as a good homage to the original, but in here, they're done so poorly, and in most cases just seem totally out of place. Like the writers said "well I can't think of anything original or clever here...I KNOW, lets just take this scene from the original and stick it here, the fans will like that, right?" Like the "Tina" scene. What the hell was the basis for even putting it here? The lead up to it didn't even add up to the final death, and the scene itself was just a waste of time. It was over done and drawn out, and after it happens we don't care anymore about the character or the situation then we did before. Hell, in the original we barely knew Tina but we cared enough about her for her death to have some effect. Then there was the wall-stretch scene...that's been talked about to death so I'll leave that one alone. I'll just say I echo everyone else's reasons as to why that was shit.

Then there's the movies total reliance on jump scares. Jump scares are not "frightening", they don't move the story along and they're not engaging. What they do accomplish though is showing that no one could come up with anything clever to do with Freddy. Every single time he pops up it starts or ends with some kind of jump scare. The micro-naps idea is especially bad; all it does is allow them to have Freddy pop up at any time they want and do, guess what? Another fucking jump scare. What happened to this idea that no matter what you did you'd have to sleep eventually, and Freddy would be patiently waiting on the other side when you did? Instead it seems like Freddy will do anything to get you at any time; they strip him of the idea that he's this smart, clever phantom slowly creeping up on your subconscious, and instead replace him with an impatient slasher filled with blind rage, hell bent on trying to off these kids as fast as he possibly can. There's no sense that he's enjoying himself like in the original, instead it just seems like he's out to do this as systematically and as coldly as he can and move on.

All in all, it's just a poorly thought out, poorly executed idea on the story. Lazy film making at its finest with no sense of quality or care put into crafting a decent story for the general audience OR the fans. And I'm one of these people who wanted to give this movie a chance, I didn't go in hating it from the day it was announced. For the most part I avoided all the threads, early reviews, and released clips. But after seeing this now twice now (and never again), this is the last time I'm giving Platinum Dunes a chance with anything. They've proven they're not interested in quality, just making a quick buck on a big name. Well, they've gotten enough of my money, let them go their way and I'll go mine. I'm done with them.

[The Tall Man]

Bravo, Fan. Bravo. The nail on the head, sir.

T.M., Esq.

[Utellme]

The Tall Man; I think this bit that a pal of mine just said pretty much sums up the remake:
<Evil Scrotom> the whole thing was like a Freddy cover album. It's all your favorites - done by no one with even half the talent.


That sounds about perfect except you forgot to add sleeping or yawning.

[Rick]

It's so incoherent; how in the hell does this calm, nice old groundskeeper at a preschool turn into the evil, sleazy demon we see him as in death?
Because he's not really a calm, nice old grounds keeper, he's a monster inside who targets and molests children. In death he doesn't have to hide that and can be his true monstrous self. Not only that, he's out for revenge at that point as well because they told on him and got him killed
He's obviously not going to walk around being sleazy and acting overtly perverted in life. If child molesters had "Kiddie Diddler" tattooed on their forehead they'd be a lot easier to spot. I don't think it's incoherent to think that child-molester Freddy is going to try and keep that part well hidden until he has the ability to attack people in their nightmares, where he lets his true colours be shown..

[Hockey Mask]

I hated the Halloween reboot and know what it was like to try and convice someone that a movie was shit and how it often became heated. I am not interested in going down that path but will be happy to discuss it with anyone now that I am on the other side. Here it goes...

It's so incoherent; how in the hell does this calm, nice old groundskeeper at a preschool turn into the evil, sleazy demon we see him as in death? Sure he was supposedly molesting the kids, but the way they portrayed him in life, there was nothing truly "evil" about him; there's no basis for Fred Krueger to turn into "Freddy" in the dream world later on.
There was nothing calm or nice about him. The only thing they did was make it ambiguous until the end.


As if the Freddy character himself isn't bad enough, the motivations the parents had for burning him are even less coherent. So you have "hunch" he's molesting your kids, but rather then being rational and doing a little research on Krueger, maybe get the police involved and have his room searched properly; you know, gather any and all evidence you can so you can say if he's guilty or not, instead you hunt the man down like an animal and torch him in a fiery explosion, all based on a "hunch" that you aren't even 100% about? At least in the original they could justify their actions; they already had all the evidence against him, they knew what he did and even got him into a court room for it, but he walked because someone didn't cover all the bases.
But that is where the story went with the characters. First Blood and Death Wish would have been boring movies had the characters done what was right.


So rather then let him go free again, they did the only thing they felt they could to keep their kids safe, and that was to kill him themselves. In the remake, the "I'm doing this for my kids" angle is there, but again, there is ZERO basis for it. How can you say "I'm doing this for my kids" when you don't even know one way or the other if this man is even guilty? Are these parents just so protective that they'll kill the first person they see in cold blood just based off what their 5 year old daughter or son tells them?
I think every movie that has been made you could argue why someone chose to do such and such. In F13, why did the girl run up the stairs kind of thing. I know if my child came to me and said that the groundskeeper at his daycare had been doing bad things to him I would go apeshit before I contacted the police. I don't think it is that much of a stretch dealing with what the franchise is asking us to believe in to begin with.


Like the "Tina" scene. What the hell was the basis for even putting it here? The lead up to it didn't even add up to the final death, and the scene itself was just a waste of time. It was over done and drawn out, and after it happens we don't care anymore about the character or the situation then we did before.
Was it too similar or too different? I thought they brought a decent balance to it that paid homage but made it different. Not sure why you have a porblem with it. Is it a slap in the original's face to you or something else?


Then there's the movies total reliance on jump scares.
Agreed.


The micro-naps idea is especially bad; all it does is allow them to have Freddy pop up at any time
I was able to accept this and I thought it was the rebboot's biggest change to the series. It ain't your father's Nightmare anyomore. But if you don't like the change it will be hard to convice you otherwise.


All in all, it's just a poorly thought out, poorly executed idea on the story. Lazy film making at its finest with no sense of quality or care put into crafting a decent story for the general audience OR the fans.
There were things I didn't like about it but overall I thought they did a decent job with it.

[CrazyChris187]

to be honest i liked the remake it was pretty good only jump scare that got me the first time was the starting cause it was loud other than that they were way over used i liked jackie earle hayle but i didnt like the look all that much and some of the stuff he says is pretty funny yet dark.The wall scene i hate i liked the original wall scene better and some of the kills in this are pretty sweet,ilike the whole thing about micro-naps and the saying about if you dont sleep your body will shut down and go into a coma which is permanent sleep and i figured out why my mom always said it was unhealthy for me to stay awake all the time lol but i have seen this movie twice in theatres and i will buy it when it comes to dvd

[Fan of Freddy]

I hated the Halloween reboot and know what it was like to try and convice someone that a movie was shit and how it often became heated. I am not interested in going down that path but will be happy to discuss it with anyone now that I am on the other side. Here it goes...


There was nothing calm or nice about him. The only thing they did was make it ambiguous until the end.
Well like I said, sure he was molesting the kids, and its easy to understand that he's a fucked up guy, but the way they portrayed him in life, there was way that guy had "raging evil child molester" in him. A child molester doesn't have to be THAT level of bad, and this Fred Krueger wasn't until he became "Freddy", and then they pretty much had to portray him that way. It just felt very contradictory and didn't feel like the two characters were related.


But that is where the story went with the characters. First Blood and Death Wish would have been boring movies had the characters done what was right.
But it still made no sense. In the original it made plenty of sense and was easily acceptable. Here, the parents do what they do off nothing more then a hunch.

I think every movie that has been made you could argue why someone chose to do such and such. In F13, why did the girl run up the stairs kind of thing. I know if my child came to me and said that the groundskeeper at his daycare had been doing bad things to him I would go apeshit before I contacted the police. I don't think it is that much of a stretch dealing with what the franchise is asking us to believe in to begin with.
See previous. Movie world or not, would you just go out and torch a guy when you have practically zero evidence to say he did what the kids said he did? Sure, I can see someone going apeshit about something like this, but this remake is really stretching things by asking us to accept that the parents burned a man alive with no basis for that action. They had no evidence against him to make that kind of judgment call, all they had was what their kids told them. If I were a parent, sure I'd be mad if my kid said that, but I wouldn't let my actions be dictated solely on that alone. I'd try to be rational; think things through, go to the police, etc. I wouldn't just take matters into my own hands unless I knew for sure it was necessary, like the parents in the original Nightmare. In that movie it was a lot more realistic because of those circumstances; in this movie it takes all the realism away from the situation because rather then giving us real, rational people who are doing what they're doing because they exhausted every other avenue, it gives us a bunch of hollow cardboard cut outs; they're mad for the sake of being mad and burning a guy for the sake of the story needing "Freddy" to exist later.

Was it too similar or too different? I thought they brought a decent balance to it that paid homage but made it different. Not sure why you have a porblem with it. Is it a slap in the original's face to you or something else?
To me it was a slap in the face, yes. Not because it was similar or different, but because there was simply no reason to put it there and it was executed so poorly. It didn't add anything to the situation and didn't move the story along, it just happened because they figured they needed a scene from the original. It was tacked on; there was no other thought put into it then that.


Agreed.
Glad we found at least some kind of common ground xD

I was able to accept this and I thought it was the rebboot's biggest change to the series. It ain't your father's Nightmare anyomore. But if you don't like the change it will be hard to convice you otherwise.
On the contrary, I do like change. But not when you change things just for a cheap scare. The thing is, Micronaps could have worked very well, it could have been a very clever concept if it was in the hands of anyone else. But in the Dunes universe it exists solely to have Freddy pop up at any time for a cheap jump scare. There was no thought into making the idea work for the story, just "oh its getting dull here, lets have Freddy pop up for no reason."

There were things I didn't like about it but overall I thought they did a decent job with it.
That's your opinion and I respect it, I'm not trying to convince you otherwise. For me though it seemed pretty clear what this was; a cash grab for the Dunes. No quality or care put into it other then what they needed to make a quick buck.

[Hockey Mask]

Well like I said, sure he was molesting the kids, and its easy to understand that he's a fucked up guy, but the way they portrayed him in life, there was way that guy had "raging evil child molester" in him. A child molester doesn't have to be THAT level of bad, and this Fred Krueger wasn't until he became "Freddy", and then they pretty much had to portray him that way. It just felt very contradictory and didn't feel like the two characters were related.
I thought they were trying to ride out a balance between of trying to make it look like Freddy was innocent as long as possible and in order to do that they couldn't get the audience against him too quickly. It was probably trying to ask too much of them to pull it off. It worked fine with me but obviously it didn't succeed with you


But it still made no sense. In the original it made plenty of sense and was easily acceptable. Here, the parents do what they do off nothing more then a hunch.
When two dozen kids come out it seems more than a hunch but I get what you are saying. It worked for me.

They had no evidence against him to make that kind of judgment call, all they had was what their kids told them.
I agree it was the wrong decision but the decision itself didn't seem so unreal to me that it turned me off.

In that movie it was a lot more realistic because of those circumstances; in this movie it takes all the realism away from the situation because rather then giving us real, rational people who are doing what they're doing because they exhausted every other avenue, it gives us a bunch of hollow cardboard cut outs; they're mad for the sake of being mad and burning a guy for the sake of the story needing "Freddy" to exist later.
The parents were definately cardboard. If I remember right it was a type of mob mentality and the actions of just one guy which led to the burning. Not too big of a leap for me considering we are dealing with a dream-killer.

To me it was a slap in the face, yes. Not because it was similar or different, but because there was simply no reason to put it there and it was executed so poorly. It didn't add anything to the situation and didn't move the story along, it just happened because they figured they needed a scene from the original. It was tacked on; there was no other thought put into it then that.
They introduced a vistim and killed her off. That was its sole purpose. How can you tack on a death scene in a slacher movie? I liked it. I think your dislike for it is only because of your attachment to the original. A lot of people disliked the Goldfinger scene in Quantum of Solace but I liked that too.



Glad we found at least some kind of common ground xD
One down. About 6 to go.

On the contrary, I do like change. But not when you change things just for a cheap scare. The thing is, Micronaps could have worked very well, it could have been a very clever concept if it was in the hands of anyone else. But in the Dunes universe it exists solely to have Freddy pop up at any time for a cheap jump scare. There was no thought into making the idea work for the story, just "oh its getting dull here, lets have Freddy pop up for no reason."
Agreed. Two down and about 5 to go.

That's your opinion and I respect it, I'm not trying to convince you otherwise. For me though it seemed pretty clear what this was; a cash grab for the Dunes. No quality or care put into it other then what they needed to make a quick buck.
Clearly a cash grab but I did see more quality and more care. Things I did not see in the Halloween reboot.

[Rich]

The parents didn't have to be anything more then cardboard. All they had to do was burn Freddy. That was their only purpose. They were nothing more then a plot device. Nancy's mother was the only one that we even slightly got to know, and some other kid's father.

As far as Freddy goes. He was nice to the kids because he really liked them, and perhaps he resented himself for having sexual desires and murderous impulses toward them, in the same way that homosexuals keep their sexuality "in the closet" so to speek. He was ashamed of himself do to the fact that he knew society would not tollerate it, yet because children were his sexual preferance (which often can't be helped) he both loved and hated kids, because he knew that that behavior is not accepted by society.

When he became the dream killer, he was pissed ofd and rageful because he felt that he could not control what his sexual preferance was, and yet he was murdered for it. He would commit acts of cruelty on the kids, because subconsciensly he had a resentment toward them, because he could not help be attracted to them, but knew that his actions would not be tollerated by society. He took his sexual frustrations out on them, the same way husbands beat up their wives and kids. He was killed for that too. In his own mind, he felt that he could not help his sexual desires and it was unfair for him to be killed for something that he did not know how to control. Naturally his spirit would be angry and full of rage.

"What do you want man?"
"CAN YOU BRING BACK THE DEAD!!!!!!"

That is what I get out of it anyway.

[The Dream Master]

The parents didn't have to be anything more then cardboard. All they had to do was burn Freddy. That was their only purpose.

And that is one of the reasons this movie misfires, big time. One of the great things about the original series was the tension between the kids and the adult figures in their lives. Nancy's mother in the original is an emotional wreck and makes Nancy's life a living hell even when she's awake. In fact, that's why the film's title works so well on many different levels: the nightmare is not only the literal one involving Freddy, but the complete breakdown of the family structure and the trust between kids and their parents. That's a great subtext that the remake misses out on, despite the fact that they had a chance to expand on it.

[Rich]

I understand what you are saying between Nancy and her mother. You can say the exact same thing with Kristin and her mother in Dream Warriors.

I understand your point, however, I feel that that is not as important as the characters' struggle with dealing with Freddy, and how pissed off Freddy is at what their parents did.

Don't bne suprised if we get an extended edition DVD/Blu-Ray with more story elements attached to the film. It isn't like that never happened before. :X

[The Dream Master]

You can say that about all the movies. Certainly some handled it better than others, but even the most shallow of Elm Streets (part 4) made it a major component. I mean, nothing in the Nightmare remake is nearly as powerful as Kristen telling her mother that she just murdered her. Plus, you've got the shit between Alice and her dad that's a critical component of her story. I think the fact that most of the kids can't even confide in their parents is almost as scary as Freddy himself, and the remake glosses over it, big time.

[Dead Cell]

One of my friends that had never seen any of the Elm Streets asked me at the end of the movie if Freddy was now in the mirror world or something. It didn't make any sense to her. :p

Oh, what else to say? I don't know. I've pretty much said it all already. Meh.

[Hockey Mask]

One of my friends that had never seen any of the Elm Streets asked me at the end of the movie if Freddy was now in the mirror world or something. It didn't make any sense to her. :p

Not sure if the original NOES ending would have been any less confusing.

[The Dream Master]

I don't think either is all that confusing. Obviously, both end with a dream, though the remake's ending is a lot more out of left field. At least in the original, you can tell there's weird shit going on already. I would say the ending for the remake is more on par with Nightmare 2's ending.

[Dead Cell]

So true. Stepping out of the bedroom and onto the porch with no rhyme or reason, the fact that her friends and mom are all alive again, the striped top on Glen's convertible, the jump rope kids- more than enough clues for people to figure out it was a dream before Freddy's hand popped through the door.

With the remake it was just... there. And if that's the case, then we can assume Nancy's mom is still alive and well, and that Freddy was just screwing with her by making it look like he'd killed her mom.

[slasher king]

Overall I liked the remake. Two things I wish they would have stayed closer to the original seriseswith are the score and the having the makeup. I think they wrapped it up to much. All the kids of the parents that wronged him are dead. Who else will he go after

[The Tall Man]

Because he's not really a calm, nice old grounds keeper, he's a monster inside who targets and molests children. In death he doesn't have to hide that and can be his true monstrous self. Not only that, he's out for revenge at that point as well because they told on him and got him killed
Frankly, it just doesn't play off like that. It plays off more like piss-poor writing... which is the name of the game as far as this movie's concerned.

In fact, that's why the film's title works so well on many different levels: the nightmare is not only the literal one involving Freddy, but the complete breakdown of the family structure and the trust between kids and their parents. That's a great subtext that the remake misses out on, despite the fact that they had a chance to expand on it.
^^^^ This. Hard.

One of my friends that had never seen any of the Elm Streets asked me at the end of the movie if Freddy was now in the mirror world or something. It didn't make any sense to her.
:lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao: You should have just told her "Uh... yes?"

"The Mirror World." Fucking awesome.

So... how would you like to see Not-Nightmare if it were an episode of "Freddy's Nightmares"? What would Freddy have to say about it? Well, here's your opportunity to find out. Be warned: if you don't want the end of the movie spoiled for you, don't watch this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LIc2ichiuBU

Enjoy!

T.M., Esq.

[The Dark Vampire]

Wouldn't Freddy actually be good in the Mirror World

[The Dream Master]

:lol: :lol:

It's just as funny as I'd imagined it'd be.

[Darth Reaper]

As far as Freddy goes. He was nice to the kids because he really liked them, and perhaps he resented himself for having sexual desires and murderous impulses toward them, in the same way that homosexuals keep their sexuality "in the closet" so to speek. He was ashamed of himself do to the fact that he knew society would not tollerate it, yet because children were his sexual preferance (which often can't be helped) he both loved and hated kids, because he knew that that behavior is not accepted by society.-Rich

It seems more likely to me that Freddy didn't think he was doing anything wrong. That seems to be a common thing with pedophiles. They don't see the harm they're doing. They convince themselves that they're being good to their victims. Freddy probably knew that society would frown on what he was doing, so he hid it, but he personally didn't see the harm.

And, that's why he's angry with the children for telling on him. He'd convinced himself that he was being good to these kids and they betrayed him and caused his death, so he was mad as Hell and looking to make them pay.

Well like I said, sure he was molesting the kids, and its easy to understand that he's a fucked up guy, but the way they portrayed him in life, there was way that guy had "raging evil child molester" in him. A child molester doesn't have to be THAT level of bad, and this Fred Krueger wasn't until he became "Freddy", and then they pretty much had to portray him that way. It just felt very contradictory and didn't feel like the two characters were related.- Fan of Freddy

Concidering the circumstances of his death, I think it's reasonable to think that Freddy's more than a little unhinged now. Burning to death has to be an awful way to go, so I could imagine that it could drive a person over the edge. Freddy's not just angry, he's deranged. He was always a monster, but dying the way he did made the monster worse.

[Alex DeLarge]

So... how would you like to see Not-Nightmare if it were an episode of "Freddy's Nightmares"? What would Freddy have to say about it? Well, here's your opportunity to find out. Be warned: if you don't want the end of the movie spoiled for you, don't watch this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LIc2ichiuBU

Enjoy!

T.M., Esq.

Holy crap.

I have no desire to see the remake...

But every desire to see the remake as an actual episode of Freddy's Nightmares, complete with opening titles and everything. One of his nightmares indeed!:D

[idolone]

I finally saw this movie, but I wish I hadn't. After reading the reviews here and on the Nightmare site, I actually thought this movie might be okay. Man, I was wrong. This movie is worse than Freddy's Dead. I could go into it, but why bother. I guess you either dig it or you don't. I don't.

[The Dark Vampire]

Well I ended up going and I hated it apart from the micro naps idea which was a good idea I thought everything else just really sucked.

I went in there with low expectations but it was even worse than I feared which is odd as most times I go in thinking it's going to suck I end up liking it

[Just Jeans]

Rolling out with three friends to watch this tonight. I've avoided the thread (for the most part) since the release, so I'll post back my thoughts once I've seen it.

"But these fans on the web should just get up, stretch, breathe, go outside and get some fresh air, maybe get a girlfriend and just get a life.”-- Samuel Bayer, 2010.

Man's got a point though. I myself would do all of those things if I could walk properly. :shy:

Anybody that paid 10 dollars to see Not-Nightmare deserves Rooney Mara showing up at their door to blow them.

*raises his hand* Give 'er my address, mang. It's been half a decade since I've experienced physical contact of that sort.

Thomas Dekker handjob.

I'd buy that for a dollar.

[CrystalLake]

Will I like this if I like the Friday remake? see some very negative comments on this thread, but a good majority of you enjoyed F13. Will I have the same reaction?

[Just Jeans]

You should see for yourself, CrystalLake. It's hard to know what you'll like based on the opinions of others, you know? :)

[The Dark Vampire]

Will I like this if I like the Friday remake? see some very negative comments on this thread, but a good majority of you enjoyed F13. Will I have the same reaction?

I loved the new F13th and hate the NOES remake

[Sean [The Wildcard]]

http://www.ilovehorror.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/Krueger.jpg

[Just Jeans]

Plans fell through, so it looks like it'll be a little bit before I see this. Dern.

[The Tall Man]

Man's got a point though. I myself would do all of those things if I could walk properly. :shy:
Yeah, but he didn't say it because it's something we need to do (which all of us really do). He said it because we were badmouthing his POS movie. Big dif.

I'd buy that for a dollar.
:lmao::lmao::lmao: Classic.

Will I like this if I like the Friday remake?
I loved the new F13th and hate the NOES remake
Replace "loved" with "liked" and ^^^ this

T.M., Esq.

[SlasherFreak]

What Im about to say can be considered an oxy moron to my previous post in this thread. I said it wasnt on the Zombieween level of horrible, which I still stand by, but still, i found myself watching this again earlier and i was just so......bored. I mean, at leat Zombieween had some hilarious dialouge. "I'll crawl over there and skullfuck the shit of you!" "Will your mom show me her tits and let me suck them for a quarter?". I mean...thats hilarious. But this remake had nothing going for it. I think thats my main complaint. This shit is just BORING. Pretty much nothing of significance happens in the film...and the Freddy make up is just laughibly horrible. You want me to be scared of someone who looks like one of my Italian meatballs I make? Really?

Bad, bad film...smh

[NW77]

Anybody heard Bayer insulting us for hating it yet?

Seems like Fuller's class is rubbing off on him.

T.M., Esq.

Do we know for sure if he really said that? Or maybe his comments was taking out of content? But then you didn't believe anything Rue Morgue said with your hated for them on the Kane's comments, so couldn't it be the other way with what Bayer said? I'll believe it when I see a video of Bayer saying it out of his own mouth than what his comments said on an articles. Maybe whoever add the comments on the article who hate him for doing this film & will make up lies to make some people hate him & the film some more. ;p

[The Tall Man]

Do we know for sure if he really said that? Or maybe his comments was taking out of content? But then you didn't believe anything Rue Morgue said with your hated for them on the Kane's comments, so couldn't it be the other way with what Bayer said? I'll believe it when I see a video of Bayer saying it out of his own mouth than what his comments said on an articles. Maybe whoever add the comments on the article who hate him for doing this film & will make up lies to make some people hate him & the film some more. ;p
Excuse me, but you can go read it yourself over at Fangoria.com where he said it. Considering... no, you know what? That's really dumb. He said it. Fangoria reported it. I passed it on to you. End of story.

Also, fuck Rue Morgue.

This shit is just BORING.
You know something's not right when "The Dream Child" seems taut and exciting in comparison.

T.M., Esq.

[DouglasJ]

This shit is just BORING.


That's pretty much exactly what I said to my girlfriend when we left the cinema. How can a film about a guy who kills you in your dreams be boring? It must have taken a lot of effort to make it so dull.

So yeah, it came out here in the UK yesterday. Went to see it, hated it. Despised... loathed... yeah. It was awful - I would go into the reasons why, but other reviews here sum up my feelings pretty well.

[BlakeTyner]

Okay, so I went and saw it. Because of some of the, um, passion here on the board I went in with relatively low expectations and came out pleasantly surprised. I enjoyed it. It makes my top 3 or 4 "Nightmare" movies (it beats the shit out of 2, 4, 5, 6, and FvJ.)

I'll buy the Blu-ray and probably watch it from time to time.

~Blake

[Jus-X]

Okay, sounds like lots of hate for the movie. I just have to ask, the very first death, what did you think?I think because it was so quick and you couldn't see Freddy, and he made it look lik suicide, it was very cool. IMO.

[The Dream Master]

I liked it better when Freddy pulled the make it look like suicide bit both in the original and Dream Warriors (Phillip's death especially). In this one, I was wondering why in the hell he would use a steak knife when he's got a razor glove.

Oh, and Bayer's comments to Fango can be read here. (http://www.fangoria.com/index.php?id=731:samuel-bayer-talks-new-nightmareand-the-fans&option=com_content&catid=1:latest-news&Itemid=167)

[Dead Cell]

I liked the first death. Hell, I liked the entire opening scene at the diner. Pretty cool. Although...

Movie opens with Dean (name?) having a nightmare.
He wakes up. Chats with his g/f.
Falls asleep again. Dies.
Or maybe he was having a micro-nap?
But his eyes were closed.
Doesn't matter. My point is, we just saw Freddy 2 seconds ago. Then he's right back again.

And then

Funeral scene.
Spooky girl with slash marks on her shows up.
Pop-out scare!

We just saw Freddy no less than a minute ago. It's okay to leave him off-screen for a little while and focus on introducing and developing the other characters. But again- PACING issues.

Then, let's see-

Kris in the attic.
Pop-out scare!

Kris in the classroom.
Freddy again!

Kris in her bedroom
Freddy!

I can't remember if the wall scene occurs before or after these events, but if it's before- well that's just another pointless Freddy moment. Heaven forbid we don't see Freddy for a few seconds.

I think, if given the chance, these characters could hold my attention for a few minutes all on their own without having to inject Freddy into every scene. Well, maybe Quentin and Jesse. They were cool. The cast of the original had many scenes that were just them with no sign of Freddy.

Tina has a nightmare
Freddy!

Tina and her friends at school.

Tina and her friends at her house.

Tina and everyone in the backyard.
Fake pop-out scare!

Tina has a nightmare
Freddy!

Between Tina's first nightmare and her 2nd one there's at least a good 10 minutes devoted to introducing the cast and making them out to be more than just names. And despite the lack of Freddy in every scene, it doesn't feel slow or boring. Good writing, good pacing.

[Rich]

Sam is getting a lot of heat by fans on another board for those comments, but I can actually see where he is coming from.

[The Tall Man]

In this one, I was wondering why in the hell he would use a steak knife when he's got a razor glove.
I've said it before and I'll probably keep saying it, as far as this movie's concerned, piss-poor writing is the name of the game.

How bad do you have to be when you make De Luca look like a writing genius?

Between Tina's first nightmare and her 2nd one there's at least a good 10 minutes devoted to introducing the cast and making them out to be more than just names. And despite the lack of Freddy in every scene, it doesn't feel slow or boring. Good writing, good pacing.
Well that's because Wes Craven is a competent filmmaker.

Whoa... did I just say that?

T.M., Esq.

[The Dark Vampire]

I really thought the acting was bad in this to and I do think Jackie Earle Haley is a great actor but in this he was just bad I think he just read the script thought that it sucked so just gave a half assed performance

[Dead Cell]

Well that's because Wes Craven is a competent filmmaker.

Whoa... did I just say that?

T.M., Esq.
Hehe, Wes has had a few great movies. When he's on his game, he's really on. But then, I also saw Shocker. :p

[The Tall Man]

Dead, Shocker could have been really great were there somebody there (a la Bob Shaye) to reign in Wes. Instead of starting a whole new movie and creating and concentrating on a new mythology, Wes acts like he's directing Nightmare 5 (or Shocker 5, if you prefer). Shocker is all over the place with its schizophrenia. At first it's a slasher movie, then it's a revenge picture, then it's a possession movie, then he's an electrical signal, then he's a TV signal... WHAT?!

Craven commits the same sort of sins in "Shocker" that he damned the Nightmare sequels of. And because the script can't focus, the direction and his actors suffer. In fact, the only solid performance in the film is Mitch Pileggi's. So, "Shocker" really saddens me because its concept was great. It's execution was less than stellar because Wes himself had final call. I'd be ALL for a "Shocker" remake, but only with Wes directing and Pileggi back. Then again, my favorite episode of Craven's "Nightmare Cafe" is the one he himself directed.

But you're right: when Wes is on, he's on.

T.M., Esq.

[Zombie]

The "writing" wasn't piss poor... It's VERY OBVIOUS why Freddy used a "Steak Knife" in that scene to kill that kid instead of his knives on his glove like some of you would prefer.

Let's see, could they call it a suicide if he was standing there and all of a sudden saw a magical "slice" go across his neck with nothing in his hand and people are watching or would it be better if used the steak knife so that way it was a physical object in his hands and making it look like he was stabbing and slicing at himself even though he was trying to hold off his hand from doing it?

If some of you all think the first option is better and would "write in" an invisible slice instead then that's some piss poor writing and I shudder to even think of what kind of movie you would make...

As for the issue with the "Parents".... You guys are really not looking at what they were originally going to do and just comparing to what happened in the original. It's pretty obvious they were going after him to beat the shit out of him. I could swear the guy/father that was like leading everyone said something like "Come out and get your medicine". I'm pretty certain you can ask the people who made this movie that their intentions were probably to go and beat him up and take him to the police or maybe just beat him up and leave him there and hopefully he'd get the message to leave for good?

It just so happened he went into that building/room to hide from them and they couldn't get to him so they threw in the gas can/container on fire to LURE HIM OUT, but it backfired on them because Freddy didn't come out (right away) and instead stood in there and caught on fire and then finally ran out when it was to little to late and ended up dying.

Now I will admit that by doing that or by that happening it leaves a plot hole in a way with how or what did the parents do to cover up killing him (on accident?) Its obvious Nancy doesn't have her father around which in the original she had her dad who was the Sheriff/Officer. It actually looks like all the kids parents are single cause I don't think I saw any two parents at one time to be honest? Anyways though, I also don't think there was a cop/officer present when they go after Freddy and end up torching him. If there was then I can totally see him covering it up for everyone and that's that and just my mistake as I don't remember one being there during that time.

Maybe it'll be something that will be brought up in the sequel if there is one in this universe?

[The Dream Master]

The "writing" wasn't piss poor... It's VERY OBVIOUS why Freddy used a "Steak Knife" in that scene to kill that kid instead of his knives on his glove like some of you would prefer.

Let's see, could they call it a suicide if he was standing there and all of a sudden saw a magical "slice" go across his neck with nothing in his hand and people are watching or would it be better if used the steak knife so that way it was a physical object in his hands and making it look like he was stabbing and slicing at himself even though he was trying to hold off his hand from doing it?


You hit the nail right on the head as to why it still doesn't work--it's very obvious that he is trying to stop himself, which is why nobody there believes it was really a suicide anyway. As for how it should have been, it seems you have left out the third option: make it look like a suicide in the real world while Freddy is doing cool shit in the dream world, like in part 3. At the beginning, Kristen looks as if she's slit her own wrists with a razor, but Freddy really did it with his glove. Same thing with Phillip--Freddy made him into a walking puppet with his own tendons, but it was made to look like a suicide/sleepwalking accident. Really, it just comes back to how unimaginative the whole movie is.

As for the parents, in the script there is a reference to one of them saying they're trying to "smoke Freddy out." In the actual movie, one of the parents (The Kurgan maybe) says "this ends here" or something to that effect, so I think it's pretty obvious what they were trying to do. The fact that even you say you're not sure and that you need to ask the film makers their intentions is a huge clue that it is pretty poor writing.

[Zombie]

Oh the one thing I forgot to mention, I kind of feel bad for Jackie Earle Haley because this is what his second (maybe third?) role as a child molester or sexual predator, that he actually looks like he would be one. I know it's just a role and probably the reason why he get's those kind of role's but he better be careful about doing any other "newer" roles as a sexual predator because that's all he might be known for and people might stereotype him as really being one.

Sorry about my previous post and not putting in spoilers. I was actually thinking about it but it seemed like those parts that I talked about had already been openly talked about already, but thanks for editing it.

[The Dream Master]

No problem about the spoilers, it happens from time to time.

I have another problem with the whole suicide thing. Doesn't Freddy later say that Nancy's memories basically fuel him? So, basically, the more the kids know about him, the better it is for Freddy? If so, why's he trying to make it look like the guy committed suicide? Wouldn't it scare you more if something really nuts happened to the guy? I know in the original series, Freddy made it look like suicide (even with Rod in the original), but I always got the feeling that he was doing it to fuck with the kids because no one will believe them. In the remake, I have no idea what his motivation is. Is he just messing with all the kids there, since they all seem to know about him already anyway? In the words of Lex Luger, "I DUNNO!" In all seriousness, I think they could have come up with something better than a throat slash with a steak knife. Really boring, especially for this series.

[Jus-X]

No problem about the spoilers, it happens from time to time.

I have another problem with the whole suicide thing. Doesn't Freddy later say that Nancy's memories basically fuel him? So, basically, the more the kids know about him, the better it is for Freddy? If so, why's he trying to make it look like the guy committed suicide? Wouldn't it scare you more if something really nuts happened to the guy? I know in the original series, Freddy made it look like suicide (even with Rod in the original), but I always got the feeling that he was doing it to fuck with the kids because no one will believe them. In the remake, I have no idea what his motivation is. Is he just messing with all the kids there, since they all seem to know about him already anyway? In the words of Lex Luger, "I DUNNO!" In all seriousness, I think they could have come up with something better than a throat slash with a steak knife. Really boring, especially for this series.

I enjoyed the scene myself for the very purpose of it looking like a suicide..

Of course Freddy tells Nancy what he does and I'm thinking it's definitly a true statement. But the reason why he makes his first kill the way he does is because it's a public place. Think about it, if it were all kids witnessing mysterious slashes the kids would goto their parents and the parent would not believe them. They would have their kids commuted. But there were a wide range of ages, including adults. Had adults seen mysterious slashes appearing, they would take their families and get the fuck out of dodge. Freddy would have had no one's memories fueling him when they're all gone.

[The Dream Master]

I don't remember exactly who all was at the diner, but it seems like only the kids were the ones who saw it. But, forgetting that for a second, why would it really matter if people "got the fuck out of dodge" at that point? All the kids already know about him, and Freddy has already killed the other kids strewn throughout the country. Even if I gloss over that though, I still have a big problem with how bland the scene is. Want it to look like a suicide? Great, knock yourself out--but come up with something that's visually interesting for the dream aspect of the whole thing.

[The Tall Man]

As for the parents, in the script there is a reference to one of them saying they're trying to "smoke Freddy out."
:lmao::lmao::lmao: Oh man! How could I forget about smokin' 'em out? Oh... good times.

Oh the one thing I forgot to mention, I kind of feel bad for Jackie Earle Haley because this is what his second (maybe third?) role as a child molester or sexual predator, that he actually looks like he would be one.
That's Hollywood, sir. Keep in mind that for like 10 years or something, Englund was typecast as Southerners (despite the fact he's from CA) and the lead's best friend.

In the words of Lex Luger, "I DUNNO!"
That pretty much describes the script (which again, piss-poor writing is the name of the game) when you start to think about the events in the story at all.

I don't remember exactly who all was at the diner, but it seems like only the kids were the ones who saw it.
According to this boot I got, the only people in the diner at the time are Not-Nancy, Kris, and Dean (and Not-Freddy, I suppose). John Connor and his gang had left by this point.

T.M., Esq.

[Dead Cell]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought Dean grabbed the steak knife and tried to stab Freddy with it. But Freddy grappled with him a bit and turned the steak knife back on Dean. When I first saw that scene, I thought- yeah! Dean's first reaction is to go right for the kill! I could almost see him being the lead if his whole purpose weren't to die.

[The Tall Man]

By the way... did I or did I not call it almost exactly a year ago in the Fail Pictures thread?

http://img187.imageshack.us/img187/7241/fails.jpg

T.M., Esq.

[Jus-X]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought Dean grabbed the steak knife and tried to stab Freddy with it. But Freddy grappled with him a bit and turned the steak knife back on Dean. When I first saw that scene, I thought- yeah! Dean's first reaction is to go right for the kill! I could almost see him being the lead if his whole purpose weren't to die.

No you're right.

Now I'm not trying to defend the film, Gozer knows I thought it was mediocre nonetheless. But I thought it was a good scene.

[Dead Cell]

Me too. The movie did have its good points, and that scene was one of them.

[RedDevilBigEvil]

The first death is really simple to me:

As Freddy stated later in the movie it was the teens remembering what happened that gives him his power. What Freddy did in his kill of Dean was simply jar the memories of Nancy and Kris by planting the seed of "something or someone that couldn't be seen killed Dean and it was connected to his sleep deprivation. Quentin and Jesse's memories were jarred after the funeral when Kris mentions the complexitites of Dean's death to which Nancy agrees. As far as I'm concerned Freddy needed a way for the others to remember him and Dean's death was that trigger.

As for my thoughts of the movie; I actually enjoyed it. I liked the darker version of Freddy that we saw in this movie. No disrespect to Robert Englund because he will always be Freddy to me, but to me the only portrayal that comes close to this one as far as being dark and evil is in Wes Craven's New Nightmare. As far as the story goes, for the most part it's the same story as in the original with just a couple of changes:

1. Freddy's methods: in the original he kidnapped and killed kids. In this remake he works at a school, and only abuses the kids.

2. In the original he goes to court and gets off for his crimes, in the remake the parents never let it go to court thinking he'd get away with the crimes anyway.

Outside of that it's nearly identical to the original. You have the female blond get hoisted up to the ceiling and killed while the boyfriend watches and then the boyfriend goes to jail and meets his fate. You have the whole pulling Freddy into the real world bit. And of course at the end you once again get the scene of Nancy's mom being killed by a very still alive Freddy.

This movie will get a lot of heat especially considering the week 2 Box Office, but to put things into perspective in regards to that; none of your other recent slasher remakes (Friday the 13th, Rob Zombie's Halloween, My Bloody Valentine, etc.) had week 2 competition the caliber of Iron Man 2. I firmly believe that if not for Iron Man 2, this movie does better than the $9,170,000 that it did gross because Iron Man 2 was basically the only new movie to come out and A Nightmare on Elm Street did better than every other movie this weekend at the box office, so I think it's safe to assume that at least some of the people that went to see Iron Man 2 would have gone to see ANOES.

[Ron]

I went to see this again today in hopes that I would like it more now that I was accustomed to Platinum Dunes "Freddy". I still hate this movie like I hate child molesters and racism.

[Voorheeszilla]

I've never had an issue with child molestation being apart of Freddy's character, as I've always thought it was a way to show that it's a major issue that's out there, just like I see Jason representing neglect towards children, & Michael showing that some people have no rhyme or reason behind their actions, & they just kill simply to kill. The way I see it, every film conveys a different message to it's respective viewer, & the message I've gotten from these films is that there are sick, twisted people out there whom you have to watch because you never know what they might do, especially to your children, but maybe that's just me.

I feel that this movie was a pretty good remake, as I said earlier. Again, not as great as the original, but not truly disappointing (at least for me). In my opinion, this movie sets up the possibility for a good franchise, but it's all about execution. If latter films can be executed as good or better than the remake, then I'm all for a few sequels.

[Speck]

I saw it yesterday, and I hated it. It wasn't good at all. The acting was horrible, I didn't like Freddy's look or how he was portrayed, I didn't like the new storyline.

F-

[Scarecrow]

I'm not a remake-hater and I wanted to give this a chance, when I saw it. Alas, I came out really disappointed and with a sense that the "ultra real gritty" style of recent horror has finally had its day. First off, as a performance, Freddy is fantastic, veyr creepy in and of himself. He's the star, despite the material given. I fele the MAIN problem is the directing. The style is one-note, throughout. Reality is dark adn gritty, dreams are dark and gritty, the lighting is all the same tone, the whole film is flat becaus eit just feels the same. This makes it also very dull to watch. Add to this, they overlit Freddy considering the style, showing him lots which just took away the fear of him they wanted to create.

The script was poor though. It could have been passable with better direction, but still. It never lets up but not ina good way. It opens wioth nightmares and continues, ecah scene being pretty much 50% nightmare. This means we're not given any normality, no character building, no contrast to the horrors, no sense of what these kids might be like, or how they relate. Not asking for shakespeare, but the original used good archetypes to set them up and set out a real world, them going to school and so on.

Related to this is the micronaps. Yeha, just works as an excuse to have nightmares any tiem the writers want for boo scares. I see why it was done but it robs the unique aspects of the series, the wake/asleep dynamic, although the lack of any dreamlike atmosphere also helped this. We know half the stuff is a dream so don't try and hide it, give us some surreal moments where we FEEL it's a dream, and maybe fear the terror.

Not a kid killer? I don't like it. I never was opposed to the sexual side in the character, it's alluded to in the original films. But just that? There's a leap from being a pewrvert to being a killer, and becoming a demonic dream being. I believe it more if he was psychotic and a killer in life. As it was? Didn't really work for me and it's almsot enough for me to review the old series purely in killer terms.

Final note. So many references to the past, which didn't always work. I never imagiend they'd take so much from Freddy vs jason, including the entire death scene! very bizarre choice really. And the 'final scare' once again was just there, making no real sense or relating to what came before but oh well, i disliek final scares anyway. Overall, this was a disappointment, unscary, flat and lacking direction.


- Scarecrow

[Evil_Meanie]

Well I finally got around to watching this one.

I thought it was absolutely awful. Nothing impressive about Haley at all. His character didn't even seem like Freddy Krueger.

I could go on a long rant, but I don't pop in here often enough to have any validity. But this was probably one of the more disappointing remakes that I've seen. I can't think of a single redeeming factor about it.

[Rich]

I went to see this again today in hopes that I would like it more now that I was accustomed to Platinum Dunes "Freddy". I still hate this movie like I hate child molesters and racism.

A Nightmare on Elm Street 5 had a newspaper article saying he was a child molester and Freddy vs. Jason had the "dark meat" line so neither of those aspects are anything new. The last thing we want is a politically correct Freddy Krueger.

[Hockey Mask]

I don't care for remakes but thought they did a decent job with it. I have to admit Freddy isn't that close to my heart so it was probably easier for me to forgive.

[Bill 1981]

http://cumbriansky.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/disappointed.jpg
Homer Simpson sums up my feeling on this movie. That is all.

[The Tall Man]

His character didn't even seem like Freddy Krueger.
http://i150.photobucket.com/albums/s101/mheivy/smiley/35.gif Psst. He wasn't.

http://cumbriansky.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/disappointed.jpg
Homer Simpson sums up my feeling on this movie. That is all.
:lmao::lmao:

T.M., Esq.

[Utellme]

Well I finally got around to watching this one.

I thought it was absolutely awful. Nothing impressive about Haley at all. His character didn't even seem like Freddy Krueger.

I could go on a long rant, but I don't pop in here often enough to have any validity. But this was probably one of the more disappointing remakes that I've seen. I can't think of a single redeeming factor about it.


Come on Mng the credits were great.

[Ron]

The CG Freddy shape popping through the wall in Nancy's bedroom was one of the worst effects in a film I have ever seen.

[Jus-X]

The CG Freddy shape popping through the wall in Nancy's bedroom was one of the worst effects in a film I have ever seen.

What are you talking about? It was the most realistic scene in the whole entire movie. It deserves an award on how very well put together and thought out the scene was! My penis literally exploded watching the 3 seconds of awesome CGI!!!

Not really. I was being sarcastic. :shifty:

[The Dark Vampire]

TBH I didn't like both the bedroom wall or bath homages to the original they just looked like some cheap attempt to try and please fans of the old series.

I also agree with the ppl saying how boring it was I swear every time I checked my watch to see how much longer was left I thought half a hour must of passed by now and it was only something like 3-5 minutes.

[Voorheeszilla]

I thought the homages were just fine, & I'd have to say I disagree, I was entertained enough to not keep checking to see how much more of the movie was left.

[The Dark Vampire]

If anyone liked it that is great I'm happy someone did but if I'm honest if was a movie where I was just thankful when it was finally over and even when it was on I was thinking that I would sooner be at home or anywhere else.

Funny thing is when I got back someone said "wow that was quick did you stay until the end" and I thought quick it felt like I'd been gone all day.

Like I said in another thread I have honestily seen bad Fan Fics I liked more than this.

I really wanted to like it to I know it was getting bad reviews but so did 4-5-6 and FvsJ and I liked those so I was hoping this would be the same case.

[The Dream Master]

http://www.dreadcentral.com/img/MPP/mpp-nightmare10.jpg

[CrystalLake]

I thought it was really good, no worse than the F13 and TCM remakes. Loved all the references to the original and sequels, ("How's this for a wet dream?" "I'm your boyfriend now"). I was actually kind of sad that Freddy went the molester way. He just seemed like such a nice, friendly guy, and the innocent aspect would have worked.. I'll watch it again in the theater as I saw it just now online, because I was afraid that I would aid those dastardly people at PD with my money (with all the negativity around this movie and all), but I'll gladly go and see it again and give my well-earned money to the makers, even though the director's a bit of a prick.

[Hypnocil]

Wow, I'm finally back on the net and looking for a place to vent about this movie....so glad this board is still around! I'll just place most pf my review in spoiler caps. Sorry it's so long, but I just have so much to say about this "movie".

I'll begin with the one pro of the movie: Kyle Galner. He was the only person I cared about, and felt the same fear he would be killed that I felt for Nancy in the original. Of course, Kyle is a great actor who I've taken notice of since he played Bart Allen (very well) on Smallville, and he went on to tackle some good dramatic roles. I see a future for this guy.

Eh...most of the cast did fine, I'm not gonna bad-mouth them because really it was the script that had problems. Rooney Mara will be the exception.

The rest is, sadly, all cons to the movie:

I just don't get this movie. All I can really think is PD tried to have their cake and eat it too. The movie tries so hard to be different, yet at the same time rips off (aka pays homage to) the original (and sequels!?) it's hard for me to even figure out what the true driving force behind this movie is, until I take a step back and realize it's just $$$$$$$$. If you think about it, the message seems to be "If you tell on a molestor, he will come back and fucking kill you." Yeah, so much more dramatic and DARKE than the original message of the sins of the parents coming back to haunt the children. So much more.

The original was Nancy Thompson's movie....this movie goes all over the map, the true direction of the movie never really settles on one thing, not even in the end because we got the "twist" revelation. I guess you could could call this Freddy's movie, but that doesn't seem right either. It certainly wasn't Nancy's. She was peripherial until Kris died then she shared the spotlight with Quentin and, arguably, Freddy himself.

The kids in this movie weren't really friends, in fact it even feels like their loose-connecting "friendships" felt forced for the sake of the plot. They couldn't be a life-long group of friends because that would hinder one of the film's big, lame revelations...and they couldn't be total strangers because, then, there wouldn't be a movie. So were left with a group of "fair-weather friends" who care enough to show up at each other's funerals and sit in the front row, yet know shit about each other. Riiiiiiiight. :confused:

The parents in this movie were protrayed by adequate actors, but the circumstances surrounding Krueger's death was just horrible writing and the way they attempted to cover it up is just sooooooo silly. Actually horrible writing is kind of the motif of this whole movie. And the way the parents were all "Oh god the kids are .....remembering!" just seemed so patronizing, to all parties involved but mostly the viewers and ESPECIALLY the fans.

Lt. Donald Thompson (or someone in his vein) was needed in this movie, but then I guess a high body cound is also needed. Marge, or her updated version, is infinately less compelling than the original. She doesn't even seem affected by her involvment in Krueger's death, the only real strand she shares is her concern for her daughter. In essense, she wasn't really needed beyond a cameo capacity.

The movie, I guess intentionally, completely changes the mythos of A Nightmare on Elm Street:
--There are no Elm Street Children. They just do NOT exsist anymore. Nancy, Quentin, Kris, John Connor, ect. are Badham School children. Elm Street really has nothing to do with nothing, since the school was across town and the parents lived all over Springwood. Only Nancy lives on Elm Street, and she doesn't spend a whole lot of time there. The movie should have been called A Nightmare at Badham School, it would have been much more appropriate.

--The jumprope children do appear, but I'll be damned if I can explain why. Where the hell would that jumprope rhyme have come from? It makes perfect sense given the context of the original (a rhyme created when Krueger was arrested), but in this movie a) no children were killed only raepd and b) the Badham School Children would not have made that rhyme up themselves, especially since they never saw each other after his death. Where the fuck did it come from?

--The children were completely innocent in Nightmares 1 and 3, it was the act of their parents that doomed them. In this movie, the children all seem to report to their parents at the same time (or, perhaps, the parents all suddenly take notice at the same time). Either way, the children were involved directly with the events leading to Krueger's death. While I suppose this makes his targeting them that much more personal, it does indeed change the mythos of A Nightmare on Elm Street and Freddy himself.

--The whole Badham School angle, itself, was a change in the mythos. This Freddy wants these children to remember, where as in the original Freddy really didn't mind that the children had no clue who he was, because it added to their terror. In fact, it was Nancy's determination to get to the truth that helped empower her, where as in this one Nancy's quest for knowledge was ultimately a bad thing. In the original, Marge was dishing out bad advice. In the remake, Nancy's mom was dishing out good advice, since "remembering him" was bad. Ugh.

--The micro-naps. The fuckin'. Micro. Naps. Farewell tension and build-up....you know, the whole "if Nightmare was Jaws, it would be an ocean you have to swim in eight hours a day" because in this movie, the shark can just appear wherever the fuck it wants, whenever the fucking director feels the movie needs a cheap scare...did this guy direct Urban Legend? So it doesn't even fucking matter if you "don't fall asleep" because Freddy can pop out whenever your brain resets itself and I guess R.E.M. sleep can be immediately achieved. Eh....sooo lame. Yep, I'm swimming laps in the pool and just sort of fell asleep mid-stroke. LOL!

The micro-naps will definately hinder future scripts because it just makes Freddy too powerful when you think about it, and fruitless for the survivors since apparently they'll fall into a super-coma when they do sleep. Just lame.

--So Freddy doesn't really want to kill Nancy, he was setting her up to fall into a Super-Coma so he can raep her forever. Okay. The first thing he does is try to kill her? Huh? Why does Freddy go to such elaborate lengths to keep her forever if he intends on dispatching her the first thirty seconds she falls into the coma?

--Freddy goes from a very disturbed child killer to a quasi-sympathetic child molestor. Yeesh. Call me crazy, but the thought of Freddy luring children to his boiler room to hack them up is far creepier than the child molestor with a tragic heart of gold and a little cave in the wall where he raeps his favorites. The original translates well into Freddy. This new guy doesn't translate at all into Freddy. It doesn't even make sense why he would have the glove. He kind of just had it as an accessory, like women keep bangels and hair-clips in their drawers, he just kind of has a glove with razors laying around.

--Is the glove supposed to be his little raep toy? If so, I am so looking at Freddy's glove in a new way. Bleah.

--Granted, things were happening fast and loose and I may have simply imagined this, but were some of the dreamers sharing dreams? If so, then all logic flies out the window.
Haley was okay as Krueger. He did nothing Englund was incapable of, with exception to looking like an alien of the week from Star Trek: Voyager.

Sorry Heather Langenkamp, but the fire you hoped Nancy would carry on is not only absent, but the new Nancy exudes ice! She doesn't seem able to break away from her three main emoticons: Sneering, determination, and emo. I didn't want this Nancy to wake from the coma, and I don't want her returning for any future sequels unless she dies at the hands of Heather Langenkamp, not Freddy.

Can you imagine if she does return?

NANCY: You are the last of the Badham School Children.....

LOL! Well, they could never do this anyway since the Badham School Children definately ends with Nancy and Quentin, they made extra sure of that. (Why save some for a sequel when you can kill them all off-screen?) So I guess Freddy will be randomly going after random teens already in the next sequel. Fitting, I suppose. What would be more fitting is if there is no sequel, but I somehow doubt it.

Finally, the references to Freddy Vs. Jason were shocking. When Nancy copied, practically verbatim, Lori Campbell's dispatching of Freddy (including decapitation) I just couldn't believe the whole thing. Sooooo cheeeeezyy all over again! "WELCOME TO MY WORLD, BITCH!!!!" Thankfully Quentin is tenthousands times more awesome than Will so it wasn't a complete FvsJ retread. Ugh that was just dreadful, epic fail shit.
The original Nightmare was like an onion, you can keep pealing away a layer and find something new to ponder. This movie is the opposite, you scratch the surface and you've hit rock bottom. I hope Wes Craven never sees this, or anyone who worked on the original.

The movie had a few inspired sequences, but overall the writing and directing just wasn't that good. The music was completely forgettable....as in, I can't remember a lick of the music. PD just sucks when it comes to scoring, unless generic scores are the in thing nowadays. The special effects were hit or miss. Freddy coming out of Kris' wall was just...wow, so cheesy! What were they thinking?!? Oh that's right...$$$$$$$$$

Ten years from now the original Nightmare will still be reguarded as a masterpeice of 80's horror. This remake will be edited and shown on the Lifetime Movie Network. :shifty:

[The Tall Man]

I swear every time I checked my watch to see how much longer was left I thought half a hour must of passed by now and it was only something like 3-5 minutes.
^^^ This. I don't know how many times I checked my watch, but it was a lot.

I love you, Hyonocil!

T.M., Esq.

[Scarecrow]

Something else that just does not work for me.

Pedo-Freddy is just that. A creepy, but otherwise ordinary pedo. We have them in real life, they hide, seem normal, all that. They, as a rule, don't generally become undead killers. Yeah, i know, killed by people and all, but it happens. An utterly deranged killer, like Freddy, I udnerstand, it works he becomes this demonic dream entity... but some wimpy Pedo? Doesn't wash. I'm not actually against the diea the original Freddys exually abused the kids, BUT I think it was not in such blatant ways, it wasn't about sex, but about power, just another way of dominating, degrading and torturing his victims. Pedo-Freddy though? He's out for sexual kicks and "fun" with kids that he "loved". How does that translate into the ability to be a evil, dream killer? You'd think he'd just haunt other little kids and get his kicks or something. As is, it just doesn't really work.


- Scarecrow

[Chucky's back]

What's with the last option; "Worst in the franchise"? If it's a reboot then it's not a part of the original series.

[The Dream Master]

Because it's still part of the franchise.

[The Dark Vampire]

I just had a thought as a lot of fans myself inc hate the molester angle is it possible they could back track a bit they could say all he ever did was take photos nut didn't actually touch them.

Not that just taking photos wouldn't make him a sick SOB who deserved what he got.

As for he killed all the kids they could say that was only 1 class but there was another class or 2 and the parents from those helped with his burning

[Rick]

I think it's pretty clear that he molested them, although I could see them adding the idea that he had begun murdering children before the parents killed him.
Say, there were children's bodies found they had never been able to connect to him specifically, but that exhibited wounds consistent with the finger blades that we see in his layer at the end.

[The Tall Man]

Shouldn't they have done that in THIS movie, instead of having to "correct" it in a later one?

T.M., Esq.

[Darth Reaper]

Shouldn't they have done that in THIS movie, instead of having to "correct" it in a later one?

T.M., Esq.

Yes, but they didn't, so now we have to do what we can with what we have.

I just had a thought as a lot of fans myself inc hate the molester angle is it possible they could back track a bit they could say all he ever did was take photos nut didn't actually touch them.

Not that just taking photos wouldn't make him a sick SOB who deserved what he got.-The Dark Vampire

Honestly, I'd rather they didn't. Freddy's not supposed to be likable or sympathetic. He's a monster, a bad man who got worse after he died.

As for he killed all the kids they could say that was only 1 class but there was another class or 2 and the parents from those helped with his burning

I think they should just show Freddy escalating his behavior as time goes by. This started out being about revenge, but Freddy likes his new state of being and he likes the power that he's discovered, so he starts attacking people who had nothing to do with his death because he enjoys it.

Pedo-Freddy is just that. A creepy, but otherwise ordinary pedo. We have them in real life, they hide, seem normal, all that. They, as a rule, don't generally become undead killers. Yeah, i know, killed by people and all, but it happens. An utterly deranged killer, like Freddy, I udnerstand, it works he becomes this demonic dream entity... but some wimpy Pedo? Doesn't wash. I'm not actually against the diea the original Freddys exually abused the kids, BUT I think it was not in such blatant ways, it wasn't about sex, but about power, just another way of dominating, degrading and torturing his victims. Pedo-Freddy though? He's out for sexual kicks and "fun" with kids that he "loved". How does that translate into the ability to be a evil, dream killer? You'd think he'd just haunt other little kids and get his kicks or something. As is, it just doesn't really work.- Scarecrow[QUOTE]

It works for me when I think about how he died. Burning to death has to be a terrible way to go. I can easily imagine it driving a person over the edge, and I think that's what happened to Freddy. He was already a sick man in life; dying the way he did made him completely deranged.

Also, as I recall Pedophilia is usually about power and domination. I think I once heard a psychologist say that usually at some point in their lives Pedophiles are made to feel powerless, and they regain that sense of power by preying on children. They may convince themselves that they 'love' their victims and that they're being 'good' to them, but in reality they're feeding their own needs at the expence of their victims.

[QUOTE]I think it's pretty clear that he molested them, although I could see them adding the idea that he had begun murdering children before the parents killed him.

Say, there were children's bodies found they had never been able to connect to him specifically, but that exhibited wounds consistent with the finger blades that we see in his layer at the end.- Rick

I've been thinking that they should show in future films that Freddy was playing with the idea of escalating his behavior before he died, but never got the chance to follow through with it for one reason or another. He hadn't actually taken a life, and he didn't get a chance to before his death, but the idea, even the fantasy, of taking lives was very much floating around in his head, and he was getting closer and closer to acting out that fantasy before he died.

I've even thought that they should recreate the beginning sequence from the original film where Freddy is building his glove, then when he lifts it up to examine his handywork we see that this happened when he was still alive. Then, we here someone offscreen calling for Freddy to help them with something, so he wraps the glove in a cloth of some kind and hides it away.

Flash forward to the present and we see Freddy actually getting to escalate. As I said before, he likes his new state of being and he likes his new powers, so he's beginning to attack people who had nothing to do with his death because he's moving away from the need for vengence and is now simply reveling in his power.

[Rick]

I've been thinking that they should show in future films that Freddy was playing with the idea of escalating his behavior before he died, but never got the chance to follow through with it for one reason or another. He hadn't actually taken a life, and he didn't get a chance to before his death, but the idea, even the fantasy, of taking lives was very much floating around in his head, and he was getting closer and closer to acting out that fantasy before he died.

I've even thought that they should recreate the beginning sequence from the original film where Freddy is building his glove, then when he lifts it up to examine his handywork we see that this happened when he was still alive. Then, we here someone offscreen calling for Freddy to help them with something, so he wraps the glove in a cloth of some kind and hides it away.

Flash forward to the present and we see Freddy actually getting to escalate. As I said before, he likes his new state of being and he likes his new powers, so he's beginning to attack people who had nothing to do with his death because he's moving away from the need for vengence and is now simply reveling in his power.

I think that could work really well.

[Hypnocil]

Why do you think they'll try to make this Freddy like the old one? They went to great lengths to make this a new, different Freddy. Throw some shades of grey into a character that was always black.

I can almost guarentee that PD will do the predictable "origin" story for Freddy, but it's going to be a completely different origin, that I promise involves Freddy being molested as a child. And don't forget, different characters mean no royalties have to be paid, so I doubt Freddy's mom will be a nun or anything like that.

The original series offered reasons why Freddy might become a child KILLER. So this new series will inherently offer things up differently. Setting up why Freddy might become a killer ghost in the sequel isn't needed, since the first movie explained that Freddy's rage at the children telling on him and causing his death is it. It's not even the parents so much, but the children themselves.

And we got a pretty expanded backstory on Krueger. To show him thinking about killing a child would seemingly come out of nowhere in relation to the remake. I just think PD is taking a new idea and running with it.

[The Tall Man]

Yes, but they didn't, so now we have to do what we can with what we have.
Why don't we just forget about it instead? :wiggle:

T.M., Esq.

[Darth Reaper]

Why don't we just forget about it instead?

T.M., Esq.

That's always an option, as long as the powers that be are willing to do the same thing. But, if they decide to continue with what they've started there's no harm in thinking of ways to improve the product.

Why do you think they'll try to make this Freddy like the old one?- Hypnocil

I don't neccessarily think that they'll try to make him like the original. I'm saying it could be interesting if they went in this direction.

[Hypnocil]

But, if they decide to continue with what they've started there's no harm in thinking of ways to improve the product.

Wes Craven's New Nightmare part 2. Have Wes, Robert, Heather, Dylan, John and GAP-Freddy return and join forces to eliminate everything/everyone from the remake and destroy it before the movie can be copied to DVD/Blu-Ray? I'd pay to see it.

I don't neccessarily think that they'll try to make him like the original. I'm saying it could be interesting if they went in this direction.

The thing about PD is they pay lip service to fans, but then completely go off on their own tangents, and I'm sure they have a lot of ass-kissers surrounding them agreeing with every idea they like. This Freddy was no mistake as far as they are concerned, they THRUST that fact repeatedly into our faces.

You could be right, though. They may backpeddle in the sequels if enough criticism reaches them, who really knows. If I understood Fuller and Form and their whole "A Nightmare on Elm Street isn't supernatural" take on this series, I could probably answer you better. :)

[Brett H.]

If I understood Fuller and Form and their whole "A Nightmare on Elm Street isn't supernatural" take on this series, I could probably answer you better. :)

That's what we get when there are thousands of grittye and harshe idiots who most likely are barely mentally stable who don't know their ass from a hole in the ground talking about films on the internet. All PD did was give the majority exactly what they wanted, in my mind. Unfortunately for the majority, they themselves don't even understand what they want and hence the backlash.

[The Tall Man]

Wes Craven's New Nightmare part 2. Have Wes, Robert, Heather, Dylan, John and GAP-Freddy return and join forces to eliminate everything/everyone from the remake and destroy it before the movie can be copied to DVD/Blu-Ray? I'd pay to see it.
Make this shit happen... NOW.

T.M., Esq.

[Darth Reaper]

The thing about PD is they pay lip service to fans, but then completely go off on their own tangents, and I'm sure they have a lot of ass-kissers surrounding them agreeing with every idea they like. This Freddy was no mistake as far as they are concerned, they THRUST that fact repeatedly into our faces.

You could be right, though. They may backpeddle in the sequels if enough criticism reaches them, who really knows. If I understood Fuller and Form and their whole "A Nightmare on Elm Street isn't supernatural" take on this series, I could probably answer you better.-Hypnocil

I think you misunderstand me. I don't know what PD is going to do next, but they're going to do what they're going to do most likely whether we like it or not. I'm not talking about what I think they're going to do next, I'm talking about what they could do next that would make me happier.

[Hypnocil]

I think you misunderstand me. I don't know what PD is going to do next, but they're going to do what they're going to do most likely whether we like it or not. I'm not talking about what I think they're going to do next, I'm talking about what they could do next that would make me happier.

Sorry, this movie has me so bummed I guess I wasn't reading your post correctly. Guess I need a micro-nap. :)

[Rich]

Why do you think they'll try to make this Freddy like the old one? They went to great lengths to make this a new, different Freddy. Throw some shades of grey into a character that was always black.

I can almost guarentee that PD will do the predictable "origin" story for Freddy, but it's going to be a completely different origin, that I promise involves Freddy being molested as a child. And don't forget, different characters mean no royalties have to be paid, so I doubt Freddy's mom will be a nun or anything like that.

The original series offered reasons why Freddy might become a child KILLER. So this new series will inherently offer things up differently. Setting up why Freddy might become a killer ghost in the sequel isn't needed, since the first movie explained that Freddy's rage at the children telling on him and causing his death is it. It's not even the parents so much, but the children themselves.

And we got a pretty expanded backstory on Krueger. To show him thinking about killing a child would seemingly come out of nowhere in relation to the remake. I just think PD is taking a new idea and running with it.

I actually prefer it that way. I loved the first three Elm Street films. They (along with Wes Craven's New Nightmare) are the best the series has to offer. I think they should be left alone.

A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010) was a great reinvention of Freddy Krueger. It is the beginning of a new story arc. I think it should be aloud to be it's own.

[Utellme]

Sorry, this movie has me so bummed I guess I wasn't reading your post correctly. Guess I need a micro-nap. :)

After watching disc 1 of the new NOES Never Sleep Again. The house that Freddy built etc.

"I think if you got the wrong guy under that makeup it wouldn't have worked at all. Your so right Mr Hopkins .This new attempt was very dismal, sad truly sad i feel that the fans of this series deserve a appology a refund and a better going out than this 2010 pice of crap.
ADDED:

A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010) was a great reinvention of Freddy Krueger. It is the beginning of a new story arc. I think it should be aloud to be it's own.

Great ? Reinvention of some guy in some alien makeup. Beginning of a new story arc I think it should be aloud to be it's own. Rich that would be fine if it didn't use the the NOES name.

[Brett H.]

"I think if you got the wrong guy under that makeup it wouldn't have worked at all. Your so right Mr Hopkins .This new attempt was very dismal, sad truly sad i feel that the fans of this series deserve a appology a refund and a better going out than this 2010 pice of crap.

I would just like to give you and everyone else their weekly reminder that this "wrong guy" you are talking about was in a comic book movie called Watchmen.

[The Dark Vampire]

I do think that Jackie Earle Haley could of been a great Freddy if the script didn't suck more than a nympho at a orgy but I don't think even Englund could of made that script work..

I also agree that the make up sucked like along with other things I've seen Freddy fan fics with better done make up

[Utellme]

I would just like to give you and everyone else their weekly reminder that this "wrong guy" you are talking about was in a comic book movie called Watchmen.

And your point ? Am i suppose to go oooh awww now if im supposed to be impressed im not.I never seen that movie or comic book and probably never will.You think that just cause this guy was in those 2 things it automatic translates to great ? Or am i taking you the wrong way ?

I do think that Jackie Earle Haley could of been a great Freddy if the script didn't suck more than a nympho at a orgy but I don't think even Englund could of made that script work..

I also agree that the make up sucked like along with other things I've seen Freddy fan fics with better done make up

Dark that about sums it up the makeup and script did not help matters at all.

[The Tall Man]

Utell, Boo's being facetious... unfortunately, it got old about two months ago and no one gave him the memo.

Rorschach was the only character I still liked by the end of "Watchmen"; Jackie was great in it. But he's just atrocious in this. Not only was he up against a sub-troglodytic script, but the choices he himself made (his constant twitching, the muttering indifferent-toned voice, etc.) just didn't work.

T.M., Esq.

[The Dark Vampire]

I honestly think it was more to do with he knew the script and other things sucked about this movie so didn't even bother trying to put on a good performance

[Utellme]

Oh ok hard to pick that up on cpu or at least for me.

Im sorry but maybe i should not talk about this movie if i cant say nothing nice.But it just pisses me off i had alot higher expectations and to think this will be how the series goes out just makes me sick.

[nottidelterrore]

I like comic book movies(for the most part) & still find Boo's comments to be funny.

[The Dream Master]

Guys, for get Watchmen. You need to look at Haley's riveting performance in Maniac Cop III, which was so good that it resulted in tons of roles for him. Seriously, hell of a run for old Halyez in the 90s. :X

[The Dark Vampire]

i had alot higher expectations and to think this will be how the series goes out just makes me sick.

I don't think it's that it's I went in think it will suck but it sucked more than I could ever imagine.

I know ppl could argue "if you went in thinking it would suck that's why you think it does" but that is not the case as 9 times out of 10 if I go in thinking it's going to suck (F13th 2009 for example) I end up liking it

[nottidelterrore]

Guys, for get Watchmen. You need to look at Haley's riveting performance in Maniac Cop III, which was so good that it resulted in tons of roles for him. Seriously, hell of a run for old Halyez in the 90s. :X

It doesn't get any better than that either. Is it bad that MC3 is the only thing I've seen Haley in thus far? I haven't even seen the original Bad News Bears! Shame on me! Epic death scene too on a toilet after hiding behind a woman taking a poop/piss.

I'm sure that once I see him in more stuff I'll praise every performance of his, including Nightmare '10.

Oh ok hard to pick that up on cpu or at least for me.

Im sorry but maybe i should not talk about this movie if i cant say nothing nice.But it just pisses me off i had alot higher expectations and to think this will be how the series goes out just makes me sick.

Utell, voice your opinion no matter what you think about the movie, good or bad. Just remember all the hate Harsh Corps has spewed over Rob Zombie's Halloween movies. A lot more hate than Nightmare '10 has seen on this board.

[The Dream Master]

I remember him vaguely from Bad News Bears; I actually have that Little Children movie, and he was nominated for an Academy Award in that. Of course, that's nothing compared to the fact that he starred in Watchmang.